The URL can be used to link to this page

2. Resolution 5366 - Pre-Disaster Mitigation PlanKALISPELL FIRE DEPARTMENT PO Box 1997 Daniel Diehl — Assistant Chief/Operations _- 312 First Avenue East DC Haas — Assistant Chief/Prevention Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7760 FAX: (406) 758-7952 May 12, 2009 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dan Diehl, Acting Fire Chief Myrt Webb, Interim City Manager RE: 2009 Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan Adoption The Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires counties to adopt a Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan. The City of Kalispell previously approved a 2005 Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan and this plan will replace the previous plan. The purpose of the plan is to identify mitigation projects that could potentially reduce the impacts of potential hazards and disasters. The plan recognizes the significant threats to Flathead County residents as floods, winds, severe summer storms with damaging thunderstorms, harsh winter storms with extreme cold and blizzards, wildland fires, drought, avalanches, mudslides, and hazardous material spills and abandoned hazardous products. It is important to the County and the City of Kalispell to adopt this plan and pursue implementation. Federal grant dollars can be requested and obtained for projects outlined in the plan. FEMA assistance in a disaster is also tied to having a viable plan. It is the recommendation by staff to adopt the Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan 2009. Dan Diehl A/Fire Chief 41'*i_�__ Myrt Webb Interim City Manager "Protecting our community with the highest level of professionalism." RESOLUTION NO.5366 A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN PURSUANT TO THE FEDERAL LAW ENTITLED "DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000" WHEREAS, the federal law entitled "Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000" requires that local government entities adopt a Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan in order to be eligible to receive Hazard Mitigation Grant Program project funding; and WHEREAS, the Office of Emergency Services for Flathead County, Montana, prepared the "Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan" dated January 2009, which plan includes the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Kalispell and has been reviewed and accepted and formally adopted by the Flathead County Commission; and WHEREAS, the "Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan" dated January 2009, has also been examined and recommended by the various emergency services and administrative departments of the City of Kalispell and should be formally adopted by the City of Kalispell. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The "Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan" dated January 2009, available for review at the Office of City Clerk, is hereby approved and adopted by the City of Kalispell. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 18TH DAY OF MAY, 2009. Pamela B. Kennedy Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk FLATHEAD COUNTY MONTANA PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN Prepared by: Flathead County Office of Emergency Services 920 South Main Street Kalispell, Montana 59901 With Assistance From: Hydrometrics, Inc. Missoula, MT 59801 January, 2009 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF FIGURES v LIST OF APPENDICES v 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 AUTHORITY....................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................. 1-2 1.3 PROJECT AREA LOCATION............................................................................ 1-3 1.4 CLIMATE AND WEATHER............................................................................... 1-5 1.5 REGIONAL ECONOMY..................................................................................... 1-8 1.6 SCOPE AND PLAN ORGANIZATION..............................................................1-10 2.0 PLANNING PROCESS....................................................................................................2-1 2.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 STAKEHOLDER INPUT..................................................................................... 2-2 2.3 PUBLIC MEETINGS........................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 SOURCES OF DATA AND INFORMATION.................................................... 2-2 2.5 PLAN REVIEW....................................................................................................2-3 3.0 HAZARD EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT...........................................................3-1 3.1 HISTORICAL HAZARDS................................................................................... 3-2 3.1.1 Wildfire Hazards.................................................................................... 3-8 3.1.1.1 Location and Extent of Previous Wildfire Events .................. 3-10 3.1.2 Weather Hazards.................................................................................... 3-12 3.1.2.1 Location and Extent of Weather Events ................................. 3-12 3.1.3 Flood Hazards........................................................................................ 3-13 3.1.3.1 Location and Extent of Previous Flood Events ....................... 3-16 3.1.4 Earthquake Hazard................................................................................. 3-18 3.1.4.1 Location and Extent of Previous Earthquake Events .............. 3-18 3.1.5 Subsidence Hazards............................................................................... 3-23 3.1.5.1 Location and Extent of Previous Subsidence Events .............. 3-24 T PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.6 Human -Caused Hazards......................................................................... 3-24 3.1.6.1 Location and Extent of Human -Caused Hazards .................... 3-25 3.1.7 Dam Failure Hazards............................................................................. 3-26 3.1.7.1 Location and Extent of Previous Dam Failure Events ............ 3-27 3.1.8 Avalanche Hazards................................................................................ 3-28 3.1.8.1 Location and Extent of Previous Avalanche Events ............... 3-29 3.1.9 Landslide Hazards.................................................................................. 3-30 3.1.9.1 Location and Extent of Previous Landslide Events ................ 3-30 3.1.10 Volcanic Eruption Hazards.................................................................. 3-31 3.1.10.1 Location and Extent of Previous Volcanic Events ................ 3-31 3.1.11 Hazards Not Carried Forward in Risk or Vulnerability Ratings.......... 3-32 3.2 HAZARD PRIORITIZATION.............................................................................. 3-32 3.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT....................................................................3-34 3.3.1 Property Values...................................................................................... 3-34 3.3.2 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure....................................................... 3-43 3.3.3 Future Growth and Land Use Trends ..................................................... 3-51 3.3.3.1 Forest Land Use...................................................................... 3-52 3.3.3.2 Agricultural Use...................................................................... 3-53 3.3.3.3 Industrial Use.......................................................................... 3-54 3.3.3.4 Commercial Use...................................................................... 3-55 3.3.3.5 Residential Use....................................................................... 3-56 3.3.3.6 Open Space Use...................................................................... 3-56 3.3.3.7 Special Need Use.................................................................... 3-57 3.3.3.8 Lands Unsuitable for Development ........................................ 3-58 3.3.4 Vulnerable Populations.......................................................................... 3-59 3.4 HAZARD EVALUATION................................................................................... 3-60 3.4.1 Hazard Recurrence................................................................................. 3-60 3.4.2 Hazard Geographic Distribution............................................................ 3-60 3.4.2.1 Wildfire................................................................................... 3-60 3.4.2.2 Weather...................................................................................3-61 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.4.2.3 Flooding.................................................................................. 3-61 3.4.2.4 Earthquakes............................................................................. 3-62 3.4.2.5 Human -Caused Hazards.......................................................... 3-62 3.4.2.6 Avalanche Hazards................................................................. 3-62 3.5 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT: ESTIMATING POTENTIAL LOSSES... 3-63 3.5.1 Hazard Probability................................................................................. 3-63 3.5.2 Extent of Exposure................................................................................. 3-63 3.5.3 Severity of Impacts................................................................................ 3-63 3.5.4 Human Health and Life Impacts............................................................ 3-64 3.5.5 Vulnerability Calculations..................................................................... 3-64 3.5.6 Future Vulnerabilities............................................................................ 3-65 4.0 MITIGATION STRATEGY.............................................................................................4-1 4.1 LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION GOALS AND ACTION PLAN....................4-1 4.2 MITIGATION OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS .................................................. 4-2 4.2.1 Wildfire.................................................................................................. 4-2 4.2.2 Weather..................................................................................................4-4 4.2.3 Floods.....................................................................................................4-4 4.2.4 Earthquakes............................................................................................4-6 4.2.5 Human Caused Hazards.........................................................................4-7 4.2.6 Dam Failure........................................................................................... 4-8 4.3 PROJECT RANKING AND PRIORITIZATION................................................ 4-8 4.4 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKK ....................... 4-15 5.0 PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES....................................................................... 5-1 5.1 MONITORING, EVALUATING AND UPDATING THE PLAN ...................... 5-1 5.2 IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH EXISTING PROGRAMS ............................ 5-2 5.3 CONTINUED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.......................................................... 5-2 6.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................6-1 iii PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 3-1. DECLARED DISASTERS.........................................................................3-3 TABLE 3-2. HAZARDS IDENTIFIED...........................................................................3-5 TABLE 3-3. HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE DATA..........................................................3-20 TABLE 3-4. DAMS LOCATED IN FLATHEAD COUNTY.........................................3-27 TABLE 3-5. HAZARD PRIORITY RANKING SURVEY RESULTS ..........................3-33 TABLE 3-6. VALUATIONS BY STRUCTURE TYPE.................................................3-35 TABLE 3-7. VALUATIONS OF CRITICAL STRUCTURES.......................................3-37 TABLE 3-8. FLATHEAD COUNTY PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATIONS 3-38 TABLE 3-9. COLUMBIA FALLS PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATIONS ..... 3-38 TABLE 3-10. KALISPELL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATIONS ..................3-39 TABLE 3-11. WHITEFISH PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATIONS ..................3-41 TABLE 3-12. VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT..........................................................3-65 TABLE 4-1. COST BENEFIT RANKING OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION PROJECTS........................................................................4-9 TABLE 4-2. HAZARD MITIGATION RANKING........................................................4-14 TABLE 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN......................................................................4-17 iv PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1-1. FLATHEAD COUNTY OVERVIEW........................................................1-4 FIGURE 3-1. WILDLIFE — URBAN INTERFACE..........................................................3-9 FIGURE 3-2. PRIORITY FUELS REDUCTIONS AREAS.............................................3-11 FIGURE 3-3. FLOODPLAIN DELINEATION.................................................................3-14 FIGURE 3-4. AVALANCHE ZONES, DAMS & LEVEES.............................................3-17 FIGURE 3-5. GEOLOGIC ACTIVITY.............................................................................3-19 FIGURE 3-6. LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES......................................................3-44 FIGURE 3-7. FIRE STATIONS.......................................................................................3-45 FIGURE 3-8. MEDICAL FACILITIES............................................................................3-46 FIGURE 3-9. AIRPORTS & HELICOPTERS.................................................................3-47 FIGURE 3-10. MAJOR ROADS AND RAILROADS.......................................................3-48 FIGURE 3-11. BRIDGES....................................................................................................3-49 FIGURE 3-12. ENERGY PRODUCTION & INFRASTRUCTURE..................................3-50 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A RESOLUTIONS AND DOCUMENTATION OF PDM PLAN ACCEPTANCE BY LOCAL JURISDICTIONS APPENDIX B FLATHEAD COUNTY SEVERE WEATHER EVENTS APPENDIX C FLATHEAD COUNTY PDM DEVELOPMENT CONTACT LIST APPENDIX D FLATHEAD COUNTY PDM DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC NOTICE AND MEETING DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX E REVIEW OF RECORDS DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX F FEMA CROSSWALK PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FLATHEAD COUNTY MONTANA PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN 1.0 INTRODUCTION Natural and man-made hazards are recurring factors that affect the safety and economic conditions of Flathead County residents. Historically, natural hazards including floods, high winds, severe summer storms, winter storms, wildfires, drought, and hazardous material spills have affected Flathead County. While most hazards cannot be eliminated, the effects from them can be anticipated and mitigated. Flathead County, working in conjunction with Montana DES, Hydrometrics, Inc. and Arrowhead Engineering, Inc. has prepared this Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Plan (the Plan) to help guide future hazard mitigation activities. The Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan profiles significant hazards to the community and identifies mitigation projects that can reduce their impacts. The purpose of the Plan is to promote sound public policy designed to protect citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure, private property, and the environment from natural and man caused hazards. The Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan includes resources and information to assist county residents, organizations, local government, and others interested in participating in planning for natural and man caused hazards. The mitigation plan provides a list of mitigation objectives and projects that will assist Flathead County in reducing risk and preventing loss from future hazard events. 1.1 AUTHORITY The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000 amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by adding a new section, 322 - Mitigation Planning. It requires all local governments to have an approved Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan in place by November 1, 2003 to be eligible to receive Hazard Mitigation Grant Program project funding. 1-1 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County and the incorporated Cities of Kalispell, Columbia Falls and Whitefish will adopt this Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan through the resolution process. These governing bodies have the authority to promote sound public policy regarding natural and man-made hazards. Copies of the signed Resolutions from these jurisdictions will be included as Appendix A to this plan following approval of the plan at the State and Federal levels. The Plan will be adopted at the regularly scheduled meetings of the Kalispell, Columbia Falls and Whitefish city councils, and at a meeting of the Flathead County commissioners, all of which are open to the public and advertised through the typical process for publicizing public meetings. The Flathead County Office of Emergency Services (OES) is responsible for submitting the Plan to the State Hazard Mitigation Office in Helena, Montana. The State Hazard Mitigation Officer will then submit the Plan to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for review. This review will address the federal criteria outlined in FEMA Interim Final Rule 44 CFR Part 201. Upon acceptance by FEMA, Flathead County and the other plan signatories will gain eligibility for local mitigation project grants and post disaster hazard mitigation grant projects (HMGP). 1.2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many groups and individuals have contributed to development of the Flathead County Pre - Disaster Mitigation Plan. The local Office of Emergency Services (OES), Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), and the Montana State Hazard Mitigation Officer provided significant guidance and support to development of the plan. Elected officials, city and county personnel, personnel from several of the rural volunteer fire departments, the Fire Mitigation Committee from the North Fork Improvement Association and local community members participated in the planning process and contributed significantly to the Plan's development. Flathead County Fire and Emergency Medical Services also provided important input through their independent development of a Wildfire Community Protection Plan (Flathead County, 2004). 1-2 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 1.3 PROJECT AREA LOCATION Flathead County is located in northwest Montana, and has an area of 5,098 square miles. Flathead County is bounded by Glacier, Pondera and Teton Counties on the east, Lincoln County on the west, Sanders, Lake, Missoula and Lewis and Clark Counties on the south, and the Canadian Province of British Columbia to the north. Kalispell is the county seat and the county has two other incorporated cities: Columbia Falls and Whitefish. The three cities, along with the County, comprise the jurisdictions for the Plan. The Flathead River and tributaries drain the eastern portion of the county; the Flathead River discharges to Flathead Lake about nine miles southeast of Kalispell. Hungry Horse Reservoir, created by the 564 foot high Hungry Horse Dam on the South Fork Flathead River, has a length of 34 miles and impounds nearly three and a half million acre feet of water. Figure 1-1 presents a location map of the Flathead County Plan area. The eastern portion of Flathead County geography is dominated by mountainous, forest -covered terrain of Glacier National Park and the Bob Marshall Wilderness cut by narrow river valleys. The Flathead Valley, in the central portion of the county, is a broad flat plain dominated by the river and by Flathead Lake. The elevation in Flathead County ranges from about 2,900 feet above sea level on the Shore of Flathead Lake, to over 10,000 feet in Glacier National Park. The Little Bitterroot and Thompson Rivers are major streams in the western part of Flathead County. 1-3 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County --- ,.� Overview eolumbia* Falls! s 93 N Kalispell t ` -r r, � 93 • .f r no11% f4.1111der. �. ITV' LinsH of LISPS l N1', I -ind I ake -.ram- 5dr�tm FG�Irr'aY Ni Allunal Roil -- RaditW Ar afro &TufIM xmm Phil may rrr fiiw dirHrafi.• 'l irpw* PRig juiJ A, Rai# Rff'rse lv O"M RR MR.' ,. rtt ymg. ur raSw mRRx abmAffda. S F I J t li 0 a Ll C 0 u n t N. G I S D t p a r t m v n t FIGURE 1-1. FLATHEAD COUNTY OVERVIEW 1-4 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 1.4 CLIMATE AND WEATHER Flathead County, Montana is located within the region generally classified as a modified west coast marine and continental climate. Summers are generally hot and dry and winters are cold. Mean annual precipitation averages approximately 30 inches for the Flathead River basin, generally increases with increasing altitude, and varies from less than 16 inches/year in the valley bottoms, to as much as 100 or more inches along the Continental Divide in Glacier National Park. Graph 1 shows the average of all daily precipitation recorded for the first day of each month for the period June, 1896 to May, 2006. This information is obtained from the reporting station at Kalispell. KALISPELL, MONTANA (244563) Period of Record : B/ 1/1896 to 5/31/2006 2.4 2.2 2 i.a 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.6 0.a 0.2 i Jan 1 Mar 1 May 1 Jul 1 Sep 1 Nov 1 Dec 31 Feb 1 Apr 1 Jun 1 Aug 1 Oct 1 Dec 1 Day of Year Average Daily Precipitation Graph 1 Western Regional Climate Center Annual snowfall varies from about 50 inches in the lower valleys to 300 inches or more in the highest mountain areas. Most of the snow falls during the November -March period, but heavy snowstorms can occur as early as September or as late as May. Much of the annual runoff occurs in spring with the snowmelt. Graph 2 shows both the average of daily extreme and average snowfall on the first day of each month during the period June, 1896 to May, 2006. This information is obtained from the reporting station at Kalispell. 1-5 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 ALISPELL, MONTANA (244563) Period of Record : 6/ 1/1896 to 5/31/2006 25 20 15 io Jan I Mar I May I Jul I Sep I Nov I Dec 39 Feb I Apr I Jun I Aug I Oct I Dec I Day of Year Extreme Average Graph 2 Western Regional climate Average high and low temperatures in Kalispell in January are 28.20 and 12.70 F, respectively. The lowest temperature recorded at Kalispell was -38' F. Often the coldest temperatures occur at sheltered valley locations when winds are light, but extreme wind chill situations occur almost every winter when windy conditions coincide with very low temperatures. Rapid warm-ups during the winter and early spring or rain on snow events can lead to significant snow melt and flooding of small streams and rivers and/or ice jam flood problems. Average high temperature in July at Kalispell is 80.1° F and the July mean low temperature is 47.1" F. Both summer and winter temperatures vary considerably with elevation and local topography. Brief spells with temperatures above 1000 F can occur but are often short lived. The highest temperature recorded in Kalispell was 1051 F. Extended periods with temperatures above 90" F occur every few years. Freezing temperatures can occur during any month of the year, but are rare in lower elevations from June through August. I-6 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Graph 3 shows the average of all daily extreme maximum and minimum temperatures and average maximum and minimum temperatures on the first day of each month during the period June, 1896 to May, 2006. This information is obtained from the reporting station at Kalispell. iio ALISPELL, MONTANA (244563) Period of Record 6/ 1/1896 to 5/31/2006 100 U_ 70 ¢I CU30 I M 20 a 1CU ¢ E -zo I , I ~ l -3o — Jan 1 Mar 1 May 1 Jul 1 Sep 1 Nov 1 Dec 31 Feb 1 Apr 1 Jun 1 Aug 1 Oct 1 Dec 1 Day of Year Western �e910MQ1 Extreme Max — Ave Max —Ave Min Extreme Min climate Center Graph 3 Summer thunderstorm events with heavy precipitation of up to several inches can occur and may be accompanied by high winds, hail and local flooding. Winter storms with heavy snow can occur from October to April. These storms can produce up to several feet of snow and may be most damaging when temperatures are warmer, and the snow is heavier and more difficult to travel in and remove. Winter storms may be accompanied by high winds resulting in blizzard conditions. The chart below depicts the top four extreme weather events in each category. 1-7 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 o. Weather Events June :'•2006 - Kalispell, MT Hottest Days Coldest Days Most Precipitation Days Greatest Snowfall Days 102 08/25/1969 -33 12/30/1968 7.0" 01/24//1899 25" 03/20/1898 101 07/10/1973 -28 01/31/1950 6.0" 01/27/1899 17.3" 01/17/1954 101 07/19/1979 -27 01/30/1950 6.5" 01/07/1949 14" 11/30/1897 101 08/04&05/1961 -26 02/04/1899 2.5" 03/20/1898 11" 11/24/1961 For the purposes of this hazard assessment and mitigation plan, weather is of interest when it threatens property or life and thus becomes a hazard. The National Weather Service (NWS) provides short-term forecasts of hazardous weather to the public and also records weather and climatic data. Appendix C contains a listing of historic severe weather events recorded by the NWS in Flathead County. Of the 234 events chronicled by the NWS from 1950 through 2006, 110 are winter storms or high winds, 110 are summer thunderstorm/hail/high wind events, 12 are floods and 2 are tornados. 1.5 REGIONAL ECONOMY According to the 2000 Census (US Bureau of Census, 2001), the population of Flathead County was 74,471. The Census Bureau estimates that the 2007 population was 86,844, a 16.6% increase in population since the 2000 census, and which represents 17.03 persons per square mile. Population is clustered near the three incorporated communities and a few smaller unincorporated towns primarily located in the valley bottoms along the rivers or adjacent to lakes. Historically, the Flathead County economy was dominated by the lumber industry. However, in recent years a number of mills have closed. Government, service sector (tourism, medical, financial and retail), manufacturing and timber industry are the primary employers in the county. 1-S PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 The Montana Department of Labor and Industry reported that in October, 2008 Flathead County had a total labor force of 478,810 and an unemployment rate of 5.9%. In 2005, 12.5% of Flathead County residents lived below the poverty level as compared to 13.6% for the State as a whole (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2007). As of the 2000 census, Columbia Falls had a total population of 3,645. The estimated population in 2007 is 5,116, a 40.4% increase. The biggest employers are Plum Creek Lumber Company, Columbia Falls Aluminum Company, Smith Food & Drug, Super 1 Foods and Pamida. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad runs through the north end of the city with a spur line that goes to Kalispell. The population of Kalispell as of the 2000 census was 14,223. The 2007 estimate is 20,298 or a 42.7% increase. Major transportation routes serving Kalispell include US Highway 93 north/south and US Highway 2 east/west. Largest employers in Kalispell area (2004) include the Kalispell Regional Medical Center, Plum Creek Timber, Semi Tool, Flathead Valley Community College and the Kalispell School District. The 2000 census population of Whitefish was 5,032. Population estimates for 2007 place Whitefish at 8,083, an increase of 60.6%. US Highway 93 runs through Whitefish providing primary north/south access; the BNSF railroad east west service has a station and provides regular passenger service in Whitefish. Tourism and service industries, including the Big Mountain Resort, are major employers in the Whitefish area. 1-9 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 1.6 SCOPE AND PLAN ORGANIZATION The scope of the Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan includes the following: • Identify and prioritize disaster events that are most probable and destructive; • Identify critical facilities; • Identify areas within the community that are most vulnerable; • Develop goals for reducing the effects of a disaster event; • Develop specific objectives and projects to be implemented for each goal; • Develop procedures for monitoring progress and updating the Plan; and • Officially adopt the Plan. The Plan is organized into sections that describe the planning process (Section 2), hazard evaluation and risk assessment (Section 3), mitigation strategies (Section 4), and Plan maintenance (Section 5). Appendices containing supporting information are included at the end of the Plan. 1-10 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 2.0 PLANNING PROCESS The Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Plan is the result of a collaborative effort between Flathead County citizens, public agencies, and regional, state, and federal organizations. Public participation, the local emergency planning committee, and local emergency management services played a key role in identifying historic disasters and setting priorities for development of goals and mitigation projects. Interviews were conducted with the Flathead County Office of Emergency Services (OES), elected officials, and public meetings were held to include the input of Flathead County residents. 2.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The PDM planning process began in 2004. Interviews were conducted with individuals and specialists from organizations interested in hazard mitigation planning. The interviews identified common concerns related to natural and man-made hazards and identified key long- and short- term activities to reduce risk. Stakeholders interviewed for the plan included representatives from local government, utilities, and police and fire officials. Appendix D contains a list of people that attended the stakeholder meetings including a LEPC Quarterly meeting March 18, 2004 and a meeting of the North Fork Improvement Association Fire Mitigation Committee on April 18, 2004. Additional public input was sought from the LEPC in 2007 after a revised draft of the PDM plan was completed. Appendix D includes a list of attendees at the 2007 LEPC meeting. A comprehensive list of individuals whose input was considered important to help develop the Plan was developed in consultation with the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and included elected officials (County Commissioners and city mayors), OES, as well as the sheriff, fire managers and public works directors. Federal and State agencies on the contact list included the U.S. Forest Service, Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Border Patrol, and Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation. Appendix D also presents the Flathead County contact list. Persons and entities on the contact list received a variety of information during the planning 2-1 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 process, including project maps and documents for review, meeting notifications, and mitigation strategy documents. 2.2 STAKEHOLDER INPUT Input was sought for the PDM Plan from individuals and specialists from organizations interested in hazard management. Input was obtained during meetings which identified common concerns related to natural and man caused hazards and identified community concerns and ideas on activities that could reduce risk. Stakeholders that provided input to the Plan included representatives from local government, fire departments, public health providers, law enforcement and utility providers. A list of meetings and contacts with Flathead County stakeholders is presented in Appendix D. 2.3 PUBLIC MEETINGS Public participation played a key role in development of goals and mitigation projects. Interviews were conducted with the Flathead County OES, Mayors and elected officials of the three Cities. Several public meetings were held to include the input of Flathead County residents. Meetings with four of the Rural County Fire Departments (Evergreen, Creston, West Valley, Trail Creek and the North Fork Improvement Association) have been held. Two meetings with the LEPC (March, 2004 and July, 2007) were held. Other than for the final public review period, there was no newspaper advertising done for this project. There was advertising when the fire mitigation portion of the PDM was done and little or no public participation was shown. 2.4 SOURCES OF DATA AND INFORMATION The Plan incorporates data and information from various public and private resources. Sources for these data and reports are referenced when used. Public information resources included the 2-2 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Census Bureau, FEMA (for floodplain delineations), and the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, among others. Conversations with the Montana Department of Transportation and a local avalanche expert provided data, reports, and maps. Section 6 includes a comprehensive list of the reference materials used during plan development. 2.5 PLAN REVIEW A variety of documents from the incorporated cities and the county were reviewed, during the development of this plan. Appendix E contains a record of the review and incorporation of existing programs, policies and technical documents for each of the cities and the county. In addition, Hydrometrics provided review copies of the draft Plan to OES for distribution in hard copy. OES placed a newspaper advertisement in the Daily Interlake informing the public of the beginning and ending dates of the final review period and the locations where both hard and electronic copies of the plan could be found. OES placed a copy of the draft plan on the County web site and provided review copies of the Plan to all jurisdictions involved in the planning process including Kalispell, Whitefish, Columbia Falls, and Flathead County. Plan reviewers included county commissioners, mayors of the incorporated town/cities, representatives of the LEPC, and other federal, state, and local officials. Public comments were submitted to the OES after a 30-day review period. No comments from the public were received. Following public review of the Plan, the Plan was adopted by the local jurisdictions was submitted to the Montana DES Hazard Mitigation Officer and the Montana FEMA representative for pre -approval. Once pre -approval notification is received, the Plan will be adopted by the local jurisdictions. Comments or questions regarding this Plan should be addressed to: Flathead County Office of Emergency Services 920 South Main St. Kalispell, Montana 59901 2-3 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.0 HAZARD EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT Hazard identification and prioritization involved determining what hazards have, in the past, or are likely to, in the future, cause injury, death or damage to property. Searching historical records, interviewing people with knowledge of past disasters, and input from the Flathead County LEPC and members of the public, identified hazards. An assessment of risks posed by the identified hazards was conducted to address requirements of the Disaster and Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA, 2000, FEMA, 2000) for evaluating the risk to the community of the highest priority hazards. DMA 2000 requires measuring potential losses to critical facilities and property resulting from natural hazards by assessing the vulnerability of buildings and critical infrastructure to natural hazards. The risk assessment approach taken in this study evaluates risks to vulnerable populations and also examines the risk presented by man-made hazards. The goal of the risk assessment process is to determine which hazards present the greatest risk and what areas, populations or infrastructure are the most vulnerable to identified hazards. The hazard risk assessment requires information about what hazards have historically impacted the community and what hazards may present risks in the future. The process of identifying potential hazards included review of historical records of past hazard events and obtaining public input from Flathead County residents on historic disasters. The first phase entailed interviewing local government officials and staff, local emergency planning and response staff, and the general public. Section 2.3 describes the public participation and public input process in detail. The second phase entailed researching government records and news publications for records of previous hazard events. The results of the initial hazard evaluation were used to focus further risk assessment on hazards that historically had caused the most problems and those judged to be of most future concern. The risk assessment approach used for the Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan used Flathead County's Geographic Information System (GIS) system to map population centers, structures, and critical facilities as a tool to assist in evaluating those potential hazards to the identified critical facilities in the county. This type of risk assessment approach is very 3-1 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 dependent on the detail and accuracy of the data used during the analysis. The resources available for conducting this risk assessment dictated that existing data be used to perform the assessment. The existing information available is extensive but also has limitations. The data limitations mean that it is important to recognize the relative nature of the risk comparisons of areas within Flathead County. (NOTE: Although attempts were made to install and utilize the FEMA Hazus software, the installation process continually caused the computer system to crash. Attempts by the contractor to utilize the system were also unsuccessful. MT DES is also unable to use Hazus at this time.) 3.1 HISTORICAL HAZARDS Flathead County has historically, and will in the future, be affected by a variety of natural and human caused hazards. Examples of natural hazards that have the potential to impact the region include earthquakes, flooding, wildfire, severe storms, high wind, and landslides, among others. Potential human caused hazards include explosions, urban fires, uncontrolled chemical or hazardous material releases (either at a fixed location or in transit), power outages, and dam failure, among others. Human -caused hazards can also be the result of purposeful actions including civil unrest/riots, and terrorism. Available documentation of historic hazards is a relatively recent phenomenon and is often directly related to the severity of impacts on people and property. Historical data is generally available only for the last 50 to 100 years. Information on hazards most likely to affect Flathead County was derived from a number of sources. Hazard information was compiled by examining data from the Office of Emergency Services (OES), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the National Weather Service (NWS), reviewing historical newspaper articles, searching relevant databases, and interviewing local experts. Most importantly, residents of Flathead County provided information during public meetings on what hazards had affected their lives and their communities. Table 3-1 lists the Federal and State declared disasters that have occurred in or affected Flathead County. 3-2 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-1. DECLARED DISASTERS — FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA 1 RANDILIV IE".O.Resp. • 1 1 , Ctn Approx PA Applicant Comments Pro'. No. No. No. 2003 STATE DECLARATIONS 14-03 EO 14-03 2003 FIRES -BA 850B1 MT-04-03 Flathead Co Robert Fire Zone = FEMA-2484-FM- MT 14-03 EO 14-03 2003 FIRES -BA 850B1 MT-04-03 Flathead Co Wedge Canyon Fire Zone = FEMA- 2485-FM-MT ($27,889.84 State Only) 16-03 EO 14-03 2003 FIRES -BA 850B 1 MT-04-03 Flathead Co Flathead Fire Zone = FEMA-2694-FM- MT FEDERALDISASTER DECLARATIONS 1974 TO DATE Year disaster No. Type of Event Areas Declared Counties and Reservations. 1974 FDAA-417-DR-MT Flood Deer Lodge, Flathead, Glacier, Lincoln, Mineral, Missoula, Sanders 1975 FDAA-472-DR-MT Flood Broadwater, Cascade, Fergus, Flathead, Glacier, Jefferson, Judith Basin, Lewis & Clark, Meagher, Pondera, Powell, Teton, Toole &Wheatland 1994 FEMA-2110-FSA-MT Wildland Fire Lincoln, Flathead, Sanders, Lake, Mineral, Missoula, Powell, Ravalli, Granite, Deer Lodge, Silver Bow, Beaverhead, Madison 1996 FEMA-1113-DR-MT Flood Blaine, Flathead, Hill, Liberty, Phillips, Toole 1997 FEMA-1183-DR-MT Flood Broadwater, Carbon, Dawson, Deer Lodge, Flathead, Judith Basin, Lincoln, Madison, Meagher, Missoula, Musselshell, Park, Prairie, Ravalli, Richland, Roosevelt, Sanders, Sweet Grass, Treasure Valley, Wheatland, Yellowstone & Flathead Reservation 2000 FEMA-2320-FSA-MT Wildland Fire Flathead, Lake, Lincoln, Sanders 2000 FEMA-1340-DR-MT Wildland Fire Beaverhead, Big Horn, Blaine, Broadwater, Carbon, Carter, Cascade, Chouteau, Custer, Deer Lodge, Fallon, Fergus, Flathead, Gallatin, Garfield, Glacier, Golden Valley, Granite, Hill, Jefferson, Judith Basin, Lake, Lewis & Clark, Liberty, Lincoln, Madison 2003 FEMA-2484-FM-MT Wildland Fire Flathead 2003 FEMA-2485-FM-MT Wildland Fire Flathead 2003 FEMA-2494-FM-MT Wildland Fire Flathead 2005 FEMA-3253-EM-MT Hurricane Relief All 56 Counties in the State (Cat B Emergency Assistance Only) 3-3 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 The following hazards were identified, evaluated and prioritized or dismissed as part of Flathead County's PDM development: Natural Hazards - Avalanche Wildfire Floods Weather Winter storms Summer storms Landslide Earthquake Volcanic eruption Insect infestation Biological Hazards Infectious disease Animal/agricultural disease Blight and Drought Human Caused Hazards - Mass casualty accidents — air, rail, highway, disease Dam failure Chemical spill Terrorism Civil disturbance Near Surface Ground Control Failure & Subsidence (Old Mine Workings) Table 3-2 lists hazards initially identified, evaluated, and prioritized or, in some cases, dismissed from further evaluation as part of Flathead County's PDM development. 3-4 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-2. HAZARDS IDENTIFIED Evaluated Impacted Hazard How Identified Why Ident , or Area 1 d USFS National -History of wildfires Fire Plan * Growth in the urban • Subject matter wildland interface • Flathead expert input a Mountainous, forested Wildfire County * City/County terrain exists throughout Evaluated Comprehensive the County Plans * Ordinances * Count EOP * Data from Western * Frequent winter storms Weather Regional Climate and extreme cold Winter Storms Center temperatures each *Input from subject season All matter expert . Potential for power Evaluated Summer Storms * County EOP outages during a cold spell Hail damage * Damage to utilities and buildings . Flathead * FEMA Flood • Several creek, rivers, County Study and FIRM and streams run through Columbia review the County Falls * FCOES database *History of urban Flooding . Kalispell * City/County Flood flooding Evaluated Plain Ordinances * Presidential declarations * County EOP for flooding in 1964, 1974, 1975, 1991, 1995, 1996, 1997, * USGS National * History of earthquakes Earthquake * Potential for disrupting Information Center utilities, dams, and Earthquake * All * Montana Bureau transportation systems Evaluated of Mines and Geology publications * County EOP * Input from * Existence of hundreds planning/public of abandoned mines * Flathead meetings throughout the County Subsidence County * Data collected by and urban areas Evaluated the EPA * History of collapsing * Subject matter mine workings expert in ut 3-5 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-2. HAZARDS IDENTIFIED (continued) Evaluated Impacted Hazard How Identified Why Identified or OIL Area 4J Dismissed- -Records from * Hazardous materials are FCOES database frequently transported * County EOP through the County * Several fixed facility Considered Hazardous *All hazardous material sites under Human- Materials exist caused * History of frequent Hazards spills and leaks * FAA records * Several wilderness Mass Casualty airports Accidents — * Presence of Considered Aviation, Rail, international airport under Human - Highway *All * May be associated with caused Disease other high population Hazards Nimpact hazards x * Subject matter * Little protection of expert input hazardous materials and U * State of Montana critical facilities Considered Terrorism and *All Strategic Plan * Heightened alert since under Human - Violence *County EOP September 11, 2001 caused * Large populated events Hazards in the County each year * Input from * History of an influenza planning/public outbreak during the meetings 1910's Considered Communicable * Montana * New emerging diseases under Human - Disease & All Department of such as SARS and West caused Bio-terrorism Livestock website Nile Virus Hazards * Center for Disease * Rapid disease spread Control website potential through urban areas * Subject matter * Heightened alert since Considered Civil Unrest All expert input September 11, 2001 under Human- * Large populated events caused in the County each year Hazards * Flathead *National Inventory * High hazard dams County of Dams website within the County Dam Failure * Columbia * County EOP * County ownership of Evaluated Falls * Dam Emergency other hazard dams * Kalispell Action Plans 3-6 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-2. HAZARDS IDENTIFIED (continued) Evaluated Impacted Hazard How Identified Why Identified or Areas Dismissed- -State DES * Mountainous terrain Website exists that may be prone * Mountainous * State Hazard/ to avalanches Avalanche Areas of Vulnerability * History of avalanches Evaluated Flathead County Assessment * Impacts to * County EOP transportation and commerce systems 14 *USGS National * The County has an area Study of landslide incidences Not carried Landslides * Flathead -Montana Bureau and susceptibility forward in County of Mines * Potential for damage to evaluation publications and residences records * State DES website * Proximity to active *County EOP volcanoes that could Volcanic deposit ash over the Not carried Eru tion p * All County forward in * History of volcanic ash evaluation from Mt. St. Helens o -Input from subject * Hazards to local Insect Infestation •All matter expert economy Not carried forward in * Increased threat of evaluation wildfire * Input from subject * Input from Public matter expert and meetings Biological public meetings * New emerging diseases Not carried a� s. Hazards- * All * Montana * Possible rapid spread in forward in Infectious Department of urban areas evaluation U Disease Live stock Center for Disease Control website N*Input from subject * Input from Public Biological matter expert meetings Hazards- * Montana * New emerging diseases Not carried Animal\ *Flathead Department of * Possible rapid spread in forward in Agricultural County Live stock urban areas evaluation Disease * Center for Disease Control website 3-7 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-2. HAZARDS IDENTIFIED (continued) Impacted Evaluated Hazard Area How Identified Why Identified or Dismissed • Montana Drought • Frequent historical Advisory drought events Committee . USDA Disaster 3 website Declarations �? * National Drought • Relationship to wildfire Mitigation Center danger Not carried s�". y website Blight & Drought • All forward in U c • Data from the evaluation c Western Regional Climate Center * State DES website NOAA Pale x Climatology Program website 3.1.1 Wildfire Hazards Wildfire has historically represented a significant threat of potential property damage within Montana. Although fire is a natural and necessary component of the western Montana forest ecosystem, uncontrolled wildfire has large economic, social and health impacts in Flathead County. Negative impacts of wildfire include loss of life, property and resource damage or destruction, smoke -caused health impacts, and environmental degradation. Long periods of warm, dry summer weather combined with lightning storms or human activity are often causes associated with wildfire. The wildland/urban interface is a zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland and forest fuels. In northwest Montana, the wildland/urban interface typically is where the edges of local communities are immediately adjacent to forest lands and where suburban development and single-family homes are surrounded by forest. The wildland\urban interface in Flathead County consists of approximately 6,400,000 acres of forested lands. Based on information derived from the 2007 Headwaters study, approximately 22% of the County population is located in the wildland/urban interface zone. Figure 3-1 depicts the population density within the interface zone. 3-8 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FIGURE 3-1 WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE 3-9 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Although Flathead County has not had large losses of life or homes from recent fire seasons there is the potential for significant damage under the right conditions. The combination of continually increasing fuel loads in second growth forest and increased residential development in and near forested areas makes wildfire one of the highest priority hazard issues in Flathead County. Lightning storms can initiate a number of fires over a broad area under the right conditions. Under dry fuel conditions and hot, windy, dry weather, fires can spread quickly. The rate of spread of a fire varies with wind speed, fuel conditions and topography. Fire suppression can be very effective under favorable conditions and where access is good. However, under some conditions, including dry fuels, difficult terrain and high wind, suppression efforts may have little effect. 3.1.1.1 Location and Extent of Previous Wildfire Events Significant wildfires occurred in Flathead County during 1988, 2001 and 2003. The Robert and Wedge Canyon fires in 2003 were declared State disasters. There were no large fires in the North Fork Valley from the late 1920's to 1988 when the Red Bench fire burned 37,000 acres. The 2001 Moose fire burned approximately 71,000 acres and in 2003 the Wedge Canyon, Trapper Creek and Roberts fires burned over 130,000 acres. The Wedge fire destroyed seven homes and 29 outbuildings. Portions of the Brush Creek Fire (30,000 acres) and Chippy Creek Fire (99,000 acres) burned in Flathead County in 2007. A comprehensive evaluation of fire risk in the North Fork was undertaken and results incorporated into the Flathead County Wildfire Community Protection Plan (2004). The US Forest Service manages portions of wilderness in Flathead County with minimal fire suppression. The National Park Service allows natural fires to burn uncontrolled in Glacier National Park. The focus of the Flathead County wildfire management as outlined in the 2004 Community Protection Plan is protection of private property. Other major components of the Community Protection Plan include fuels management, both around individual residential properties and generally in the wildland/urban interface. Priority fuels reduction areas are shown on Figure 3-2. 3-10 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County: Fuel Reduction - � Priorities F i - %, IV - 11 v 1 d i- 11 U n 1 r k,- N.va Lmv 'C1D Bin" LrlrIwi. IAxm1'wF + n+5 11m11 4 m."er h Iui. 41ED AiW I.xm I+..1.. %6klh,1-rdJ..1- - - •m. Uer t'atil .ta,Illads %"vdtf."t tuna. ^•�llr,ah++sp �11�1�ihist l,aa►uri+ �'tjf}rtJ iirtl�r lU.1.. A mrmd R—L liq !+!►.rr F-ir �1'./ I., 114Ir I - - It.rMay.1 «ir l tr I I _+b ff.-.0 1 urb I# i1.' %%tA...r fuA1 1'.IW+Y fa, rw•I. I•wo 1 oo Furl. 1F..1 Ng Iwh l�rxil�.xKhiu•1. TFtrAmw irp.o rrd." rhr. mp a" k 0+r.tray.x r rp— ,�Iw and d, +,. .rrrnwtrfi'y Wort rlrgy+plrra .nrnY11r�(, p+r nlylu+mur,�.l�+darit6+ (:r+,, ,+� i .MlriRalarw ORWI I.Ff. A 910 V Aw *r 11llr r.rs a 7+,au w4 rs.1 k; f :S D e p a r t m e II � Figure 3 - 2 FIGURE 3-2. FUEL REDUCTION PRIORITIES 3-11 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.2 Weather Hazards Winter Storms - Numerous severe winter storm events have affected northwestern Montana and impacted Flathead County residents. The NOAA National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) for Flathead County lists eighty-one severe winter weather events between 1950 and 2006 (see Section 1.4 above and Appendix B). Winter storms can present a number of hazards including cold, high winds, blowing snow that drifts roads and impairs visibility, snow loading on buildings that can collapse roofs, ice accumulations that can both cause tree and power line breakage and ice that causes difficult driving conditions. Dangerous driving conditions, road closures and utility line damage are probably the most common hazards associated with winter storms; however, exceptionally large snowfall or ice loading that causes structural damage to buildings may be the greatest threat to critical infrastructure, public and private property. Summer Storms - Severe thunderstorms typically occur in the summer and can be accompanied by high winds, heavy rainfall, hail or dry lightening. These storms can present conditions producing flooding or wildfires. Tornados are uncommon in western Montana, but a few have been recorded in Flathead County and vicinity and they can also be accompanied by high winds, heavy rainfall, hail, and lightening. 3.1.2.1 Location and Extent of Weather Events Winter Storms - Winter storm events with significant snow accumulations are common in Flathead County, especially in the mountain passes. A winter storm in November 1996 dropped 20 inches of snow in Kalispell in 24 hours and was accompanied by high winds and followed by freezing rain. Two fatalities were recorded as a result of the storm. Heavy snow events have been recorded in 1994, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 in any month between November and March. Summer Storms - Thunderstorms, hail and high wind are potential hazards to people, property, crops and forests. The NCDC lists 141 severe summer storm or wind events in Flathead County 3-12 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 during the period 1950 to 2006 (Appendix B). Hazards associated with summer storms include the direct effects of lightning and hail, dangerous driving conditions, hazards to outdoor recreationists, and wind damage to utility lines, trees and structures. Secondary effects include wildfire ignition and flooding. Crop damage from hail and forest blow down from high winds can have significant economic local impacts. Historic weather events are reported to have resulted in thirteen injuries, six from winter storms and seven from summer thunderstorm events. A falling tree limb in a windstorm event killed one person. Reported property losses from these past weather events total over $23 million including $11.66 million from winter storms, $2.69 million from thunderstorms, high winds and hail, and $9.95 million from floods. The historic losses from these recorded events and other weather events are undoubtedly higher than presented in the NCDC listing. Flathead County residents rank weather hazards as some of the most frequent and most potentially damaging of all natural disasters. 3.1.3 Flood Hazards Floods are natural, recurring events in rivers and streams. Runoff water from snowmelt and rainfall exceeds the channel capacity and overflows onto the banks and adjacent floodplains. Floodplains are lowlands, adjacent to rivers and lakes, which are subject to recurring floods. Winter or early spring rain -on -snow events and late spring mountain snowmelt are often the cause of flooding in Flathead County. Remapping of the floodplain is currently under way. Draft versions of the new floodplain delineations are shown on Figure 3-3. Floodplain maps exist for Flathead County (30029), Columbia Falls (300024), Kalispell (300025) and Whitefish (200026), all with a September 28, 2007 effective date. 3-13 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 �►� ' Flathead County: Y. Y. h FPMA Flood Plain C olumbia. s 0 r. Kalispell is a 4 o il n v Nn,_tm + :Linn" •a I tan sawx4 _ r lap. Is hr V.m,� y ® Iav C19V tn,erztt — AttnulRma 4 waa-dl l,w 6J .e. d.�e, t,d.•n !Au .any mr fi+,flartr�x.. pm,µ-... w,� v .,W .iu ij a lwwv at A. ai t- It lu it l Figum 3 - 3 FIGURE 3-3. FLOOD PLAIN DELINEATION 3-14 i t I PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County and the incorporated cities of Columbia Falls, Kalispell and Whitefish all participate actively in the national flood insurance program (NFIP) and intend to continue to do so. Neither Flathead County nor the participating city jurisdictions have any known repetitive loss properties listed under the NFIP. As a result, vulnerability, in terms of the types and numbers of repetitive loss properties located in identified hazard areas, is zero at this time. Should repetitive loss properties be identified in the future, mitigation actions will be addressed by the county and/or incorporated cities, as appropriate. The county and cities have identified floodplain management programs that provide information about the flood threat; provide restrictions and regulations that govern the use of floodplains; and provide information on how property owners can protect themselves from flood damage and the national flood insurance program. Floodplain administrators have been identified for each jurisdiction with responsibility, generally, for floodplain development permitting; waivers for the emergency repair and replacement of severely damaged public transportation facilities, public water and sewer facilities, and flood control works; participation in the review, variance and appeals process; participation in the compliance, violation, penalty process; and emergency preparedness planning as it relates to community development goals. Damage to structures, infrastructure and injuries or deaths may result from flooding. Faster moving floodwater can wash buildings off their foundations and sweep vehicles downstream. Pipelines, bridges, and other infrastructure can be damaged when high water combines with flood debris. Hazardous material issues may result if propane tanks, above ground storage tanks, medical waste containers, or other hazardous material vessels are dislodged and flooded with water. Inundation of sewage lagoons and flooded sewer systems can spread infectious germs and microbes. Flooding of built up areas can cause extensive damage to homes and other private property. The National Weather Service lists $20 million in flood damage due to storm events in Flathead County from 1959 to 2006 (Appendix B). Flooding in Flathead County, as well as in other Montana counties has resulted in Federal Disaster Declarations in 1974, 1975, 1996, and 1997. There was also a significant flood in 1964. 3-15 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.3.1 Location and Extent of Previous Flood Events The Flathead River is the dominant stream draining Flathead County. Hungry Horse Dam located five miles upstream of the confluence of the South Fork Flathead and North Fork Flathead Rivers provides significant flood control on the Flathead River. Levees have been constructed along sections of the Flathead River between the Evergreen area and an area east of the airport (See Figure 3-4). Residential development in the flood plains of these streams has resulted in the loss of several homes and related infrastructure, such as roads. Local flooding has also occurred to low lying properties along McDonald Creek and the Stillwater River. Flathead County received three Federal disaster declarations for flooding, in 1974, 1975, and 1996. There was also flooding in Flathead County in 1964, 1986, 1991, 1995, 1997 and 1999. Historic flood events tend to involve snowmelt runoff that can impact both smaller streams and low lying areas along the Stillwater and Flathead Rivers and intense rainfall events (primarily associated with summer thunder storms) that affect localized areas, primarily ephemeral and intermittent drainages and smaller streams. Areas burned in wildfires contribute to flood vulnerability. Burn areas have no, or little, vegetation and minimal capacity for storing water. Precipitation in these areas will run off and often generate flash floods. Possibly the largest flood event with respect to damage was in 1964. The 1964 flood impacted much of the Northern Rockies. In Flathead County, the railroad and highway over Marias Pass incurred significant damage. The Flathead River nearly submerged Highway 2 near the airport and the community of Evergreen was flooded. It was also reported that McDonald Creek in Glacier National Park "ran upstream." 3-16 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FIGURE 3-4. AVALANCHE ZONES, DAMS AND LEVEES 3-17 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.4 Earthquake Hazard An earthquake is ground motion that results from the sudden movement of rock beneath the earth's crust. Earthquakes may cause landslides, rupture dams, disrupt power and telephone lines, gas, sewer, or water mains, which, in turn, may set off fires and/or hinder firefighting or rescue efforts. Earthquakes also may cause buildings and bridges to collapse. Earthquakes occur along faults, which are fractures, or fracture zones, in the earth, across which there may be relative motion. A number of northwest to southeast trending faults occur in Flathead County (Figure 3-5). In the Flathead area of northwest Montana, small to moderate earthquakes occur frequently. The USGS keeps records of historic earthquakes and prepares maps of potential earthquake hazard. 3.1.4.1 Location and Extent of Previous Earthquake Events Since the 1970s, there has been considerable study of earthquakes in the Flathead and Mission Valleys. The Qamar, A. and Stickney (1983) Report indicates that 25 earthquakes were felt in the valleys from 1935 through 1980. In 1975, a magnitude 5.0 quake was recorded and Stickney's evaluation placed its source on the Creston fault, about three to five miles south of Kalispell. Flathead County experienced a damaging earthquake on March 31, 1952. This shock was felt over an area of 35,000 square miles and caused minor damage along the eastern shore of Flathead Lake. A magnitude 4.7 earthquake in the Flathead Lake area on April 1, 1969, caused damage in Big Arm, Dayton, and Proctor. Some damage was also noted in the Lake Mary Ronan area. In addition, a water well near Polson went dry. The shock was felt over 10,000 square miles and was followed by a number of aftershocks over the next few weeks. 3-18 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County: ,,A., Geologic Activity Lrnrul F,.d • 0% U-1 k��4rv,1 ✓ 4�1� �—C- 154.II.watww.'rrlJen+ frnX f.r,w.`i a<Ir+rrwrl.+w +e,Inul faall' Y I✓,. J1w,n f_ ♦R111011 � �• M fl'JY N► ••^•••'.,rrrl.lf faall fl,,akSwmf.n+.r+:.a#I K '�••*yrrrrpfi � � ti..rnul iJuIl,Laxl4+q� Win ICY 417'..! }R3YYIr' �� tlMusl lsY.11 via+ail��, f_trLlMl Il..�ni"- 'j � tl,..'Irl�rrl..,rwWh.1�+IJ.n.yIlI+1Iwi � �r•'�Sr•'... IIycI+6 n+W.irlf•cIJ..•r�lllfnwn' � ~'•"r M•r�11y &7wInf .,w IPwr mwp arr for Wapfrefti r pwrptwp mfw roxd A , ..va.gov,rgi*t.nwr.aa"dm,1. .. . •. •i.'atthe. + vow. ogled "A h I a I h e a d C o u n t %, k , 1 Depart men t i Igurf• ; - ; FIGURE 3-5. GEOLOGIC ACTIVITY 3-19 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Subsequent monitoring has shown frequent, small magnitude earthquakes associated with north - south faults bounding the Flathead and Mission Valleys and the east -west Creston fault south of Kalispell. Since the 1975 magnitude 5.0 event, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center database shows records of 91 quakes of magnitude 2.2 to 4.7 within 100 km of Kalispell (Table 3-3). Fifty-three (53) of the earthquakes registered between 3.0 and 3.9 on the Richter scale and eleven (11) registered between 4.0 and 4.7 on the Richter scale. Earthquakes measuring between 3.0 and 3.9 on the Richter scale are "often felt but unlikely to cause damage." Events measuring between 4.0 and 4.9 on the Richter scale "will cause noticeable shaking of indoor items, and rattling noises, but significant damage is unlikely." Future earthquakes will occur, some with the potential to cause damage to buildings and infrastructure. The USGS hazard mapping (US Geological Survey Earthquake Data Base, 2002) indicates that nearly all of Flathead County lies within the zone having a 10% probability of exceeding a peak ground acceleration of 10 — 25% of gravity in 50 years (Figure 3-5). Local residents would feel the earthquake ground motion peak acceleration values of up to 10% to 25% gravity, which could result in objects falling from shelves and walls, but at the lower end of this range, would be expected to cause significant structural damage to buildings. Although the risk of very large earthquake events with catastrophic damaging results are not considered likely to occur in Flathead County, the general earthquake risk in the County is generally moderate. TABLE 3-3. HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE DATA Year EARTHQUAKES Month Day OF FLATHEAD Latitude COUNTY Longitude Magnitude Depth 1974 7 26 48.72 -114.89 3.7 13 1975 1 17 48.36 -114.1 6 1975 1 31 48.17 -114.14 4.1 5 1975 2 4 48.21 -114.11 5 8 1975 10 20 48.2 -114.28 4.3 25 1976 1 21 48.22 -114.1 3.1 5 1976 4 18 47.87 -114.21 5 1976 4 24 48.26 -114.09 3.5 5 3-20 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-3. HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE DATA (continued) Year EARTHQUAKES Month Day OF FLATHEAD Latitude COUNTY Longitude Magnitude Depth 1979 7 21 47.72 -114.15 3.5 5 1979 10 16 48.24 -114.54 3.1 5 1982 2 22 48.1 -113.96 3.1 5 1982 8 5 47.85 -114.35 2.5 5 1982 8 8 47.93 -114.36 2.3 5 1982 8 8 47.93 -114.34 2.8 5 1983 11 8 48.1 -114.16 3.1 5 1984 2 11 49.19 -114.41 4.5 18 1984 5 3 47.88 -113.68 3.4 5 1985 11 13 47.59 -113.73 2.5 5 1986 8 11 48.17 -114.64 3.1 5 1987 1 47.56 -113.73 3.2 5 1987 5 2 48.97 -114.87 2.9 5 1987 7 23 47.6 -113.71 3.2 5 1987 7 23 47.72 -113.67 4.2 5 1989 3 19 47.9 -114.01 3 5 1990 4 8 48.57 -114.61 3 5 1991 2 16 48.38 -113.9 3 5 1991 29 47.74 -114.75 3 5 1991 7 18 47.82 -113.75 3.9 5 1992 4 1 47.88 -113.73 4.2 5 1992 7 2 48.51 -113 3.8 10 1992 11 21 48.86 -113.68 3.4 5 1993 12 22 47.82 -114.81 2.5 5 1994 6 17 48.18 -113.91 3 5 1994 11 11 48.18 -114.49 3.2 8 1995 1 29 48.05 -114.5 3.2 5 1995 2 48.14 -114.48 4.5 9 1995 5 2 48.15 -114.54 2.7 9 1995 5 2 48.13 -114.49 4 9 1995 3 48.14 -114.51 3.7 9 1995 3 48.11 -114.58 3 9 1995 5 4 48.11 -114.58 3 9 1995 5 5 48.18 -114.49 2.5 9 1995 20 48.12 -114.52 3.4 9 1995 25 48.14 -114.46 3.4 9 3-21 - PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-3. HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE DATA (continued) Year EARTHQUAKES Month Day OF FLATHEAD Latitude COUNTY Longitude Magnitude Depth 1995 5 25 48.15 -114.46 3 9 1995 5 25 48.14 -114.48 3.8 9 1995 6 29 48.14 -114.47 4.1 5 1995 6 30 48.14 -114.49 3.8 9 1995 10 2 47.72 -113.81 3.7 5 1996 1 16 47.7 -113.57 3.1 5 1996 5 3 47.69 -113.88 3.1 14 1997 1 21 47.83 -114.29 2.6 4 1997 1 21 47.84 -114.28 2.2 5 1997 1 23 47.69 -113.74 3.1 6 1997 2 2 47.82 -114.22 3.6 5 1997 2 3 47.78 -114.22 2.9 1 1997 2 5 47.57 -113.94 3 18 1997 3 3 47.84 -114.12 2.8 4 1998 1 20 47.95 -115.05 4 7 1998 4 15 48.01 -113.75 4.1 4 1998 4 15 48.01 -113.74 3 4 1998 12 22 47.99 -115.21 4.7 12 1999 8 19 48.12 -114.98 3.7 13 1999 10 18 47.68 -114.17 2.6 10 1999 10 26 47.91 -114.89 3.6 12 1999 11 15 47.79 -114.27 2.9 5 1999 11 21 47.67 -113.69 3 5 2000 3 4 49.17 -114.03 4.6 1 2000 3 8 47.8 -113.88 3.2 3 2000 4 25 47.63 -114.31 3 2 2000 9 24 47.95 -114 3.3 6 2000 10 15 49.19 -114.06 3.2 1 2000 11 25 47.58 -113.97 3.4 15 2001 7 29 48.32 -114.41 2.8 12 2001 12 18 47.57 -114.01 2.9 17 2002 1 28 47.93 -114.27 2.9 8 2002 9 11 48.09 -115.14 3.2 9 2002 9 16 48.1 -115.14 3.3 8 2002 11 7 48.3 -114.29 3 9 3-22 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-3. HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE DATA (continued) EARTHQUAKES IeW4 Month Day OF FLATHEAD Latitude COUNTY Longitude Magnitude Depth 2004 8 23 48.09 -114.54 2.7 11 2004 9 26 47.57 -114.31 3.8 17 2005 1 1 48.08 -115.15 2.8 13 2005 5 47.71 -113.67 3 6 2005 6 27 47.71 -113.68 3.2 12 2005 7 3 47.7 -113.7 3.4 12 2005 7 12 47.71 -113.68 2.9 11 2005 12 20 47.63 -114.15 2.9 12 2002 1 28 47.93 -114.27 2.9 8 2002 9 11 48.09 -115.14 3.2 9 2002 9 16 48.1 -115.14 3.3 8 2002 11 7 48.3 -114.29 3 9 2004 8 23 48.09 -114.54 2.7 11 2004 9 26 47.57 -114.31 3.8 17 2005 1 1 48.08 -115.15 2.8 13 2005 5 47.71 -113.67 3 6 2005 6 27 47.71 -113.68 3.2 12 2005 7 3 47.7 -113.7 3.4 12 2005 7 12 47.71 -113.68 2.9 11 2005 12 20 47.63 -114.15 2.9 12 2005 12 21 47.71 -113.68 3.2 8 2006 2 7 47.72 -113.66 3.3 8 2006 3 22 48.83 -115.2 4.2 8 2006 7 31 47.63 -114.16 2.5 13 2007 5 9 48.11 -115.13 3.1 9 2007 7 3 47.62 -113.82 2.8 15 Source: USGS National Earthquake Center Search area is 100 km radius centered on 48.400N: 114.200W 3.1.5 Subsidence Hazards Subsidence is commonly related to earthquake, flood, or landslide activity, but can be related to collapse of historic underground mine workings. Subsidence induced by earthquakes or landslides can impact roads and utility infrastructure. 3-23 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.5.1 Location and Extent of Previous Subsidence Events Subsidence hazards are typically limited in size and occur either in remote areas or associated with other hazards. Any subsidence will have limited impacts to populations due to this limited scope and scale. No earthquake, landslide, or mine related subsidence has been identified in Flathead County. 3.1.6 Human -Caused Hazards Human -caused hazards include accidental events and intentional acts that provide threats to human health and property. These are distinct from natural hazards primarily in that they originate from human activity. Accidental incidents include those that arise from human activities including transportation, manufacture, storage, and use of hazardous materials. Incidents arising from mass transportation accidents such as plane or train accidents are also considered human -caused hazards. The term "terrorism" refers to intentional, criminal, malicious acts. Terrorism hazards include the intentional use of biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological weapons; arson, incendiary, explosive, and armed attacks, industrial sabotage and intentional chemical releases. Whether intentional or accidental, human -caused disasters involve the application of one or more modes of harmful force to the built environment. These modes are defined as contamination (chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear hazards), energy (explosives, arson, and electromagnetic waves), or failure or denial of service (sabotage, infrastructure breakdown, and transportation service disruption). These hazards can be triggered by malicious intent or accidents related to storage and transportation. Hazards, such as structural fires, may also be related to accidents associated with normal day-to-day operations. Potentially significant human caused hazard risks to northwest Montana communities include damage to infrastructure including dams, power lines and fuel storage facilities and chemical releases or spills (particularly fuels in transit or at bulk storage facilities). 3-24 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.6.1 Location and Extent of Human -Caused Hazards Record research has not found any incidents of previous events involving hazardous waste. Nor were any records found documenting terrorism, violence, bio-terrorism, or spread of communicable diseases. The flu epidemic in the early 1900's probably had some impact to the county's population. The proximity of the Canadian Border and the security of the Border crossing is a potential concern with respect to both unintentional and intentional human caused hazards. Health threats from disease brought across the Border (either unintentionally or intentionally) could be a threat to Flathead County residents and those outside the County. The level of security at the remote rural Border crossings only provides superficial health screening and there are no facilities to safely detain or isolate any suspected health threats. The length of uncontrolled Border and limited Border security at the designated Eureka crossing are a potential concern related to unwanted infiltration or potential terrorist threat. Although the low population density and lack of major military or industrial facilities makes Flathead County a low risk for terrorist activities, the potential for accidents related to transport of terrorists and hazardous or biologic materials through the county must be considered. Large-scale accidents involving mass casualty are a concern associated with a variety of human activities including transportation, large gatherings and population centers. Transportation accidents involving aircraft, railroad and highway systems have the potential for involving a large number of people. The risk of such accidents is a function of the volume of traffic; the condition of the transportation system and natural and man caused influences. Many of the causes of potential mass casualty events are described elsewhere in this Plan and the Flathead County Emergency Response Plan (OES, 2008). Possible causes, or contributing causes, to a mass casualty event include such things as weather, structural fire, flood, dam failure, health emergency, hazardous material spill or even terrorism. However, some potential risk factors related to potential mass casualty incident may be essentially technological in nature, such as a mechanical failure that results in an aircraft or train crash. Although the likelihood of a mass 3-25 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 casualty accident or incident in Flathead County is low, this situation is addressed in this Plan and the Flathead County Emergency Operations Plan. Transportation of hazardous materials including chemicals, pesticides and fuels through Flathead County occurs on a daily basis. A number of businesses, hospitals and government agencies produce, utilize or store hazardous substances as part of their routine activities. Spill or release of hazardous materials has the potential to occur from transportation accidents, pipeline breaks, fuel storage leakage or work place incidents. Although most hazardous materials spills are small and quickly contained without significant impact to human health or the environment, a large or difficult to control release could affect a large number of people. Hazardous substance releases to air or water could affect both human health and the environment. Fuel or chemical spills can impact surface and groundwater resources and pose fire risk. Hazardous materials releases are addressed by the Flathead County Emergency Operations Plan, by local fire and law enforcement and by workplace safety regulations and procedures. 3.1.7 Dam Failure Hazards Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks (MT FWP) lists 17 dams in Flathead County (Figure 3-4, p. 3-17). Five dams are considered high hazard structures and one as significant hazard under the DNRC hazard classification (Table 3-4, p. 3-27). Two dams, McGregor Lake and Skyles Lake, have not been hazard classified. Montana DNRC classifies dams based on potential damage resulting from a dam breach, as follows: "high" - significant loss of life and property; "significant" - no loss of life and significant property damage; and "low" - minor property damage. These dams are used for hydropower, flood control, fire protection, irrigation, recreation, stock watering and water supply. Emergency Action Plans related to potential failure of high and significant hazard dams in Flathead County are kept in the County OES office. 3-26 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.7.1 Location and Extent of Previous Dam Failure Events There is no record of significant dam failures in Flathead County, but there have been failures in Montana. Swift Dam, an earthen dam in Pondera County, failed in 1964 due to heavy rainfall. Another earth filled dam in Lewis and Clark failed in 1975 when heavy rain fell in that area. The high hazard and significant hazard dams in Flathead County range from a 5 foot tall irrigation dam to the 564 foot high Hungry Horse hydroelectric dam, on the South Fork of the Flathead River, capable of storing over two million nine hundred thousand (2,900,000) acre feet of water. Catastrophic failure of any of the five high hazard dams would cause downstream flooding that could impact residential structures and/or public roads. Failure of the Hungry Horse Dam has the potential to inundate roads, critical facilities and a large number of homes and businesses. Catastrophic release from the dam certainly would have impacts following the Flathead River and its flood plain as far as Flathead Lake. TABLE 3-4. DAMS LOCATED IN FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA D Ashley Ashley Creek 10 O.COMPLETED (acre feet) 27600 1928 DRAINAGE miles)(ft) (square HAZARD L Averill TR-Little 32 214 1964 L Big Meadows Irrigation Dam Fisher River 6 920 1967 L Cedar Creek Cedar Creek 86 2720 1971 13 H Hardy Dam TT -Fisher 10 200 1957 3 L Hubbart Little Bitterroot -10 -10 1923 117 H Hungry Horse South Fork 564 2982026 1952 1640 H Jessup Mill Pond Mill Creek 28 358 1941 125 H Lion Lake Dam Whelp Creek 23 1621 1948 200 L Lion Lake South Dike Whelp Creek 23 800 1948 L Little Bitterroot Little Bitterroot -10 -10 1918 32 S McGregor Lake McGregor Creek 5 2 1932 Not Classified Robert Monk Irrigation Dam Fisher River 6 600 1971 L Smith Lake Dam 15 131 3 H Swan River Diversion Dam Swan River 12 109 1902 655 L Whitefish Sewage Lagoon I Whitefish 1 9 1 106 1 1962 1 1 L 3-27 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Levees along the Flathead River protect low areas in local floodplains and historic river channels from flooding during high water events. Failure of the levees would have significant impacts to relatively few properties. There has been at least one episode of vandalism to a dam that could have compromised the dam structure leading to flooding. A small explosive charge was detonated in a pipe in the Hubbart Dam in 2005. 3.1.8 Avalanche Hazards When snow accumulations on a slope do not have adequate strength to support the load, avalanches can occur. An avalanche can bury and/or move things in its path. The majority of all avalanches occurs in remote high mountain locations and do not cause any damage to humans or property; occasionally however, people, roads and property may fall in their paths. Avalanches can create temporary dams in streams. Damage to highways and other infrastructure may be incurred when these dams are breached or cause flooding. The State of Montana DES website identifies slopes where avalanches can occur: "If it is assumed that an accumulation of snow is possible anywhere in Montana, then we can evaluate the potential for hazard solely on the basis on terrain characteristics. The most important factor by far is terrain steepness. Wet snow avalanches can start on slopes of 20 degrees or less, but the optimum slope angle for avalanche initiation is 25 - 45 degrees. Slopes steeper than 45 degrees will not normally retain enough snow to generate large avalanches, but they may produce small stuffs that trigger major avalanches on the slopes below. Therefore, all slopes of 20 degrees and greater should be considered as potential avalanche sites." The Colorado Avalanche Information Center has compiled statistics on a national basis on avalanche fatalities. Montana ranks fifth in the nation with over 75 fatalities from 1950-51 to 2007-08. Activities the affected individuals were undertaking at the time of the avalanche accidents show that climbing, backcountry skiing, and snowmobiling rank as the top three activities that triggered the fatal avalanches. A map titled Vulnerability to Avalanches in 3-28 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Montana, published in the Montana Hazard/Vulnerability Analysis (1987), indicates that Flathead County is generally an area of moderate avalanche vulnerability. 3.1.8.1 Location and Extent of Previous Avalanche Events Avalanche hazards most directly threaten winter recreationists, homes and businesses in mountainous areas, communication infrastructure, utility lines, and transportation systems. Recreationists trigger avalanches while snowmobiling, backcountry skiing\snowshoeing, and occasionally while skiing at developed resorts. Natural avalanches occur without human activity. Avalanches can result in temporary dams when snow and debris block streams, sometimes resulting in highway closure due to flooding (Butler, 1989). Highway 2 and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad (BNSF) both traverse mountainous terrain heading over the continental divide at Marias Pass in the eastern part of Flathead County. Between 32 and 44 trains per day traverse Marias Pass carrying 61 million tons of freight per year (Reardon, et al., 2004). Approximately 1,000 cars per day use the pass in the winter (Reardon, et al., 2004). Both the train and vehicular traffic may carry hazardous materials. Snowslides have crossed both the railroad and the highway on numerous occasions, most notably in the John F. Stevens Canyon (See Figure 3-4, p. 3-17). Snow sheds over the railroad have been installed to mitigate the hazard, but avalanches still interrupt rail, as well as highway traffic. Approximately 90 avalanches leading up to rail and\or highway closures have been documented in the John F. Stevens Canyon between 1976 and 2004, prompting closures on ten occasions (Reardon, et al., 2004). These events destroyed a bridge, dammed a creek, partially dammed the Middle Fork of the Flathead River, buried cars, moved a microwave tower building, destroyed utility lines, and interrupted train traffic for up to 48 hours (Reardon, et al., 2004). Big Mountain Ski Resort exercises avalanche control on a regular basis. However, there is no avalanche control in out of bounds areas. Skiers venturing out of bounds do so at their own risk and have triggered slides. One such event in 2008 resulted in the death of two skiers. Backcountry recreationists are the most vulnerable to avalanches. There were two incidents in 3-29 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County in 2007, one near Marion Lake triggered by a skier and the other triggered by a snowmobile in Jewel Basin. The greatest vulnerability to avalanches is to recreationists who may trigger, or otherwise be caught in, an avalanche. These victims are at high risk of losing their lives. Avalanche incidents involving the railroad and highway have yet to result in loss of life, but significant financial losses have been incurred. Avalanche vulnerability areas generally coincide with National Forests and other government lands with higher elevation and steep slopes. The areas within the County with vulnerability to avalanche hazards is small; however, people using the mountainous areas in winter risk encountering avalanches. Some probability warning capabilities exist for avalanches; however, some individuals may not receive the warnings or may choose to ignore them. Loss of life is a real possibility. 3.1.9 Landslide Hazards Landslides occur in steeper terrain where geology and soil conditions present unstable conditions. Planar weaknesses in bedrock and\or low strength soils can fail, especially when lubricated by heavy rainfall or snowmelt. Movement on incipiently weak bedrock and soil masses can be initiated when the toe of the mass is cut into for road or building construction. Landslides also can be triggered by seismic activity. 3.1.9.1 Location and Extent of Previous Landslide Events The United States Geological Survey considers most of Flathead County to be of low landslide incidence (Godt, J.W., 1977), with portions of the mountain fronts on the east side of the valley being moderate to high landslide susceptibility and incidence. However, there have been several small (<50 acre) landslides mapped in the Valley (Figure 3-5, p.3-19). These slides are predominantly in glacial and alluvial deposits and located above road cuts or riverbanks, which 3-30 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 may have triggered movement. They may also be older (Pleistocene) slides developed in wetter climates. The Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology has mapped nine landslides in the county. Six of these slides are in mountainous terrain in the Bob Marshall Wilderness, two are in glacial deposits adjacent to Flathead Lake, and one is next to the Little Bitterroot River downstream from the Hubbart Reservoir. A block of bedrock slid down from a road cut on Highway 93 in 1995. This slide occurred where a planar weakness, a bedding plane, failed and the overlying bedrock block slid onto the road. This type of failure could recur where similar geologic conditions exist in road cuts. The "Columbia Mountain Slide," located approximately three miles southeast of Columbia Falls, is described as a periglacial, bedrock landslide (Smith, 2001). The toe of this landslide is undergoing suburban development. The landslide covers nearly 500 acres and may have originally developed during waning stages of the last ice age. A strong seismic event could possibly reactivate movement and cause significant damage to housing and possibly jeopardize human life. 3.1.10 Volcanic Eruption Hazards Volcanic eruptions can generate lava flows, flooding of rivers and streams, seismic activity and ash falls and flows. Impacts from a volcanic eruption decrease as distance from the eruption increase. The closest active volcanoes to Flathead County are in the Cascade Mountains approximately 300 miles to the west. 3.1.10.1 Location and Extent of Previous Volcanic Events Impacts in Flathead County from volcanic eruption are from ash fall and possibly minor seismic activity. Significant accumulations of ash fell in the Kalispell area when Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980. Air traffic, ground traffic, car finishes, and human health were impacted which affected local economies. Volcanoes in the northern Cascades will erupt again, but when an eruption will occur is difficult to predict. 3-31 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.1.11 Hazards Not Carried Forward in Risk or Vulnerability Ratings Some identified hazards were dismissed from risk and vulnerability ratings because impacts to populations, properties or economies are perceived to be minor or because of overlap with other hazards. Insect infestation for example overlaps with wildfire hazards, in that bug -killed timber presents hazardous fuel conditions. Similarly, biological hazards in the form of infectious disease, animal disease, blight and agricultural disease are considered human caused hazards which are difficult to mitigate without excessive cost benefits. Some of these can also be caused, or at least made worse by, warm winters/drought conditions. Subsidence hazards in the County are primarily related to historic mine workings and are in relatively remote locations and on Forest Service land. The Forest Service and the State have programs addressing the hazard. Hazards related to Volcanic eruptions are a low probability and there is little one can do to prepare or mitigate for them on an ongoing basis. Landslide hazards are not carried forward because probabilities are low and, in part, can be a subset of summer storms and earthquakes. 3.2 HAZARD PRIORITIZATION Between 1974 and the present, 14 federal and/or state disasters have been declared in Flathead County (Table 3-1, p.3-3). Declared disasters have included wildfire and flood events. Hazards discussed and evaluated during the interviews and public meetings are presented in Table 3-5. This table, which is set up as a matrix to list and prioritize hazards based on probability and magnitude, was developed and used in public meetings held in Flathead County. A probability rating was assigned to each hazard based on the potential to affect Flathead County residents in the future. Probability ratings were assigned as follows: High - once every 1 to 2 years Medium - once every five to ten years Low - once every ten or more years. 3-32 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Magnitude ratings were assigned based on a combination of which hazards had caused prior fatalities, resulted in property damage or had the potential to cause the most economic hardship within the County. The number of people affected by the hazard was also factored into the rating. Magnitude ratings are identified as follows: Low Magnitude - property impacts of $100,000, or less and fewer than 100 people affected Medium Magnitude - property impacts of $100,000 to $500,000, and 100 to 2,000 people potentially affected High Magnitude - property impacts greater than $500,000 and more than 2,000 people affected. Based on review of the historical record and local knowledge, coupled with the probability and magnitude ratings, Flathead County residents identified three major hazards that consistently affect this geographic area: wildfire, winter storms, and flooding (Table 3-5). TABLE 3-5. HAZARD PRIORITY RANKING SURVEY RESULTS Probability Disastrous Event Hazard (chance any ii. '.i i given year) Wildfire High Moderate -High 1 Weather Winter Storms Moderate -High Moderate 2 Summer Storms Flooding Moderate Moderate 3 Earthquake Low High 4 7� Hazardous Materials Moderate Moderate -High 5 Mass Casualty Low Low -Moderate 6 U Terrorism & Violence Low Moderate -High 7 Communicable Disease Moderate Moderate 8 & Bio-Terrorism x Civil Unrest Low -Moderate Moderate -High 9 Dam Failure Low High 10 Avalanche Moderate Low 11 3-33 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Assessing vulnerability requires understanding the function, location and importance of those things that the community values. For purposes of this risk assessment, key critical infrastructure, primarily buildings that house critical community services and key transportation facilities, were identified as valued community resources. Other critical infrastructures identified by the community included certain bridges and communications facilities that are fundamental to emergency response. To assess the vulnerability of these community assets, their locations were mapped on the County GIS system and compared to risk factors associated with wildfire and flooding risk, the top two ranked hazard priorities. Although a dam failure at Hungry Horse Dam has a low probability rating, valuation information is included due to the significant extent of exposure, severity, human impacts and vulnerability ratings. Some of the identified hazard risks such as winter storms and earthquake had similar risk factors throughout most of the inhabited area of the county. 3.3.1 Property Values The US Census Bureau's database for Flathead County indicates a total of 37,754 housing units in 2008 with a median value of $254,200. Approximately 70% of homes in Flathead County are owner -occupied (US Census Bureau, 2007). Estimating valuation for all commercial and public buildings and infrastructure is not easy because public records are not organized to readily provide this data. There were 3,774 private non -farm businesses in Flathead County in 2004 (US Census Bureau, 2007). These businesses range from one -person in -home establishments to large stores and industrial facilities. Data from the Montana Cadastral Database lists 5,783 commercial, non -farm properties with a total taxable value of $2,613,805,819 with an average value of approximately $451,980. Property values in the Cadastral Database range from less than $10,000 for small business buildings to over $28 million for the Flathead Hospital. To determine valuation for this Plan, estimates have been compiled utilizing structure counts from the address data maintained by the Flathead County GIS Department. Structure types were defined using information provided by the Department of Revenue. Airport and Medical Clinic/Hospital locations were derived from the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS), 3-34 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 as maintained by the USGS. Market values were provided by the Flathead County IT Department and depict values as they were set in the 2008 tax year by the Montana Department of Revenue. Table 3-6 provides estimates of the valuation for various types of structures within identified hazard zones. TABLE 3-6. VALUATION BY STRUCTURE TYPE o �.a Residential Structures (24,067) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 767 3.18% $109,974,354 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 1,731 7.19% $145,834,589 WUI 7,992 3.32% $1,151,355,458 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 6,025 25% $573,057,167 Commercial Structures (4,350) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 318 7.31% $45,557,480 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 713 16.39% $133,886,596 WUI 456 10.48% $83,372,354 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 2,540 58.3% $375,850,637 Other/Unknown Structures (5,683) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 262 4.61% $8,777,111 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 394 6.93% $11,675,168 WUI 1,666 29.31% $60,357,611 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 1,729 30.4% $45,028,280 Residential Structures (1,402) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 20 14.3% $1,193,329 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 1,120 79.8% $77,528,820 Commercial Structures (554) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 2 .36% $151,931 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 494 89.2% $56,084,658 Other/Unknown Structures (288) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 13 4.5% $111,938 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 24 8.33% $416,023 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 277 96.2$77, $4,204,243 3-35 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 3-6. VALUATION BY STRUCTURE TYPE (CONTINUED) i s Residential Structures (6,346) �� Within 100 Yr Floodplain 5 ' .07% 1T.Z I MA no $606,472 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 153 2.4% $9,932,948 WUI 71 1.11% $4,833,464 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 580 9.1% $55,749,243 Commercial Structures (2,893) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 92 3.18% $24,366,839 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 198 6.84% $65,504,706 WUI 11 .38% $488,230 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 260 8.9% $62,298,152 Other/Unknown Structures (1,020) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 35 3.43% $835,914 WUI 140 13.72% $3,038,250 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 78 7.6% $3,546,394 Residential Structures (2,688) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 54 2% $8,219,196 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 439 16.33% $141,493,936 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 0 0% $0 Commercial Structures (552) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 24 4.34% $16,766,547 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 0 0% $0 Other/Unknown Structures (1,083) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 13 2.35% $942,289 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 117 10.8% $33,449,127 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 0 0% $0 3-36 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Similarly there is a wide range in value of publicly owned buildings and infrastructure from small metal buildings housing a rural fire district or ambulance with a replacement value of $100,000 or less to the Hungry Horse Dam with a replacement cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Table 3-7 depicts the valuation of critical structures within identified hazard areas. TABLE 3-7. VALUATION OF CRITICAL STRUCTURES Structure Airports (4) Hazard Area Within 100 Yr Floodplain Structure 1 % of TotalCount 25% Market Value $119 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 0 0% $0 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 3 75% $318,053 Fire Stations (11) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 4 36.4% $1,021,490 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 7 63.6% $366,857 Government Buildings (17) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 5 29.4% $10,993,235 WUI 2 11.7% $220,744 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 10 58.9% $14,634,386 Medical Clinics / Hospitals (5) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 1 20% $33,535 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 1 20% $33,535 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 3 60% $1,516,153 Police Stations (4) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 WUI 0 0% $0 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 0 0% $0 Schools (14) Within 100 Yr Floodplain 0 0% $0 Within 500 Yr Floodplain 2 14.3% $225,420 Wu 1 7.2% $53,798 Hungry Horse Dam Failure 11 78.5% $2,272,565 3-37 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Table 3-8, 3-9, 3-10, and 3-11 identify the replacement costs of publicly owned critical infrastructure as determined by insurance records for the county, Columbia Falls, Kalispell and Whitefish, respectively. TABLE 3-8 FLATHEAD COUNTY CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATION Courthouse/Juvenile Probation Complex LocationFacility 800 S Main Street Value $1,862,640 Value $2,793,960 Courthouse — West Annex Commissioner's Office) 800 S Main Street $253,094 $379,641 Justice Center 920 Main Street $2,535,193 $3,802,790 City/County Health Department (Earl Bennett Building) 1035 1" Ave W $3,614,070 $5,421,105 DMV/Su t of School Blue Bldg) 935 lst Ave $967,616 $1,451,424 Eagle Transit Bldg 1333 Willow Glenn Dr $636,896 $545,844 Facility Maintenance Bldg 1257 Willow Glenn Dr $127,038 $190,557 Road & Bride Shop 1249 Willow Glenn Dr $1,365,602 $2,048,403 Solid Waste Bldg (includes shop, scales, gatehouse) 4098 Hwy 93 S $504,200 $756,300 Weed Bldg 309 FFA Dr $88,204 $132,306 Fairgrounds (includes concessions, bathrooms, exhibit halls 265 N Meridian $6,172,877 Library 247 1'tAve E $4,344,337 $6,516,506 Area Agency on Aging 166 Kell Rd $52,000 $78,000 Total $11,866,349 $17,390,024 TABLE 3-9. COLUMBIA FALLS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATION Facility Water Treatment Facility Location Cedar Creek Dam Replacement Value 12,014 Content Value 0 Sewer Lift Station #4 1201 Talbot Rd & Clare Park 6,782 27,259 City Hall 130 6th Street W 1,783,885 218,069 Water/Parks Dept Building 2301 Talbot 128,963 8,723 Marantette Park & Buildings 233-13t" St E 150,272 0 Sewer Lift Station #3 240 4th Ave W & Truck Rte 7,212 27,259 WWTP-Chlorine Contact Chamber 2500 Shrub Drive 16,300 0 WWTP-Lab Clarifier 2500 Shrub Drive $722,263 $368,536 Sewer Lift Station #6 299 Homestead Drive $15,642 $104,965 Sewer Lift Station #7 River Terrace Est. Ph $11,000 $75,006 3-38 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Facility Sewer Lift Station #1 1 1 51 Crescent Drive Replacement Value $12,000 Content Value $27,259 WWTP-Pre-Treatment 600 Veterans Drive $75,909 $98,131 WWTP-Concrete Di estor 600 Veterans Drive $305,409 $161,371 WWTP-Aeration Basin 600 Veterans Drive $206,257 $33,801 WWTP-Stud e Basin 600 Veterans Drive $810,412 $5,452 WWTP-Con-Phosphorous 600 Veterans Drive $578,866 $75,593 WWTP-Metal Garage 600 Veterans Drive $78,830 $10,903 WWTP-Filter Press Bldg 600 Veterans Drive $303,325 $167,913 Fire Station 624 1st Ave w $682,919 $87,227 Police/Garage 700 7th Ave W $69,902 $2,540 Falls Park Water Falls Circulation 720 Nucleus Ave $8,888 $57,846 Sewer Lift Station #2 8th St & 3rd Ave $12,014 $27,259 City Service Shop 901 7th St W $139,907 $16,355 City Shops Storage A 901 7th St W $1,945 $0 City Shops Storage A Annex 901 7th St W $80,200 $0 Clare Park Well & Pumps Clare Park Well $21,282 $41,433 Water Well Building Eagle Dive $19,168 $41,433 Water Facilities Plant North Fork Rd $0 $1,234,617 Sewer Lift Station #5 Scenic View Drive & Talbot $12,014 $27,259 WWTP-Pi es & Pumps Various $0 $1,899,377 TABLE 3-10. KALISPELL CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATION Facility Tor erson Bldg - Equipment Storage Location Tract 21) Rep Value $20,500 1 ntent Value $0 Tor erson Bldg - Equipment Storage Tract 2F $51,750 $0 Airport Hangar 1 Airport $127,200 $0 Airport Hangar 2 Airport $95,400 $0 Airport Hangar 3 Airport $95,400 $0 Airport Hangar 4 Airport $106,000 $0 Airport Terminal & Office Airport $180,200 $0 Public Works 3061stAve E $294,926 $34,472 City Admin Offices 201 1st Ave E $3,000,000 $4,500.000 Police/Fire Complex 312-330 1" Ave E $5,399,616 $1,094,219 Fire Station 62 255 W Reserve Loop $2,143,000 $3,214,500 Shop Complex - Wash Bay 1st Ave w c� 13th St $252,433 $0 Domestic Violence Team Building 37 5th St E $40,000 $40,000 Shop Complex - Open Machine Shed 1416 1st Ave W $84,937 $17,590 Shop Complex- Parks/Solid Waste Warehouse 1530 & 1532 1st Ave W $187,350 $0 Vehicle Maintenance 1422 1st Ave W $265,104 $48,862 3-39 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Facility Shop Complex - Sand Storage 1 1 1540 1st Ave W Replacement Value $22,365 Content Value $0 Lean to - Material Storage 1540 1" Ave W $21,360 $0 Shop Complex - Street Dept. Storage 1434 1" Ave W $144,180 $30,805 Shop Complex- Sign & Signal Storage 1428 1" Ave W $94,215 $141,323 Shop Complex - Sign & Signal Shop 1440 1st Ave W $92,883 $54,077 Shop Complex - Sewer Dept Storage 1410 1st Ave W $116,160 $81,464 SW of City Shops Storm 1st Ave & 16t" St $116,160 $0 Booster Station #1 100 Buffalo Hill Dr $11,904 $17,856 Booster Station #2 Pump House 100 Buffalo Hill Dr $23,373 $8,142 Buffalo Well & Pump House 100 Buffalo Hill Dr $33,192 $155,221 Water Reservoir #1 100 Buffalo Hill Dr $939,500 $0 Water Reservoir #2 100 Buffalo Hill Dr $1,350,000 $0 Lawrence Park Pump Station 1000 Lawrence Park Rd $106,598 $636,306 Shop Complex - Water Warehouse 1520 lst Ave W $217,109 $178,104 Armory Well - Water Treatment 1850 Hwy 93 S $44,056 $221,244 Shop Complex - Standpipe Water Supply 1st Ave W @ 13th St $15,205 $0 Depot Park Well - Water Treatment 5 1st Ave E $18,000 $40,413 Grandview Well - Water Treatment 755 Grandview Dr $996,736 $0 Water Pump Station #1 Airport Rd & 18t" St $21,200 $0 Reservoir - Elevated Water Tank Next to Golf Course $275,000 $0 Admin/Filter/Bioreactor Building - Sewage Treatment Airport Rd $12,060,180 $5,020,000 Digester Fermenter Complex - Sewage Airport Rd $2,851,960 $572,100 Gravity Thickener - Sewage Treatment Airport Rd $185,200 $48,900 Secondary Clarifier #1&#2 - Sewage T Airport Rd $1,168,500 $233,800 Ras Building - Sewage Treatment Airport Rd $71,900 $101,400 Waste Storage Building - Sewage Airport Rd $8,100 $1,437 Chlorine Contact Chamber - Sewage Treatment Airport Rd $94,000 $60,600 Waste - Shop Building - Sewage Airport Rd $70,800 $38,900 Waste Pump Station Airport Rd $201,800 $306,600 Headworks Bldg - Sewage Treatment Airport Rd $240,000 $297,500 Underground Processing Piping T/O Plant - Sewage Treatment Airport Rd $1,810,000 $0 Shop Complex - Sewer Dept Storage 1410 1" Ave W $116,160 $174,240 SW of City Shops - Sewage Treatment 1st Ave W & 16t" S $116,600 $174,900 Empire Estates Lift Station Empire Dr & Hill Dr $53,000 $0 Elk's Sewer Lift Station #2 18th St E $426,309 $0 Grandview Lift Station #3 Grandview @ Hwy 92 N $22,350 $85,130 El Dorito Sewer Lift Station #4 400 Liberty St $112,002 $0 Green Acres Lift Station #5 510 Kelly Rd 180,955 $42,744 Green Acres West Lift Station #5A Stag Ln $24,950 $0 Gateway West Lift Station #6 486 Two Mile Dr $6,151 $52,530 Woodland Park Lift Station #7 S Park West & Circle K $7,825 $157569 3-40 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Facility Southwest Lift Station #8 1 1 7th Ave W & Sunnyside Replacement Value $9,840 Content Value $218,259 Fairway Lift Station #9 Fairway Blvd $109,750 $0 Glacier View Greens Lift Station #10 173 W Nicklaus $107,756 $0 Nicklaus Lift Station #11 87 E Nicklaus $84,650 $0 Buffalo Stage Lift Station #12 167 Buffalo Stage Dr $57,169 $0 Juniper Bay Lift Station #13 086 Juniper Bend Dr $48,232 $0 Parkway Lift Station #14 Parkway & Summit Ridge $32,500 $0 Belmar Lift Station #15 1810 Belmar Dr $41,229 $0 Willow Sub Lift Station #16 274 Buttercup Loop $63,322 $0 Home Depot Life Station #17 Home Depot $153,700 $0 Ashley Meadows #18 Ruddy Duck & Merganser Dr $40,800 $0 Blue Heron Lift Station #19 Three Mile Dr & Blue Crest $53,000 $0 Village Green Lift Station #20 North Palmer Dr $53,000 $0 Meadow Creek Lift Station #21 830 12th Ave @ $21,200 $0 4 Corners #22 - Sewage Treatment 106 Cemetery Rd $265,000 $0 Stratford Village Lift Station #23 1992 Teal Dr $53,000 $0 Muskrat Slough #25 - Sewage 101 Russell Dr $31,800 $0 The Greenery #27 - Sewage Treatment Hwy 93 N & 4 Mile Dr $73,300 $0 Cottonwood #28 - Sewage Treatment 134 Aurich $77,550 $0 Aspen Creek #29 - Sewage Treatment 135 Triple Creek Dr $200,000 $0 Moe's Run #30 - Sewage Treatment 122 Moe's Run $70,000 $0 FVCC #31 - Sewage Treatment 735 Grandview Dr $85,500 $0 FVCC #32 - Sewage Treatment 2221 Hwy 93 N $85,500 $0 Lone Pine Meadows #33 - Sewage Treatment 351 Lupine Dr $80,000 $0 Old School #34 - Sewage Treatment 3391 Hwy 92 S $80,000 $0 The Meadows #35 - Sewage Treatment 310 Four Mile Dr $80,000 $0 Buffalo Hills Pumphouse #1 1000 N Main $5,854 $65,496 Buffalo Hills Pumphouse 32 1000 N Main $30,248 $134,440 Fairway 18 Pumphouse 1000 N Main $5,301 $54,006 Pumphouse 1000 N Main $16,620 $0 Kidsport - Pumphouse Kidsport Complex $2,664 $ TABLE 3-11. WHITEFISH CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE VALUATION Facility 1 11 Golden A ers Lift Station Replacement Content Value Value $16,620'` Alamack #3 Lift Station $16,620'` Alamack #1 Lift Station $16,620'` Alamack #2 Lift Station $16,620'` Monk's Bay #1 Lift Station $16,620'` 3-41 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Facility Monk's Bay #2 Lift Station 1 1 Replacement Value $16,620 Content Value Monk's Bay #3 Lift Station $16,620 W 2°a St Lift Station $16,620 Suncrest Booster Station $9,501 S65,421 W 6t" St Lift Station $16,620 Glenwood #1 Lift Station $16,620 Glenwood #2 Lift Station $16,620 Baker Lift Station $107,538 7th & Pine Life Station $74,828 Pump House Station $10,708 $65,421 Bohemian Lift Station $36,667 Colorado Lift Station $107,538 Lower Storage Tanks $366,750 Lower Tank Pum house $9,801 $10,903 Upper Storage Tank $285,500 $0 Upper Tank Pum house $6,3780 $10,903 Houston Point Lift Station $74,828 Shooting Star Lift Station $107,538 Monk's Bay Lift Station $107,538 Miller Lift Station $107,538 WWTP Plant $1,946,082 $1,037,025 WWTP Plant $115,818 * Pum house Station $9,335 425,234 New Water Treatment Plant $6,901,000 $3,456,750 Hydro Power Plant $10,310 $10,903 Water Reservoir $0 $0 Concrete Water Reservoir $0 $0 Rest Haven Lift Station $107,538 South Whitefish Lift Station $167,294 DQ Lift Station $75,828 Mountain Park Water Supply $8,251 $65,421 Scott Lift Station $71,137 Boat House Lift Station $27,259 Viking Lift Station $74,282 Library $2,222,168 $266,963 City Hall / Fire Station $2,692,661 $352,849 City Shop $149,774 $154,762 Maintenance Building $91,424 $61,851 Yellow Storage Building $101,025 $0 Pole Barn Sand Shed $33,020 $0 Ceinetary Tool Shed $3,264 $0 Hovercraft Garage $41,200 $0 * Replacement value includes all machinery & equipment 3-42 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.3.2 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Critical facilities are of particular concern because they provide, or are used to provide, essential products and services that are necessary to preserve the welfare and quality of life and fulfill important public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions. Critical facilities are defined as facilities critical to government response and recovery activities (i.e., life safety and property and environmental protection). Critical facilities include: emergency services such as police and fire stations, emergency dispatch/911 emergency call centers; medical facilities (hospitals and ambulance); transportation infrastructure (roads, bridges, railroads, airports); and utilities. Critical facilities data were obtained and mapped and then reviewed and corrected during the public review process. Future GIS mapping is intended to periodically update and increase the accuracy of facility locations. Maps showing the location of emergency response facilities (law enforcement — Figure 3-6 and fire stations — Figure 3-7), emergency medical facilities (hospitals and ambulance Figure 3-8), critical transportation infrastructure (airfields and heliports - Figure 3-9; major roads and rail lines — Figure 3-10, and bridges - Figure 3-11), high hazard dams (Figure 3-4) and energy infrastructure\power generation facilities (Figure 3-12) services continually update this information, particularly that serving vulnerable populations, such as schools, day care facilities and nursing. Flathead County OES will add and update critical infrastructure as information becomes available. 3-43 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FIGURE 3-6. POLICE STATIONS 3-44 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FIGURE 3-7. FIRE STATIONS 3-45 i Whitefish Medical Clinic North Valley HuRp, I pherd's H d Free Clinic a G Columbia Fal C'"ic 0 Steven N1. N1 ini Clinic Y Kailis 1 Regional Has ital Erergre>sn Ca uni 'Clinic "t'-' sz ouch erf Gra ree Clinic Vuadkiad Clinic 11 h tie a 'i C 0 tl 11 t r' PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County: Medical Clinics � And Hospitals 1-n 0 LYYurft PYrundan• y t titp Lima 1 al r IlighwAy Arterial Ktnxl N Ratlnead hledical CLinic e I to*petal it trnr & r'-fed "m thl. Ravi A" Fw YILrrlrabw rmgkr ms v mmd k no ,riw.arla Mrt wjaM,�, ►unr_yM". nrmgmeermX efoidw*. Iknamg vldwwq+ i'nai th'. dafe"&W•r Aw rr.s". M.L""nA I S D e p a r t m e n I Figure.1 - x FIGURE 3-8. MEDICAL CLINICS AND HOSPITALS 3-46 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 - Flathead County: �/— • Airports, Airfields and Heliports I r . Colin F.1 40 is Whitefish y Columbia Falls 93 2 36 t 93 Kalispell Ck, Fk,ur,dan' Airl*.Irt NIrik-1 City L,11111 ® Ha t1M,Tt -�-_ SIr�aTl7 Highway AHanal R is t Ralln,ad atria darinl— Idu. ala¢r a„' tiro rrrl,fiewr psi T,�1.rYY r�2y u - i. u.. 1 ..NI�yM,�. •kliYl'1Nt i..n i i..r.1- I I ,1 1 i, ,1 t! [ t➢ it t [, i " P .1 r J m v 11 1 I 1 Itillf L' — rl FIGURE 3-9. AIRPORTS, AIRFIELDS AND HELIPORTS 3-47 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FIGURE 3-10. MAJOR ROADS AND RAILROADS 3-48 t A Columbia Falls w, Kalispell PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Flathead County: ,<� Bridges County Fkneml.rn. Cit%. Limit 1 Ity;hl, x� Arlenal Road Karinsul ltrtdge .+rryr �, tlrf�'d.ni f4s xiny* a.r.n�► riin.trlh.Y jrory:nvwiniM urt� �+ � .+yl'lij bWr rtlrppirr�: rtrn+a�lfl�'. aI`A'IrA41rFfV►iMxfdltlr.f(Y►�. �[7'rii1+' _ Ito wo.fiu r IW lsM rf d`r,rr w r1w swr'. urwwrywd rrA I t 11 L, .1 d L t. l] 11 t Y I I S Q e p a T t lTtt a tI Figure 3 - 1 i FIGURE 3-11. BRIDGES 3-49 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 4 Flathead County: Energy Production ' and Infrastructure ■ y ••�'e. a-. - ' 1w'h'slef'rsh r ' _ Columbaa�� Falls Y lsals.pc11 t � . Q L� r Whitefish r Falls 1 v Ift — b G 1 co Kmndary � F9+war I'�arFt 1 a4111=} City Limit El�wlrr. Sulx tattt�h Like Natural [:a, Pip I Stream -- - Elvctm Tr,immi -.i Highway L ov Artenat %,ad N Railroad fir sn'F A I',r 4 r-rr 11u..reeri• Nn' jurt {trvrrrpfeFr pa ..ni TMiy l/4t .!• nrM' .rrt•r+.ardvv mn4 nFar•yrex{, wrw rYed•Ir. or rr.�ie.vrin ,.t�eee{ar,�'. i'L'r�cra;� - , , , . •.,,r rlrr• rP:r • • dnpr ar rAr u,wr . a+.ygrrd n'.1 t v c, I 11 e p a r t m e figure 3 - 12 FIGURE 3-12. ENERGY PRODUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 3-50 — - PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.3.3 Future Growth and Land Use Trends Flathead County has been gaining population since the 1990 census. The U.S. Census indicates that between 1990 and 2000, Flathead County gained 26% in population. Between 2000 and 2007 the population is estimated to have increased an additional 16.6%. The Flathead County Planner suggests that this trend will continue into the future. Much of Flathead County's growth is occurring outside of incorporated communities. In addition to requiring expansion of services for this rural growth, this trend will place new development in areas where natural hazards, particularly fire, are an issue. Flathead County is the third largest county in Montana encompassing approximately 3,361,230 acres or 5,252 square miles. Land in Flathead County is managed by federal, state and tribal governments and private property owners. The federal government manages approximately 78.6% of the total land in Flathead County. The Flathead Indian Reservation comprises approximately 29,864 acres of Flathead County. Approximately 24,315 acres of this total are owned by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and are not under the jurisdiction of the County or its growth policies. Approximately 3,024 acres of the Reservation within Flathead County are non -tribal owned private fee lands. Only those non -tribal owned fee lands not owned by members or any Indian Tribe would be under the jurisdiction of the Growth Plan. An additional 2,520 acres of Flathead County, within the Reservation, are state owned lands. The remaining 587,431 acres of Flathead County are managed by private landowners. Many landowners feel they should be able to do what they want on their property as long as it doesn't negatively impact neighbors, the environment, or the safety of the public. Others desire to protect their property rights from the impacts of incompatible adjacent land uses. Some growth can and does negatively impact neighbor's property rights, the environment and/or public safety. The Growth Policy can be used to address these negative impacts, thereby preserving the use, enjoyment and value of all property well into the future. 3-51 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.3.3.1 Forest Land Use The County contains portions of four National Forests and two Wilderness Areas. The Flathead National Forest, including portions of the Great Bear and Bob Marshall Wilderness Areas, has approximately 1,875,545 acres within the County that comprise nearly 55% of total county acreage. The Kootenai, Lolo, and Lewis and Clark National Forests have lands totaling approximately 115,390. Combined, the National Forests and Wilderness Areas comprise approximately 59% of the total acreage of Flathead County. Approximately 635,214 acres of Glacier National Park are found within the borders of Flathead County, comprising 19% of the total land mass. Other federal lands include the Lost Trail National Wildlife Refuge (7,885 acres), Swan River National Wildlife Refuse (1,568 acres) and the Flathead, Batavia, McGregor Meadows, Smith Lake and Blasdel Waterfowl Productions areas (totaling 5, 189 acres). Combined, Wildlife Refuges and Waterfowl Productions Areas comprise an additional 14,642 acres. Forest land uses in Flathead County are divided into two types: public and private. Forest land means privately owned land being held and used primarily for the continuous purpose of growing and harvesting trees of a marketable species. Public forest lands include federal and state lands on which contract harvesting takes place. In 2006, 29 million board feet were auctioned to private timber companies. The State of Montana manages a substantial acreage within Flathead County. Lands managed by the DNRC Trust Lands Management System account for approximately 129,670 acres. Fish, Wildlife and Parks manages another approximately 3,208 acres. Both federal and state recreation areas promote outdoor activities such as camping, hiking, fishing and/or hunting. A substantial portion of the private property in Flathead County is used for timber production. The three largest timber landowners in Flathead County account for approximately 9.2% (310,000 acres) of the total land area in Flathead County. Land owned by these three corporations represents approximately 52.7% of the private land in Flathead County. In addition 3-52 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 to the economic aspects of timber production and material products, these timber lands provide watershed protection, wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities and other values. Private forest lands are also valuable reservoirs of mineral resources that are necessary component of any growing community. Depending on the manner in which it is executed, residential development in rural areas can impact the character of a community, the health and safety of residents, the cost of providing services and the natural environment. Converting timberlands to residential real estate can be more profitable than harvesting timber. This conversion can threaten public safety as more people move into the wildland urban interface. 3.3.3.2 Agricultural Use Flathead County has a long tradition of agricultural land uses. In 2002, approximately 40% of the private land (234,861 acres) was being farmed. There were approximately 1,075 individual farms, with the majority (78%) being under 179 acres in size. Annual sales of less than $2,500 on over half the farms indicate that a large portion of the farms are hobby farms and not a source of primary income for residents. In 2002, there were approximately 98 farms that were over 500 acres in size and approximately 115 farms that had annual sales of over $50,000 indicating they are more likely to be primary occupations of the landowners and representing a substantial portion of the agricultural acreage in Flathead County. The custom and culture of agriculture in Flathead County is one of the features contributing to rapid growth and development. Lands that have traditionally been used for agriculture are being converted increasingly to residential uses as residents seek rural living. Issues can result from mixing residential and agricultural culture when new rural residents are unpleasantly surprised by the sights, sounds and smells associated with farming. Rural living requires adjustments from urban living, and it is unreasonable to expect that farming techniques could or would change when an adjacent field is converted to a residential subdivision. Vegetative buffers on the edges of new developments which abut existing agricultural operations can aid in lessening the cross contamination of weeds, chemicals, noise and odors. 3-53 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 There are no accurate data for the number of acres converted from agricultural to residential uses in Flathead County each year, but the conversion is a primary concern of many residents. There are a variety of factors contributing to this conversion. Current landowners are interested in farming as long as it is economically viable, but the increasing costs of farming (land, machinery, fuel, labor, etc.), combined with stagnant crop revenues, impact that viability. Farmers in Flathead County are aging, and although there is great interest in agricultural practices among the younger population, one cannot afford to buy land when competing with residential developers. Extraction of minerals is also a viable use of many formerly agricultural lands as landowners seek more value from their property. 3.3.3.3 Industrial Use Industrial applications commonly have a greater impact on the surrounding community than other land uses. It is difficult to mitigate the impacts of industrial land uses due to their inherent nature. Identifying appropriate land for industrial uses presents special issues. Given the possibility that industrial uses will have deleterious impact on the rights of adjacent property owners, it would seem desirable to segregate them. Certain industrial uses, such as those that have toxic byproducts, must be sufficiently separated from residential areas, schools, playgrounds, and environmentally sensitive areas. However, industry needs to be near a base of services in order to be efficient. Industrial parks and centers provide a regional service by serving a growing economy with needed industrial space and co -locating potentially hazardous land uses in areas that have been designated as being minimally impacted by odors, heavy truck traffic, noise, etc. Flathead County currently has approximately 194,660 privately owned acres that are zoned. Many of these lands are located around or between business centers. Of the 194,660 privately owned acres with regulated land uses, only 311 acres are zoned for uses commonly defined as industrial. A limited quantity of land makes prices higher and creates difficulties for businesses seeking efficient locations. This situation leads industrial business owners to acquire property further from services than they might desire. Industry located far from services creates problems for water, sewer, transportation, safety and human resources. 3-54 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 With growth comes a demand for an increase in the number of businesses serving the population. It is important to locate industrial uses close enough to services to increase efficiency, but far enough from establish residential uses to avoid objectionable impacts. 3.3.3.4 Commercial Use Information from the 2007 Census indicates that in 2006 there were 4,223 private non -farm businesses in Flathead County employing approximately 35,456 people. Current land use regulations allow commercial uses in a variety of designated areas. It is difficult to account for exact acreages of existing commercial designations because of the varying definitions of commercial uses between zoning districts. There are approximately 938 acres of "Business" zoning. An additional approximately 500 acres are designed "Business Resort". There are an additional 392,771 acres of private property in the county which are unzoned. By locating businesses so as to mitigate the negative impacts on views, traffic and the identity of a local community, a diverse economy with a positive impact on the local community by providing goods and services where they are needed can be promoted. Commercial land uses can be characterized by location and impact. If left to the business owner, location would be a function of the cheapest land with the best visibility and accessibility. Large signs, brightly colored aluminum buildings, pavement from lot line to lot line and direct highway access has been the trend along state highways. Large, bright signs are not only potentially out of character with the surrounding community, but are also a potential safety risk as motorists are distracted from driving. Large parking areas with no landscaped islands can prevent rain water from soaking into the ground, creating an environmental problem as well as a safety problem when waters collect and flood roads and building. Dozens of adjacent businesses with direct road access can create a safety issue as motorists are forced to contend with numerous merging and braking cars in high speed areas. Commercial land uses are unique for their ability to adapt and blend with other land uses. Mixing uses is especially appropriate when mutually negative impacts are mitigated. Visual 3-55 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 impacts can be softened by simply building a few feet back from the road and planting trees. Safety hazards can be corrected with frontage roads, turning lanes, sign controls etc. 3.3.3.5 Residential Use Residential lots are the single most rapidly growing land use in Flathead County. From 2000 through 2005, the number of lots created averaged 521 per year. During that same timeframe, an average of 2,455 acres was subdivided each year. These figures do not include lots and acreage totals from activities exempt from subdivision review such as family transfer or court ordered split. Although residential development, including the subdivision of land, is not inherently problematic, residential development at a density that is not compatible with existing local services and neighborhood character can be contentious. Inappropriate residential density causes a variety of challenges. Once road capacity is exceeded, public safety suffers. Emergency services such as fire, ambulance and law enforcement have a level or service that is dictated by response times. The further a development is located from services being provided, the longer the response times and likelihood of tragedy. High density development with delayed response times for emergency services is not a match. Low density land uses in areas with delayed response times are more appropriate for the welfare of the landowner and the public as a whole. Appropriate densities can be dictated by the land itself. Areas with shallow groundwater or limited access to groundwater are more suited to low density residential land uses. High density residential uses should be avoided in areas of steep slopes due to the risks of rockslides, mudslides, severe erosion, earthquake, avalanches and in flood prone areas. 3.3.3.6 Open Space Use Agriculture, timber, tourism, construction, recreation and other important economic engines rely on a balance of undeveloped and developed lands. Open spaces also preserve lands critical to the proper functioning of the natural environment, such as riparian areas, wildlife habitats, floodplains etc. Conservation easements can be used to lower taxes paid on land, while 3-56 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 benefitting both the natural and human environments. Common areas, greens and baseball fields can improve the character of a development and increase financial benefits to developers while increasing overall health of the future residents. Currently there are acres of open space with which Flathead County residents interact every day. Many successful and marketable subdivisions in Flathead County have utilized open space development design. Developers should be encouraged to preserve open space through density bonus incentives. 3.3.3.7 Special Need Use Some land uses do not fit neatly under the criteria above, but play a vital role in the future of Flathead County. Land uses that have a potential to impact any of the attributes that drive the Flathead economy are areas of special need. One of the single greatest economic attributes is tourism. Trusts flock to this area to visit Glacier National Park, recreate in the national forests and shop at local businesses. There are special need areas that have little to do with scenery and more to do with safety, economic diversity and public health. There are over 240 gravel pits that are active, inactive, unknown or reclaimed. Because the gravel extraction industry has little choice of where to locate, it is desirable to identify areas of gravel deposits that will serve the need of growth in Flathead County and restrict these areas to low density development and prohibit high impact public facilities such as schools. Further, the transportation of gravel should be restricted to roads capable of accommodating gravel trucks without posing an undue threat to public safety. Gravel located in environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands and areas of high groundwater should not be extracted due to the potential impact to the health of all residents. Transportation in general has special land use needs. Areas like Glacier International Airport have special needs that are not met by standard land use considerations. Tourism, business, and emergency services depend on Glacier International Airport to provide efficient transportation services. 3-57 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Buffering is a technique that can work in other special need areas. The Flathead County Landfill is well served by a buffer with adjacent land uses. The existing 275-acre landfill site has a projected life expectancy of approximately 29 to 57 years. Given the importance of refuse disposal to any growing area, it is reasonable to protect the ability of the landfill to continue providing service. Protecting this ability, as well as the health, safety and welfare of adjacent landowners, calls for a special needs area to be designated around the landfill. 3.3.3.8 Lands Unsuitable for Development There are lands in Flathead County on which development would pose such a substantial threat to the health, safety and general welfare of the entire community that it is reasonable to guide all growth away from these areas. The federal government requires minimum stands for development in 100—year floodplains. Local governments can regulate beyond the minimums to protect residents from flood events. Fill in the floodplain raises the ground level above the base flood elevation, but simply displaces flood waters to other areas of the community. Areas prone to high groundwater pose a special risk to both the public and the landowner. Previous generations have been familiar with the risks of living in areas subject to flooding from rising groundwater or pooling rain and have avoided development in these areas. Homes constructed in areas of shallow groundwater are far more likely to experience flooding, mold and unstable founds. Lands on which slopes exceed 30% are extremely unsafe. Dynamic processes occur in these areas that are not compatible with public health and safety. Rock slides, flash floods, tree falls, avalanches and unstable soils are among the more serious hazards in steep terrain. The vast majority of the lands in Flathead County that exceed slopes of 30% are in the national forest and state lands. However, there is private property on which a steep slope designation would apply and those lands should be restricted from development directly upon the steep slopes. Wetlands serve a variety of important functions in the natural environment. From retaining floodwaters during rain events to filtering natural and man-made pollutants from water, wetlands 3-58 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 are a critical resource that can be threatened by unrestricted development. It is reasonable to prohibit development in wetlands as long as the areas are delineated using scientific methods. 3.3.4 Vulnerable Populations In addition to property damage, the major focus of the Pre -Disaster Mitigation Planning process is on the impact of any hazard on people. The severity of the impact is related to the intensity of the hazard, the population affected, and the population's ability to protect itself. In addition to the geographic location of potential hazards, the evaluation of hazard risks also highlighted sensitive populations that may be more vulnerable to hazards. Locations of facilities housing or serving vulnerable populations are in the process of being mapped in Flathead County. Vulnerable populations include the young, the old and the infirm. Schools, day cares, nursing homes, clinics and hospitals are facilities serving vulnerable populations and are given special weighting in evaluating risk in the PDM planning process. Figure 3-3 (p. 3-14) suggests that only a minimal number of schools, and no police stations, hospitals, or City offices, are estimated to be located in the revised 100-year or 500-year flood plain mapped in Flathead County. According to the Montana Annual Estimates of the Population of Incorporated Places and Balance of County for the period April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2007, 61% of the population in Flathead County lives outside the incorporated cities. According to a Wildland Urban Interface Analysis of eleven western states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming) completed in 2007 by Headwaters Economics of Bozeman, there are 7,846 homes in the interface in Flathead County. According to the analysis, within Montana, Flathead County ranks highest in terms of existing wildfire risk at the present time and fourth highest in terms of future potential risk. Within the region studied, Flathead County ranks eighth in terms of existing threat. According to the Census, there are a total of 34,754 housing units in Flathead County resulting in about 22% of the County population being located in the wildland/urban interface zone mapped by the U.S. Forest Service (Figure 3- 1, p 3-9). 3-59 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.4 HAZARD EVALUATION The frequency, location, intensity and likelihood of recurrence of hazards were, major factors used in prioritizing hazards that the community identified as being of most concern during public meetings. 3.4.1 Hazard Recurrence The frequency of past hazard events and, when available, tools for predicting occurrence of future events were used as a guide to evaluate the probability of future hazards occurring. Accurate records have not been kept for some of the identified hazards. Where records are available, they may be biased towards hazards that occurred in the more populated areas. This is a potential concern as current growth in areas like Flathead County is expanding into rural areas outside city boundaries. Data from the NOAA National Climate Data Center Storm Events database, local records, USGS earthquake modeling and input from the local public were used to evaluate the likelihood of recurrence of natural hazards. Recurrence intervals range from an average of several times per year for severe winter storm events to a 25% probability of a low level earthquake event with a 50 year recurrence interval. FEMA flood plain maps delineate the 100-year and 500 year flood plains, which correlate to a 1 % and a 0.2% probability of flooding in any given year. Wildfires that threaten human activity and residences, although not known on a statistical basis, seem to recur several times per decade based on historical records and the memory of local citizens. The frequencies of wildfire events seem to be increasing over the last few years. 3.4.2 Hazard Geographic Distribution The geographic distribution of hazards has been mapped and utilized to evaluate potential impacts on critical facilities and the general population. 3.4.2.1 Wildfire Forest fires in the vicinity of developed residential areas represent a significant risk for Flathead County. Many of Flathead County's communities are surrounded by forestlands and residential 3-60 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 expansion is common in heavily timbered areas. Wildfire threat is a function of fuel load, fuel conditions and ignition sources. Historic occurrence and fuel characteristics indicate that much of the county is at high risk for future wild fire. Areas with steep slopes and locations where road access may be limited are particularly vulnerable to fast spreading fire conditions and contribute to risk for loss of life and/or property. According to the Urban Wildland Interface Code, 2000, published by the International Fire Code Institute (IFCI), a "Heavy Fuel" is vegetation consisting of herbaceous plants and round wood greater than 3 inches in diameter — the forested areas of Flathead County would fall in this category. Figure 3-1 (p. 3-9) depicts fire risk areas based on proximity of forest and developed areas and fuel conditions mapped by the U.S. Forest Service for Flathead County. Many of the communities in the county are in close proximity to forested areas and are concerned about forest fire potential. Some areas of the valley bottoms are more strongly influenced by risk of grass/range fire. 3.4.2.2 Weather Winter Storms - The entire project area is subject to winter storm conditions. Although severity of winter storms, particularly snowfall, varies significantly with elevation and topography, the populated valley bottoms can be characterized as having a similar risk throughout the County. Therefore the hazard profile area for winter storms is the entire project area. Summer Storms - Historical data indicates that thunderstorms and hail and microburst wind events can cause damage to structures and forest and crop land as well as endanger people out of doors throughout Flathead County. Based on review of weather data and the determinations made for tornadoes, windstorms and thunderstorms, the entire project area is considered to have a similar level of risk for severe thunderstorms, including high winds and hail. 3.4.2.3 Flooding Historically, flooding has been documented using floodplain maps. Floodplain maps have been developed by FEMA to show flood -prone areas in the County. The floodplain areas in the County are shown on Figure 3-3 (p. 3-14). Flooding can also occur along other streams throughout the county where FEMA mapping has not been completed. Population density is 3-61 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 generally much lower along streams outside of communities in the County, but continued development and lack of mapping or floodplain regulations may result in increasing risk of flood damage in other areas of the County. 3.4.2.4 Earthquakes An earthquake would impact the entire county. Buildings and residences located on certain types of soils may experience more damage due to liquefaction or low -density soils. Rocks and boulders may be loosened and roll down steeper slopes impacting buildings near the bottom. As mentioned in Section 3.1.9, the Columbia Mountain Landslide may be reactivated with a seismic event. 3.4.2.5 Human -Caused Hazards Based on review of historical accounts of human -caused and technological hazards, and input from the public meetings, it was determined that a significant component of risk in this category was related to transportation of hazardous materials and the transportation infrastructure. Location of major transportation arteries, which included highways and railroad lines, are shown on Figure 3-10 (p 3-49). Impacts from a dam failure will vary with the size of the impoundment. Failure of low risk dams, as defined by the DNRC, will inflict "minor property damage," while failure of a high risk dam will result in "significant" loss of life and property. Certainly the most significant potential damage would result from failure of the Hungry Horse Dam, which would impact Kalispell and Columbia Falls and all lower lying areas as far as Flathead Lake. 3.4.2.6 Avalanche Hazards Highest risk of significant human exposure to avalanches is associated with short sections of Highway 2 and the railroad tracks in the Flathead River canyon, east of Columbia Falls. Winter recreators will be exposed to avalanches any time they are in the mountains. 3-62 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 3.5 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT: ESTIMATING POTENTIAL LOSSES 3.5.1 Hazard Probability The probability or likelihood of a hazard occurrence affects the assessment of vulnerability from that hazard. For this risk assessment, hazard probability estimates were developed based on historical disaster records, potential for occurrence estimates and input from those involved in development and review of the Plan. Hazard probabilities in the vulnerability assessment are categorized as high, medium or low based on the likelihood of an occurrence within a 5, 10 or 20 year period, respectively. 3.5.2 Extent of Exposure The number of structures or people potentially affected by the occurrence of a disaster event is expressed as the Potential Extent of Exposure. The Potential Extent of Exposure is based on an estimate of structures impacted by a given hazard. For this risk assessment, Extent of Exposure estimates are expressed as a range. Hazard Potential Extent of Exposure magnitudes are expressed as a rating of Very High, High, Moderate or Low as a function of the numbers of structures or people impacted. Very High exposure would impact greater than 100 residential or commercial structures or greater than five critical facilities (Table 3-6, p. 3-35); High would impact 50 to 100 residential or commercial structures or two to five critical facilities; Medium would impact 10 to 50 residential or commercial structures or one critical facility; Low would impact less than 10 residential or commercial structures and no critical facilities. Some hazards, such as winter storm events and smoke inhalation, have the potential to affect essentially all of the structures and population of Flathead County. Other hazards, such as wildfire, summer storms or flooding are likely to put a smaller subset of the structures and population at risk. The Extent of Exposure values used in this vulnerability assessment are intended to reflect the likely maximum level of impact. 3.5.3 Severity of Impacts Severity of impacts is a weighting factor intended to account for differences in type, extent and cost of property damages inflicted by various hazard events. For example, weather related 3-63 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 damage could be downed power lines, trees across roads or collapsed roofs; flooding damage could be bridge and culvert destruction or water damage to structures; and fire damage could range from smoke damage to complete destruction of structures. Severity ratings are set at arbitrary values of 25% or low, 50% or medium, 75% or high and 100%, very high damage to property or structures based on the likely maximum level of impact for a given hazard. 3.5.4 Human Health and Life Impacts Human health and threats to human life are separated from affects of hazard events on property because they are qualitatively different. Human health impacts (disease, accident, etc.) or loss of life are quantified in this evaluation as High, Medium or Low as an estimate of the likelihood of human health impact or loss of life from individual hazard events. Historic records, potential for life or health threatening situations and input from local health officials were considered in this rating. 3.5.5 Vulnerability Calculations Vulnerability calculations present a quantitative assessment of the vulnerability of structures, people, and critical facilities to individual hazards and cumulatively to all hazards. The equation used to develop the overall relative risk values in this Plan is: Overall Vulnerability = Probability + Extent of Exposure + Severity + Human Health/Life Impacts (where appropriate) Where: • Probability = Score (3, 2, 1) based on probability of event occurring within the next 5 (High), 10 (Moderate) or greater than 10 years (Low) (Section 3.5.1); r Exposure = Score 4 (Very High), 3 (High), 2 (Moderate), 1 (Low) based on numbers of structures or critical facilities at risk as described in Section 3.5.2 • Severity = Score (4, 3, 2, 1) percent of damage expected as described in Plan Section 3.5.3; and + Human Impacts = Score (3-High, 2-Moderate, 1- Low) as described in Section 3.5.4. 3-64 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Overall Vulnerability scores were categorized into High (greater than 10), Moderate (8-10) and Low (less than 8). Table 3-12 presents the results of the vulnerability calculations for all of Flathead County. TABLE 3-12. VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Hazard Probability , '., Exposure Wildfire High High High Moderate High 1 Weather Winter Storms High Very High High Moderate High 2 and Summer Storms Flooding Moderate Very High Moderate Moderate High 3 Earthquake Low High High Moderate Moderate 4 Hazardous Moderate Low Low Moderate Low 5 Materials Mass Casualty Moderate Low Low Low Low 6 Terrorism & Low Low Moderate Low Low 7 Violence U Communicable Low High Low Moderate Low 8 Disease & Bio- Terrorism Civil Unrest Low Low Low Moderate Low 9 Dam Failure Low Very High Very High High 10 High Avalanche Low Low Low Low Low 11 3.5.6 Future Vulnerabilities As discussed in Section 3.3.3, growth in Flathead County will continue to cause increased demands on County services and continue to put new residences in locations of potential natural hazards. Of particular note is the increased number of residences located in forested areas peripheral to existing development. In addition to residents being at risk of eventual wildfire, County fire protection resources are increasingly stretched. Revised floodplain mapping is expected to be available soon, and will allow better definition of areas at risk for flooding from area streams. 3-65 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 The Comprehensive Plans for Flathead County, Columbia Falls, Kalispell and Whitefish seek to reach a compromise between allowing the economy and associated markets to benefit naturally from the desirable impacts of growth and land use changes while protecting the community from the accompanying undesirable impacts to public health, safety, morals, convenience, order, and general welfare. In addition, floodplain management ordinances, building codes, zoning ordinances have been developed and/or revised to assist in managing the anticipated growth and resultant land use trends. The Comprehensive Plans, in particular, identify goals and associated policies that will assist in reaching the necessary compromise. Listed below are general concepts from those city/county plans, policies, codes and ordinance that will help guide growth and development: ■ Development in environmentally sensitive areas such as floodplains and on steep slopes should be managed to avoid and mitigate environmental impacts and natural hazards. ■ Development is designed and located to protect public health and safety by: o Insuring adequate provision of services o Encouraging the most appropriate use of land o Maintaining community character ■ Utilization of Planned Unit Developments as a tool to ensure that commercial areas provide appropriate buffers to adjacent residential areas, and that all planned uses are compatible. ■ Identifying reasonable densities for remote, rural, suburban and urban development that do not strain the provision of services or create a public health or safety hazard. ■ Adoption of techniques that mitigate the threat to public health and safety created by various developments near the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) including defensible space, road access, water supply, building materials, and building density and spacing. 3-66 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 ■ Encouraging open space development design techniques to cluster dwellings away from hazardous and/or unsafe areas on lands that contain areas both suitable and unsuitable for development. Although at this time Flathead County does not have regional zoning, locations of proposed buildings, infrastructure or critical facilities located in identified hazard areas can be evaluated relative to hazard risk in future facility location decisions. Development of GIS based mapping of critical facilities as part of this PDM Plan provides a tool for county residents and service providers to evaluate risks of various hazards. 3-67 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 4.0 MITIGATION STRATEGY Specific mitigation goals and projects were developed for Flathead County and cooperating Cities in conjunction with input from the public meetings, the LEPC and others contacted regarding the proposed Plan. During the period of PDM Plan development, Flathead County developed a Wildfire Community Protection Plan to address wildfire issues Countywide. The fire mitigation planning process and PDM Plan development have areas of overlap and are intended to complement each other. Attendees of the spring, 2004 public meetings were individually polled on the probability of a disastrous event occurring from each hazard, the magnitude or impact of that event to the community, and provided input to the ranking of each identified hazard. Following is a description of goals and objectives intended to direct mitigation of potential natural and potential man -caused hazards that builds on the community's existing capabilities. Plan implementation and legal framework are also discussed in this section. 4.1 LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION GOALS AND ACTION PLAN The Plan goals describe the overall direction that Flathead County agencies, organizations and citizens propose to take toward mitigating risk from natural and man -caused hazards. Goals and objectives of the Plan were developed during interviews and meetings with public officials and at the public meetings held to solicit input. Hazards due to avalanches were not selected to be included in mitigation goals as avalanche hazard ranking (Table 3-5, p. 3-33) and vulnerability (Table 3-12, p. 3-65) and were low (in fact the lowest for all hazards in both ranking efforts) and the location of potential avalanche areas are primarily on federal lands. Flathead County hazard mitigation goals are identified below: Minimize Risk of Wildfire at Urban Interface. Reduce Impacts of Severe Weather Events. a Reduce Impacts from Flooding. 4-1 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 * Increase Earthquake Preparedness. • Reduce Risk and Impacts of Hazardous Material Incidents. Reduce Risks with Dam Failure. 4.2 MITIGATION OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS Mitigation objectives and specific actions or potential projects identified by the County and cooperating Cities as part of the Pre -Disaster Mitigation Planning process are described in this Section. These mitigation activities are applicable to the entire county including all participating jurisdictions. A variety of funding sources may be available to assist with these projects, including Federal funds through FEMA, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Flathead County and cooperating Cities will seek to secure funding sources to implement these projects in the future. To the extent practical, the Objectives and Actions of this PDM Plan have been coordinated with the Goals and Policies of the county and cities. 4.2.1 Wildfire Objective 1: Reduce fuels in the wildland urban interface (WUI). Types of potential actions: Homeowner fuel reduction programs to get landowners to do fuel reduction on private properties. • Landowner, farmer, rancher and homeowner education on wildfire and fuel reduction of the wildland interface and adjoining lands (WUI). Controlled burns. Fuel reductions on forested lands to reduce fuels in the areas of high risk to neighboring landowners in the WWI. Streamlined permitting process for fuel reduction. Ingress and egress fuel reduction. + Fuel reduction in utility right-of-ways. • Insurance incentives. + Fanner, rancher, and homeowner education specific to wildland fire problems. 4-2 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 + Ordinances restricting WUI acreage near communities. • Abandoned building removal/regulations. �► Weed control or mowing along railroads, county roads, and USFS roads. Support alternative methods to burning when reducing fuel hazards, such as chipping and harvest. Objective 2: Accurately assess and address the current wildland urban interface (WUI) problems at the subdivision level. Types of potential actions: Require new subdivisions to have adequate on -site water capacity and recharge for fire protection. • Support mutual aid agreements between rural and municipal fire districts. • Subdivisions outside of existing rural fire districts should be annexed into the nearest district if possible. • Ensure convenient access to and within all subdivisions for the largest emergency service vehicles. Encourage two or more subdivision access points in areas of high and extreme fire hazard. • Defensible space requirements and fuel treatments on new subdivisions. Implement Community Wildfire Protection Plan. +► Coordination with federal and state land management agencies. • Water supply systems in new and existing subdivisions. 0 Statewide consistent fire risk assessment system. Objective 3: Discourage unsustainable growth in wildland hazard areas. Types of potential actions: Promotion of fire-resistant building materials. # Enforce emergency access regulations. + Structure sprinkler systems program. 4-3 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Real estate disclosures. s Restrict commercial development in unsafe, inaccessible, remote rural areas. Objective 4: Improve Fire Fighting Capabilities Types of potential actions: • Develop water storage capacity and identify water supply sites to enhance fire- fighting capability. • Improve fire agency infrastructure (training facility, additional fire equipment storage, enhanced communications systems). • Provide for shared database between fire suppression agencies on: road closures, water sources, fuel ratings, district boundaries, ignition hazards and railroads. • Use enhanced 911 inventories to identify residences and critical infrastructure. r Identify areas with high number of fire starts and inadequate suppression equipment. 4.2.2 Weather Objective 1: Reduce response time for maintenance and repairs associated with severe weather events. Types of potential actions: • Utilize 911 mapping. • Train maintenance crews (power lines, etc.). • More snowplows. Public education addressing emergency preparedness. • Assist facilities with vulnerable populations and critical facilities to find alternative heat and power sources. Develop recommendations for disaster supply kit contents. 4.2.3 Floods Objective 1: Prevent flooding of structures and infrastructure from inadequate storm drainage and poorly designed irrigation waterways. 4-4 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Types of potential actions: Flood resistant landscape guidelines (berms, ponds, irrigation, etc.). New driveway/private road bridge and culvert guidelines. +► Evaluate bridges and culverts at risk from flooding and develop schedule and funding to replace or upgrade as necessary. Stream bank restoration. Backflow valves. • Storm drains. • Elevate roadways. Water retention basins. +� Identify areas that could be turned into parks etc. • Discourage high density development within the 500-year floodplain. Discourage high density development within the 100-year. Objective 2: Provide adequate warning of flooding events. Types of potential actions: River warning systems. • Real time automated river gauges (11 in place). Snotel sights in place (6). • Mapping of burn areas to be provided to NWS. • Continue and promote additional use of NOAA Weather Radios/Storm Ready Program. Objective 3: Improve the effectiveness of flood insurance programs. Types of potential actions: r Flood insurance education, especially insurance agents and home\business owners living in floodplain. + Adopt new FEMA maps and updates of existing floodplain studies as they become available. 4-5 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 • Review and revise floodplain regulations, potentially including appropriate setback requirements from floodplains. + Development in floodway or floodway fringe should not create a net increase in the floodplain area. Consider density guidelines in the floodplain regulations. r Discourage development that displaces floodwaters within the 100-year floodplain. Objective 4: Reduce the risk of dam or levee failure. Types of potential actions: �► Removal of high hazard, inadequate flood control structures. Repair of dams or levees. • Dam failure alert systems. 4.2.4 Earthquakes Objective 1: Strengthen existing residential, commercial, and government structures. Types of potential actions: Site evaluations of critical facilities. r Window film for shatter prevention in schools. Non-structural mitigation program for public schools, i.e., equipment/furniture straps. # Non-structural and structural retrofits of government buildings, particularly critical facilities. Residential and business retrofit programs. # Education. Objective 2: Provide for earthquake resistance in new construction. Types of potential actions: Enforcement of current building codes. �► Model seismic building codes. Mapping of earthquake risk zones and faults at a local government scale. 4-6 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 • Higher building standards for critical facilities and structures housing vulnerable populations. Objective 3: Educate the public in earthquake mitigation and readiness. Types of potential actions: + Require earthquake drills in schools in Flathead County. r Public education regarding household tie- down of heavy items and furniture. Workplace earthquake drills in Western Montana. • Expand earthquake -monitoring network. # Continue "Earthquake Preparedness Month" outreach activities during October. Presentations and distribution of earthquake awareness materials. Objective 4: Upgrade community infrastructure for seismic hazards. Types of potential actions: Retrofits of bridges and overpasses for seismic stability. Retrofits of public utility systems for seismic resistance. �► Public utility shut off valves. Seismic evaluations of dams. Educate transportation and utility employees on seismic hazards. 4.2.5 Human Caused Hazards Objective 1: Identify the areas within the county, which are most vulnerable. Types of potential actions: + Maintain and update GIS mapping of critical infrastructure. • Ensure emergency service personnel have current training and equipment for response. 4-7 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 4.2.6 Dam Failure Objective 1: Identify areas that are most vulnerable. Types of potential actions: Coordinate with Bureau of Reclamation as to emergency procedures. • Maintain and update GIS mapping of critical infrastructure. + Develop and maintain early warning systems. 4.3 PROJECT RANKING AND PRIORITIZATION The public input process was used to obtain information to rank hazards and associated mitigation objectives. Input in the public LEPC meetings led to consensus values for local community priorities. Objectives identified by Flathead County as top priorities are presented in Section 4.2. Public concerns and priorities and vulnerability to specific hazards (identified in the Vulnerability Assessment ranking values in Table 3-12, page 3-65), provide a focus on which hazards are of most concern to Flathead County. Potential mitigation projects to address the identified hazards were provided by the public and agency review. The relation of project costs to potential benefits can be used to further focus on mitigation projects that may be of higher priority in Flathead County. Table 4-1 presents a summary of mitigation objectives associated with the hazards identified for Flathead County and provides an analysis of costs and benefits of potential mitigation items. Costs, benefits and feasibility of each potential mitigation project were evaluated to provide input into development of the overall mitigation priority list. The cost benefit analysis uses the following factors: cost (including management costs), feasibility (politically, socially, and environmentally), population benefit, property benefit, and community priorities are the primary tool in the cost -benefit analysis. Each of the factors was ranked low, moderate, or high for each of the projects. The categories and the associated scoring method are as follows: 4-x PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Cost (including management): 3 Score Low <$10,000 2 Score Moderate $10,000 - $50,000 1 Score High <$50,000 Feasibility: 3 Score Low (Politically, Socially 2 Score Moderate Environmentally) 1 Score High Population Benefit: 3 Score Low < 25% of population benefits 2 Score Moderate 25% - 75% of population benefits 1 Score High > 75% of population benefits Property Benefit: 3 Score Low < 25% of property benefits 2 Score Moderate 25% - 75% of property benefits 1 Score High > 75% of property benefits Community Priorities: 3 Score Low — Priority 11-18 hazards (Comment at Public Meetings) 2 Score Moderate — Priority 4-10 hazards 1 Score High — Priority 1-3 hazards The overall cost -benefit was then calculated by adding the total score for each project (see Table 4-1). TABLE 4-1. COST BENEFIT RANKING OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION PROJECTS Population Property Community Project t Feasibility - Score Cos Benefit I Benefit I Priorities WILDFIRE Objective 1: Reduce uels in the wildland urban inter ace. Forest fuel reduction 2 3 3 3 3 14 Homeowner fuel reduction 3 2 3 3 2 13 Landowner fuel reduction 3 2 3 3 2 13 Streamlined permitting for 3 2 2 2 3 12 fuel reduction projects Restrictive ordinances 3 1 3 3 1 11 Weed control on transportation and utility 1 3 2 2 11 ROW 4-9 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 4-1. COST BENEFIT RANKING OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION PROJECTS (continued) Cost Benefit For Proposed Projects Population Property Community Project Cost Feasibility Score Benefit Bene [t Priorities WILDFIRE Objective 1: Reduce uels in the wildland urban inter ace (continued). Controlled burning 1 1 3 3 2 10 Insurance incentives 3 2 2 2 1 10 Utility ROW fuel reduction 1 3 2 2 1 9 Ingress/egress fuel reduction 1 2 3 1 1 8 Abandoned building 3 1 2 1 1 8 removal/regulation Alternatives to burning for 1 2 2 1 1 7 fuel reduction Objective 2: Address the current wildland urban inter ace prohlems at the subdivision level. Mutual aid agreements rural 2 2 2 2 2 10 and municipal FDs Encourage multiple access 3 2 2 2 1 10 to subdivisions Consistent state-wide fire 3 2 2 2 1 10 risk assessments stem Subdivision requirement to 3 1 2 2 1 9 provide fire water storage Implement County fire 1 2 2 2 2 9 mitigation plan Coordination with state and 2 2 2 2 1 9 federal agencies Annex subdivisions to 2 1 2 2 1 8 nearest FD Water storage for existing 1 1 2 2 1 7 subdivisions Objective 3: Discourage unsustainable growth in wildland hazard areas. Promote fire resistant 3 2 2 2 2 11 buildings Real estate disclosure 3 2 2 2 2 11 Discourage growth in high 3 1 2 2 2 10 hazard areas Enforce emergency access 2 2 3 2 1 10 regulations Restrict commercial 2 1 2 2 1 8 development Structure sprinkler systems 1 1 1 3 1 7 4-10 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 4-1. COST BENEFIT RANKING OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION PROJECTS (continued) Cost Benefitfor Proposed Projects Project Cost Feasihility Population Property Community Score Benefit I Benefit I Priorities WILDFIRE (continued) Objective 4: Improve Fire Fi g h *ng Ca fahilities. Identify areas of high risk 3 3 3 3 2 14 Develop/identify water storage capabilities 3 2 2 3 2 13 Share data between agencies 3 3 2 2 3 13 Improve agency infrastructure 3 2 2 3 2 12 Enhanced 911 inventory 1 2 1 3 2 2 10 WEATHER Ohjective 1: Reduce response time or maintenance and re airs associated with severe weather events. Public education 3 3 2 2 2 12 Training for maintenance crews 2 3 2 2 2 11 Utilize 911 program 2 2 2 2 2 10 More snow plows 1 3 2 2 2 10 Information on disaster kits 3 3 1 1 1 9 Alternative heat sources for critical facilities 1 1 2 2 1 7 FLOODS Objective 1: Prevent flooding of structures and infrastructure from inadequate storm drainage and poorly designed irrigation water wa s. Discourage development in 100- r flood lain 3 2 2 3 2 12 Road, bridge and culvert guidelines 3 2 2 3 1 11 Identify eenwa areas 3 2 2 2 1 10 Upgrade bridges and culverts at risk 1 2 2 3 2 9 Storm drains 1 2 2 2 2 9 Water retention basins 1 3 2 2 1 9 Flood resistant landscape guidelines 3 2 1 1 1 8 Stream bank restoration 1 2 1 2 2 8 Elevate roadways 1 2 2 2 1 8 Backflow valves 1 2 1 1 1 6 4-11 i PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 4-1. COST BENEFIT RANKING OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION PROJECTS (continued) Cost Beneflitfor Proposed Projects Population Property Community Project Cost Feasibility Score Benefit Benefit Priorities FLOODS (continued) Objective 2: Provide adequate warnin qfflooding events Promote awareness of NOAA weather radios stem 3 3 2 1 2 11 Real-time automated river 1 2 2 1 2 8 gauges River warning systems 1 2 2 1 1 7 Snotel sites 1 3 1 1 1 7 Mapping of burn areas 1 3 1 1 1 7 Objective 3: Improve effective ess qfflood insurance programs Restrict/regulate development in floodplain areas 1 1 2 3 1 8 Map unmapped floodplains 1 3 1 1 1 7 Revise flood lain regulations 2 1 1 2 1 7 Flood insurance education 1 2 1 1 1 6 Objective 4: Reduce Risk o Dam and Levee Failure Remove inadequate/high hazard flood control 1 2 2 2 1 8 structures Dam failure alert system 1 3 2 1 1 8 Repair dams and levees 1 2 1 1 1 1 6 EARTHQUAKE Objective 1: Strengthen existin residential, commercial and government structures Education 2 3 2 1 3 11 Site evaluations of critical facilities 1 3 2 2 2 10 Window film in schools 1 2 3 1 1 8 Non-structural mitigation in schools (furniture straps etc. 1 2 2 1 2 8 Non-structural mitigation in critical facilities (furniture 1 2 2 1 2 8 straps etc.) Residential and business retrofit programs 1 1 1 1 1 5 Objective 2: Provide or earthquake resistance in new structures Model seismic building code 3 2 2 3 1 11 Enforcement of building code 1 2 3 3 1 10 Higher building standards for critical facilities 1 2 2 2 2 9 Map risk zones on local scale I 1 1 1 1 1 5 4-12 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 4-1. COST BENEFIT RANKING OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION PROJECTS (continued) Cost Beneflitfor Proposed Projects Population Property Community Project Cost Feasibility Score Benefit Benefit Priorities EARTHQUAKE (continued) Objective 3: Educate public in earth wake mitigation and readiness Continue "Earthquake 3 3 2 2 2 12 Preparedness Month" activities Require earthquake drills in 2 3 1 3 11 schools Public education 1 3 2 1 2 9 Workplace drills 3 2 2 1 1 9 Expand monitoring network Objective 4: Upgrade communit in rastructure or seismic hazards Install utility shutoff valves 1 3 2 2 1 9 Seismic evaluation of dams 1 3 2 2 1 9 Educate transportation and 2 2 1 1 2 9 utility employees Retrofit bridges and overpasses 1 2 2 1 2 8 Retrofit public utility systems 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 6 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS Objective 1: Identify areas in co nty that are most vulnerable Maintain and update GIS 2 3 2 2 11 snapping of critical facilities J Ensure emergency personnel have current training and 1 3 2 2 ? 10 equipment for response DAM FAILURE Objective 1: Identify most vulnerable areas Coordinate with Bureau of Reclamation on emergency 3 3 2 1 2 11 procedures Maintain and update GIS 2 11 mapping of critical facilities Develop and maintain early 1 3 3 1 2 10 warning systems 4-13 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Mitigation projects were then prioritized by ranking as high, medium or low priority in order to provide some overall guidance to policy makers and for planning/budgeting. The priority ranking includes input from the public, agencies, the cost benefit analysis and the OES. Mitigation priority ranking is shown in Table 4-2. TABLE 4-2. HAZARD MITIGATION RANKING Hazard Potential Impacts Priority Mitigation CategoryHazard Road Closure High Fuel control projects such as Building Damage High Fire Wildfire thinning and fire breaks; fire control p injuryimprove of Loss of Life High capability Smoke Inhalation High Power Outage Medium Improve 911 dispatching, prepare Winter Storm Road Closure High maintenance crews (roads/utilities), purchase Building Damage Medium more snowplows Weather Power Outage Low Improve 911 dispatching, prepare maintenance crews Summer Storm Road Closure Low (roads/utilities), purchase more snowplows Building Damage Low Drowning/Stranding High Educate on flood prone Power Outage Low Snowmelt areas, control projects, upgrade bridges and culverts Road Closure Low Building Damage High Flood Drowning/Stranding High Educate on flood prone Power Outage Low Rain areas, control projects, upgrade bridges and culverts Road Closure Low Building Damage Medium Power Outage Low Education: Building codes Earthquake Earth Movement for seismic risks, earthquake drills in schools Road Closure Low Building Damage Low Injury or Loss of Life Low Railroad Blockage Low PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 TABLE 4-2. HAZARD MITIGATION RANKING (continued) Hazardous Human Health Threat Low Improve emergency response Materials training and upgrade Environmental Threat Low communications Multiple Deaths or Injuries Low Improve emergency response Mass Casualty training and upgrade Damage to Infrastructure Low communications Bio-human Disease Medium Improve emergency response Terrorism and training and upgrade Bio-animal Disease Low Violence Infrastructure Damage Low communications Develop and maintain GIS database of critical facilities; Hospital Facilities Low improve emergency response Human training and upgrade Communicable Caused Disease and Dia communications Develop and maintain GIS Bisease rndism database of critical facilities; At Risk Populations Low improve emergency response training and upgrade communications Improve emergency response Civil Unrest Infrastructure Damage Low training and upgrade communications Drowning/StrandingDrowning/Stranding Medium Develop early warning Power Outage Medium Dam Failure system; define vulnerable Road Closure Medium areas Building Damage Medium 4.4 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK Once the Flathead County PDM Plan is formally adopted, the County will use the Plan to focus project prioritization and direct funding efforts. Mitigation projects will be considered for funding through federal and state grant programs, and when other funds are made available through the Cities/County. The Implementation Plan identifies those specific activities to be undertaken based on cost/benefit and the mitigation priority ranking. The LEPC, consisting of local officials and disaster planning personnel, would likely have input to hazard mitigation projects. The LEPC and OES have the capacity to organize resources, 4-15 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 prepare grant applications, and oversee project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Coordinating organizations may include local, county, or regional agencies that are capable of, or responsible for, implementing activities and programs. The County Commissioners and chief elected officials, depending on jurisdictional responsibility, would generally determine project coordination and administration responsibilities. A number of state and local regulations and policies form the legal framework available to implement Flathead County's hazard mitigation goals and projects. A list of these regulations and plans is presented below. State of Montana + Montana Subdivision and Platting Act �► Montana Building Codes Montana Sanitation Regulations +� Uniform Fire Code Subdivision Local • Septic Sewer Permits Fire Threat Assessment • Growth Plan A summary of how the PDM Plan can be integrated into this legal framework is presented below. • Initiate a planning and public education effort in conj unction with flood mitigation projects to prevent development in flood -prone areas. • Partner with other organizations and agencies with similar goals to promote building codes that are more disaster resistant on the State level. • Develop incentives for local governments, citizens, and businesses to pursue hazard mitigation projects. 4-16 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Allocate city/county resources and assistance for mitigation projects. • Partner with other organizations and agencies in northwest Montana to support hazard mitigation activities. TABLE 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Project Jurisdiction Responsible Potential Estimated Description Agency Funding Course Time Line Wildfire Forest Fuel Flathead County USFS Federal/State 5-10 Years reduction DNRC Grants Homeowner fuel Flathead County Fire Departments RC&D Grants In progress reduction Columbia Falls Fire Service Kalispell Area/OES Whitefish DRNC, USFS RC&D, NRCG Homeowners Landowner fuel Flathead County Fire Departments RC&D Grants In progress reduction Columbia Falls Fire Service Kalispell Area/OES Whitefish DRNC, USFS RC&D, NRCG Landowners Restrictive Flathead County Planning Internal 5-10 Years ordinances Columbia Falls Departments Kalispell Whitefish Weed control on Flathead County Weed Departments Internal 1-3Years transportation & Columbia Falls utility rights of Kalispell way Whitefish Controlled burning Flathead County Fire Departments Internal Immediate Fire Service Federal/State 1-5 Years Area/OES Grants DRNC, USFS RC&D, NRCG Mutual aid Flathead County Fire Departments Internal 1-2 Years agreements Columbia Falls Fire Service Kalispell Area/OES Whitefish DRNC, USFS RC&D, NRCG 4-17 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Table 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (continued) Jurisdiction Responsible Potential Estimated DescriptionProject Agencyi i Time i Wildfire continued Multiple access to Flathead Planning Internal In progress subdivisions County Departments Columbia Falls Fire Departments Kalispell Fire Service Whitefish Area/OES Subdivision Flathead Planning Internal In progress requirement to County Departments provide fire water Columbia Falls Fire Departments storage Kalispell Fire Service Whitefish Area/OES Implement CWPP Flathead Fire Service Internal 1-3 Years County Area/OES Currently Columbia Falls Fire Departments being Kalispell revised Whitefish Promote fire Flathead Planning Internal Annually resistant building County Departments materials Columbia Falls Fire Departments Kalispell Fire Service Whitefish Area/OES Real estate Flathead Planning Internal 1-2 Years disclosure County Departments Columbia Falls Fire Departments Kalispell Fire Service Whitefish Area/OES Identify high risk Flathead Fire Departments Internal 1-2 Years areas County GIS Columbia Falls Fire Service Kalispell Area/OES Whitefish DNRC USFS Develop/identify Flathead Fire Departments Internal 1-5 Years water storage County Fire Service RC&D Grants capabilities Columbia Falls Area/OES State Funds Kalispell GIS Federal Funds Whitefish DNRC DNRC USFS USFS -4-18 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Table 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (continued) Project Responsible Potential Estimated Jurisdiction Description Agency Funding Course Time Line Wildfire continued Share data between Flathead County Fire Departments Internal 1-2 Years agencies Columbia Falls Fire Service Kalispell Area/OES Whitefish DNRC DNRC USFS USFS GIS Improve agency Flathead County Fire Departments Internal 1-10 Years infrastructure Columbia Falls Fire Service AFG Grants Kalispell Area/OES Safer Grants Whitefish ODP Grants VFA Grants Enhanced 911 Flathead County Fire Departments Internal 1-3 Years inventory Columbia Falls Fire Service Kalispell Area/OES Whitefish Weather Public education Flathead County OES Internal Annually Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish Training for Flathead County Public Works Internal 1-3 Years maintenance crews Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish 911 program Flathead County GIS Internal 1-3 Years Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish More snow plows Flathead County Public Works Internal 5-10 Years Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish -4-19 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Table 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (continued) Project Jurisdiction Responsible Potential Estimated Description i i Time i Floods Restrict/regulate Flathead County Planning Internal In progress development in Columbia Falls Departments 100-year Kalispell flood lain Whitefish Restrict/regulate Flathead County Planning Internal In progress development in Columbia Falls Departments 500-year Kalispell flood lain Whitefish Road, bridge, Flathead County Public Works Internal 1-5 Years culvert guidelines Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish Identify greenway Flathead County Planning Internal 1-5 Years areas Columbia Falls Departments Kalispell Whitefish Promote NOAA Flathead County OES Internal On -going weather radio Columbia Falls National Weather Kalispell Service Whitefish Earthquake Public education Flathead County OES Internal Annually Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish Site evaluations of Flathead County 1-3 Years critical facilities Columbia Falls Kalispell Whitefish Non-structural Flathead County School Districts Internal 1-5 Years mitigation in Columbia Falls schools (Window Kalispell film, tiedowns) Whitefish Non-structural Flathead County School Districts Internal 1-5 Years mitigation in Columbia Falls critical facilities Kalispell (Window film, Whitefish tiedowns) 4-20 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Table 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (continued) Project Jurisdiction Responsible Potential Estimated Description Agency Funding Course Time Line Earthquake continued Model seismic Flathead County Planning Internal 1-5 Years building code Columbia Falls Departments Kalispell Whitefish Enforcement of Columbia Falls Planning Internal Ongoing building code Kalispell Departments Whitefish Continue Flathead County OES Internal Annually Earthquake Columbia Falls Preparedness Kalispell Month Whitefish Earthquake drills Flathead County School Districts Internal 1-3 Years in schools Columbia Falls OES Kalispell Whitefish Install utility Flathead County Dam Owners 5-10 Years shutoff valves in Columbia Falls BOR, DNRC community Kalispell Columbia Falls infrastructure Whitefish Seismic evaluation Flathead County Dam Owners Internal 3-5 Years of Dams Columbia Falls Grants Kalispell Human Caused Update GIS Flathead County GIS Internal h1 progress mapping of critical Columbia Falls facilities Kalispell Whitefish Ensure emergency Flathead County Fire Departments Internal personnel have Columbia Falls Fire Service SFG Grants current training Kalispell Area/OES Safer Grants and equipment for Whitefish ODP Grants response VFA Grants 4-21 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Table 4-3. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (continued) Project Jurisdiction Responsible Potential Estimated Description •• Time i Dam Failure Coordinate Flathead Fire Departments Internal In progress emergency County Fire Service procedures with Columbia Falls Area/OES Bureau of Kalispell Law Enforcement Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation GIS mapping of Flathead GIS Internal In progress critical facilities County Columbia Falls Kalispell Early warning Flathead Fire Departments Grants 1-5Years systems County Police Departments Internal Columbia Falls Sheriff Kalispell OES 4-22 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 5.0 PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES The Plan maintenance section of this document details the formal process that will ensure that the Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan remains an active and up-to-date document. The Plan maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the Plan and producing a Plan revision every five years. This section describes how the county will integrate public participation throughout the Plan maintenance process. Also included in this section is an explanation of how Flathead County government intends to incorporate the mitigation strategies outlined in this Plan into existing planning mechanisms. 5.1 MONITORING, EVALUATING AND UPDATING THE PLAN The Flathead County Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan will be reviewed every two years, or as deemed necessary as knowledge of new hazards and vulnerabilities becomes available. The review will determine whether a Plan update is needed prior to the required five-year update. The Plan review will identify new mitigation projects and evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation priorities and existing programs. The Office of Emergency Services will be responsible for scheduling meetings with the Flathead County Commissioners and City officials at Kalispell, Columbia Falls and Whitefish to review and update the Plan. The meetings will be open to the public and advertised in the local newspaper to solicit public input. The County Commissioners, assisted by OES, the LEPC and the public, will review the goals and mitigation projects to determine their relevance to changing situations in the county, as well as changes in state or federal policy, and to ensure they are addressing current and expected conditions. The LEPC and public will also review the risk assessment portion of the Plan to determine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data. The list of critical facilities will also be reviewed and enhanced with additional details. The Office of Emergency Services will give a status report detailing the success of various mitigation projects, difficulties encountered, success of coordination efforts, and which strategies should 5-1 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 be revised. The status report will be published in the local newspaper and posted on city and county Web sites to update local citizens. The Office of Emergency Services, assisted by the LEPC, will be responsible for the five- year update of the Plan, and will have six months to make appropriate changes to the Plan before submitting it to the County Commissioners, City officials and the public for review and approval. Before the end of the five-year period, the updated Plan will be submitted to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer and FEMA for acceptance. The Office of Emergency Services will notify all holders of the county Plan when changes have been made. 5.2 IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH EXISTING PROGRAMS Flathead County and the incorporated cities of Columbia Falls, Kalispell and Whitefish address planning goals through their comprehensive, master, redevelopment and capital improvement plans, as well as through use of building codes, subdivision regulations, and zoning, floodplain and other ordinances. The Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan provides a series of recommendations that are closely related to the goals and objectives of these existing planning programs. The County and Cities will have the opportunity to implement recommended mitigation action items through existing programs and procedures utilizing the Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan as a baseline of information on the hazards that impact the County. Following formal adoption of the Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan, the recommendations listed above can be incorporated into the process of existing planning mechanisms at the city and county levels. The meetings of the Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan Committee will provide an opportunity for committee members to report back on the progress made on the integration of mitigation planning elements into the county planning documents and procedures. 5.3 CONTINUED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Flathead County is dedicated to involving the public directly in review and updates of the Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plan. The public will have many opportunities to provide feedback about the Plan. Copies of the Plan will be catalogued and kept at the County Commissioners 5-2 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 offices in Kalispell and in public libraries in Kalispell, Whitefish, and Columbia Falls. City offices in Kalispell, Columbia Falls and Whitefish will also be provided copies. Section 2.0 of the Plan includes the address and the phone number of the Office of Emergency Services who is responsible for keeping track of public comments on the Plan. Public meetings will be held as part of each two-year review and the required five-year update of the Plan. The meetings will provide a forum for public input to the Plan. The Office of Emergency Services will be responsible for using county resources to publicize future public meetings and maintain public involvement through the local media including the OES web site, newspapers and radio. 5-3 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 6.0 REFERENCES Avalanche Butler, David, R, 1989. Snow Avalanche -Dams and Resultant Hazards In Glacier National Park, Montana, Northwest Science, Vol. 63, No. 3, 1989 Colorado Avalanche Information Center (on line at http://avalanche.state.co.us/Accidents/ Statistics/ Reardon, Blase A., Fagre, Daniel B. Steiner, Richard W., 2004. Natural Avalanches and Transportation: A Case Study from Glacier National Park in Proceedings of the International Snow Science Workshop, Jackson, WY, Sept. 2004. City/County Planning Flathead County Growth Policy Adopted March 19, 2007 -- Resolution #2015A Flathead County Subdivision Regulations Adopted July 2007 and proposed revisions September, 2008 Flathead County Lake and Lakeshore Protection Regulations Adopted April 13, 1982 And Amended May 11, 1992 - Resolution No. 878a; January 19, 1993 - Resolution No. 878c; September 9, 1996 - Resolution No. 1194a; February 24, 2000 - Resolution No. 215c; July 19, 2001 - Resolution No. 1515; January 24, 2002 - Resolution No. 1551 Flathead County Transportation Plan Phase H Prepared for the Flathead County Planning and Zoning Office — January 2008 Flathead County Development Code Adopted under the Authority of Title 76 (Land Resources and Use) of the Montana Code Annotated Flathead County Zoning Regulations Adopted September 27, 1993 - Resolution No. 955a Flathead County Floodplain and Floodway Management Regulations Adopted August 5, 1984 - Resolution No. 522 and Amended October 22, 1987 - Resolution No. 670A; July 19, 1988 - Resolution No. 707A; April 25, 1991 - Resolution No. 839A; July 19, 2001 - Resolution No. 1514; January 25, 2007 - Resolution No. 2013 Columbia Falls Growth Policy Adopted January, 2006 Kalispell Growth Policy Adopted February 18, 2003 - Resolution 4773 6-1 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Kalispell Floodplain Management Ordinance Adopted June 18, 2007 - Ordinance No. 1611 Kalispell Subdivision Regulations Adopted May 6, 1996 - Ordinance No. 1238 Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Adopted June 2, 2003 - Ordinance No. 1460 Whitefish Urban Corridor Study of US Highway 93 Technical Memoranda — Task 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 — Prepared for the City of Whitefish and Montana Department of Transportation July, 2008 Dam Failure Bureau of Reclamation, 2005 - U.S. Department of the Interior, Emergency Action Plan, Hungry Horse Dam Demographic Montana Department of Labor and Industry, 2001 - Annual Average Labor Force Summary Report U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001 - Profile of General Demographic Characteristics for 2000 U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001b - Table A98-30 (Estimated Number and Percent People of All Ages in Poverty by County: Montana). Earthquake Qamar, Q, and Stickney, M., 1983, Montana earthquakes, 1869-1979: historical seismicity and earthquake hazard; Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology publication M51. U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Data Base, 2002 (Available on line at http://geohazards.cr.uses.gov/eq/2002AVril03/WUS/WUSp a500v4.gifl. General DES, 2001 - State of Montana Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, Prepared by Division of Disaster and Emergency Services and Montana's Hazard Mitigation Team, October, 2001 6-2 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 DES, 2003 — Montana's Homeland Security Strategic Plan, Prepared by the Division of Disaster and Emergency Services, December, 2003 FEMA, 1997 - Multi Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, A cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy, Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA, 2000 - The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 FLATHEAD COUNTY, 2007 — Emergency Management Plan, Prepared by Flathead County Office of Emergency Services, Draft of September, 2007 Hazardous Materials Office of Emergency Services (Flathead County), 2004, Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan and Interagency Standard Operating Guidelines Landslide Godt, J.W., 1997. Digital Representation of Landslide Overview of Conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 97-289, scale 1:4,000,000 Smith, L.N., 2001. Columbia Mountain Landslide: late -glacial emplacement and indications for future failure, Northwestern Montana, USA; in Geomorphology 41 (2001) 309- 322. Severe Weather Historic Climate Information Database, Western Region Climate Center Wildland Fire Flathead County Fire and Emergency Services, 2004 (as revised) - Wildfire 2004 NIMS Community Protection Plan Flathead County, 2003 - Flathead County Wildland/Urban Interface Fire Mitigation Plan Gude, Patricia H., Rasker Ray, van den Noort, Jeff, Potential for Future Development on Fire -Prone Lands, Journal of Forestry, 2008 6-3 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 APPENDIX A RESOLUTIONS AND DOCUMENTATION OF PDM PLAN ACCEPTANCE BY LOCAL JURISDICTIONS PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 APPENDIX B FLATHEAD COUNTY SEVERE WEATHER EVENTS SOURCE: NOAA CLIMATE DATA WEB SITE PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FLATHEAD COUNTY SEVERE WEATHER EVENTS SOURCE: NOAA CLIMATE DATA WEB SITE 234 event(s) were reported in Flathead County, Montana between 01/01/1950 and 03/31/2007 (High Wind limited to speed greater than 0 knots). SOURCE: NOAA NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER:http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent—storms Date Time Type Magnitude Deaths Injuries Property Damage Crop Damage 06/22/1955 2300 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/13/1956 1700 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 09/11/1958 2055 Tstm Wind 83 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/03/1960 1930 Hail 1.50 in. 0 0 0 0 07/14/1966 1500 Hail 2.50 in. 0 0 0 0 07/24/1966 2137 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 08/11/1968 1800 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/11/1968 1813 Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 04/23/1969 1730 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/06/1971 1245 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/16/1972 1806 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 05/18/1974 1624 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/23/1974 2204 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/24/1974 40 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 08/25/1976 1630 Tstm Wind 0 kts 0 0 0 0 08/18/1981 1600 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/27/1982 1615 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 06/27/1982 1645 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/29/1982 1855 Tstm Wind 54 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/25/1983 1800 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/12/1984 1834 Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/23/1984 1400 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 08/27/1985 1850 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 06/16/1987 1830 Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 2 0 0 06/28/1988 1115 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/28/1988 1130 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 06/28/1988 1200 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 07/10/1989 1600 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 07/15/1989 1645 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 07/20/1989 1800 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 07/20/1989 2000 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 07/26/1989 2100 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/31/1989 1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 1 0 0 09/01/1989 2030 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/05/1990 1915 Hail 1.25 in. 0 0 0 0 08/20/1990 1700 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 08/20/1990 1725 Tstm Wind 57 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/20/1990 1728 Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/20/1990 1735 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 01/22/1993 400 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 5K 0 01/25/1993 500 High Winds 82 kts. 0 0 0 0 02/27/1993 600 Ground Blizzard N/A 0 0 50K 0 03/15/1993 930 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 50K 0 05/31/1993 1945 Thunderstonn Winds N/A 0 0 5K 0 05/31/1993 2100 Thunderstorm Winds N/A 0 0 500K 0 08/06/1993 2100 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 5K 0 08/29/1993 1700 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 09/11/1993 2000 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 09/20/1993 800 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 10/7/1993 2000 Winter Stonn N/A 0 0 500K 0 11/01/1993 600 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 11/03/1993 200 High Winds 78 kts. 0 0 50K 500K 11/03/1993 1800 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 5K 0 11/15/1993 436 High Winds 58 kts. 0 0 0 0 012/3/1993 1000 High Winds 65 kts. 0 0 50K 0 02/13/1994 1100 High Winds 70 kts. 0 0 0 0 03/02/1994 800 Ice Jam Flooding N/A 0 0 5.OM 5.OM 03/04/1994 2035 High Winds 55 kts. 0 0 0 0 03/21/1994 1000 Dust Storm/high Winds N/A 0 0 50K 500K 04/15/1994 735 High Winds 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 05/15/1994 1645 Thunderstorm Winds N/A 0 0 500K 0 05/15/1994 1715 Thunderstorm Winds N/A 0 0 500K 0 06/13/1994 2200 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 06/26/1994 1000 High Winds 64 kts. 0 0 500K 0 08/03/1994 1700 High Winds 0 kts. 0 0 500K 0 08/14/1994 1645 Thunderstorm Winds N/A 0 0 0 0 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 09/02/1994 2145 Thunderstorm Winds N/A 0 0 I 0 10/02/1994 0 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 10/15/1994 0 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 10/20/1994 600 High Winds 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 10/26/1994 1730 High Winds 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 11/01/1994 1900 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 11/16/1994 1800 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 500K 0 11/23/1994 700 High Winds 100 kts. 0 0 50K 0 11/25/1994 1200 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 500K 0 12/22/1994 454 High Winds 53 kts. 0 0 0 0 02/09/1995 2100 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 02/17/1995 300 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 02/17/1995 1200 High Winds 72 kts. 0 0 0 0 02/19/1995 800 High Winds 79 kts. 0 0 0 0 02/26/1995 200 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 03/04/1995 2200 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 03/24/1995 200 Winter Storm N/A 0 0 5.OM 0 03/26/1995 1925 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 04/08/1995 200 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 04/29/1995 0 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 05/11/1995 1145 Tornado FO 0 0 0 0 05/12/1995 600 Winter Stonn N/A 0 0 0 0 05/20/1995 1800 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 05/20/1995 1945 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 05/26/1995 1200 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 07/09/1995 1940 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/04/1995 2300 Thunderstorm Winds N/A 0 0 0 0 08/10/1995 1905 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 08/10/1995 1950 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 08/11/1995 1855 Hail 0.88 in. 0 0 0 0 08/11/1995 1910 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 08/11/1995 1920 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 08/11/1995 1945 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 10/04/1995 0 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 10/10/1995 600 High Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 10/18/1995 800 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 11/06/1995 1200 Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 11/09/1995 0 Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 11/18/1995 1100 High Winds 77 kts. 0 0 0 0 11/26/1995 1200 Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 12/04/1995 200 High Winds 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 12/10/1995 0 Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 01/01/1996 12:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 01/03/1996 7:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 01/12/1996 3:00 AM High Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0 01/16/1996 6:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 01/30/1996 3:00 AM Extreme Cold N/A 0 0 0 0 02/01/1996 11:30 PM Extreme Cold N/A 0 0 1K 0 02/02/1996 6:00 AM Extreme Cold N/A 0 0 0 0 02/07/1996 12:00 AM Flood N/A 0 0 733K 0 02/10/1996 2:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 02/24/1996 12:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 03/03/1996 4:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 03/11/1996 6:00 AM Flood N/A 0 0 1.5M 0 03/22/1996 12:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 03/27/1996 12:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 04/01/1996 1:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 04/10/1996 6:00 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 04/12/1996 6:00 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 04/24/1996 2:25 PM Urban/sml Stream Fld N/A 0 0 0 0 04/24/1996 3:00 AM High Wind 70 kts. 0 0 0 0 05/04/1996 12:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 05/08/1996 12:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 05/23/1996 1:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 07/02/1996 6:45 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 07/02/1996 7:15 PM Hail 2.75 in. 0 0 0 0 07/02/1996 9:10 PM Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 07/02/1996 9:20 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 10/19/1996 1:00 PM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 10/21/1996 6:33 PM High Wind 75 kts. 0 0 0 0 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 10/22/1996 11:00 AM High Wind 53 kts. 0 0 0 0 10/29/1996 1:00 AM High Wind 62 kts. 0 0 0 0 11/18/1996 8:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 2 1 0 0 12/01/1996 7:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 12/02/1996 7:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 12/20/1996 7:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 1 0 0 0 02/26/1997 12:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 03/12/1997 8:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 05/01/1997 12:01 AM Flood N/A 0 0 2.3M 0 05/31/1997 6:00 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/21/1997 7:30 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 08/01/1997 6:25 PM Hail 1.50 in. 0 0 0 0 08/07/1997 1:00 PM Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 09/14/1997 8:10 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 03/03/1998 7:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 05/20/1998 5:35 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 05/25/1998 6:00 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 05/26/1998 5:00 PM Tstin Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 01/22/1999 3:15 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 02/01/1999 8:00 PM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 02/18/1999 11:00 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 07/21/1999 8:30 PM Hail 1.50 in. 0 0 0 0 08/03/1999 4:50 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/30/1999 4:50 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 10/31/1999 11:54 AM High Wind 65 kts. 0 0 0 0 01/09/2000 3:30 PM Winter Storrn N/A 0 0 0 0 02/23/2000 9:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 04/04/2000 7:00 PM Tstm Wind 51 kts. 0 0 0 0 04/13/2000 8:00 AM Winter Stonn N/A 0 0 0 0 06/19/2000 1:55 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/22/2000 7:30 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 1 1 0 0 09/10/2000 2:10 PM Tornado FO 0 0 0 0 11/29/2000 8:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 12/14/2000 5:00 PM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 12/16/2000 2:00 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 02/04/2001 1 7:00 AM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 02/15/2001 6:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 04/02/2001 4:00 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 03/05/2002 5:00 PM Heavy Snow N/A 0 0 0 0 03/20/2002 4:30 AM Blizzard N/A 0 0 0 0 04/14/2002 11:30 AM High Wind 74 kts. 0 2 0 0 05/19/2002 6:00 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 05/19/2002 8:00 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 06/27/2002 6:20 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 07/13/2002 9:40 PM Tstm Wind 57 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/16/2002 6:00 AM High Wind 69 kts. 0 0 0 0 12/26/2002 4:00 PM Winter Stonn N/A 0 0 0 0 01/22/2003 12:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 03/14/2003 4:35 PM Tstm Wind 53 kts. 0 0 0 0 05/25/2003 3:53 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/01/2003 12:00 AM Wildfire N/A 0 0 0 0 11/18/2003 6:00 AM High Wind 64 kts. 0 0 0 0 01/01/2004 8:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 01/03/2004 7:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 01/05/2004 6:00 AM Extreme Cold/wind Chill N/A 0 0 0 0 01/07/2004 8:00 AM Winter Weather/mix N/A 1 6 0 0 03/18/2004 11:00 AM Strong Wind N/A 0 0 2K 0 06/25/2004 6:30 PM Hail 1.25 in. 0 0 0 0 06/25/2004 7:40 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 06/30/2004 4:30 PM Heavy Rain N/A 0 0 0 0 07/14/2004 3:00 PM High Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/19/2004 2:10 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 07/19/2004 2:50 PM Hail 0.88 in. 0 0 0 0 07/19/2004 3:00 AM Flash Flood N/A 0 0 20K 0 09/01/2004 1:15 PM Hail 0.88 in. 0 0 0 0 12/14/2004 6:00 AM Winter Weather/mix N/A 0 0 0 0 01/07/2005 7:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 01/11/2005 4:00 PM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 O1/14/2005 6:00 AM Winter Weather/mix N/A 0 0 0 0 O1/18/2005 12:00 AM Ice Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 06/02/2005 12:00 AM Flood N/A 0 0 701 K 0 06/05/2005 4:30 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 12K 0 08/10/2005 2:57 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 12/04/2005 10:00 PM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 0 0 12/21/2005 6:00 AM Winter Weather N/A 0 0 0 0 02/16/2006 12:00 PM Extreme Cold/wind Chill N/A 0 0 0 0 05/16/2006 2:00 PM Flood N/A 0 0 0 0 06/13/2006 4:45 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/13/2006 8:06 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/13/2006 8:08 PM Hail 0.88 in. 0 0 0 0 06/13/2006 9:05 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 06/13/2006 10:10 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 06/15/2006 9:00 PM Flood N/A 0 0 0 0 06/15/2006 10:00 PM Flash Flood N/A 0 0 0 0 06/15/2006 10:00 PM Flood N/A 0 0 0 0 07/06/2006 2:40 PM Tstm Wind 70 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/06/2006 3:20 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0 07/10/2006 2:03 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 07/24/2006 2:00 PM Tstm Wind 70 kts. 0 0 0 0 08/08/2006 7:25 PM Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 08/31/2006 12:03 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 08/31/2006 12:07 PM Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 11/05/2006 12:00 AM Flash Flood N/A 0 0 4.7M OK 11/13/2006 9:00 AM High Wind 150 kts. 0 0 OK OK 11/26/2006 2:00 AM Winter Stonn N/A 0 0 OK OK 11/27/2006 11:00 AM Winter Storm N/A 0 0 OK OK 12/15/2006 12:00 AM High Wind 75 kts. 0 0 10K OK PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 APPENDIX C FLATHEAD COUNTY PDM DEVELOPMENT CONTACT LIST PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 CONTACT LIST Name Agency Amy Vanterpool ALERT Angela Monroe KAJ Kirsten Holland FC Animal Control Ben Devall Big Mountain FD Bill Boyd KRMC Bill Dial Whitefish PD Bob McCrea CSKT FD Bob Webber Columbia Falls FD Byron Guy Kalispell Ambulance Charlie Comer Corps of Engineers Charlie Hunter Kootenai Forest Chester Powell Big Mtn Ski Patrol Chris Dalimata Canyon QRU Chuck Harris Big Fork FD Cindy Mullaney FC OES Clark Herron Mormon Church, Ward 1 Clay Colby MDT Cliff Nelson, Jr Hungry Horse FD Connie Tuman Glacier Bank Craig Glazier Flathead Forest Craig Williams Evergreen FD Dale Lauman FC Commissioners Dan Bangeman Flathead Conservation Dan Cassidy DNRC Dan Diehl Kalispell FD Darwin Freakes E. Glacier Park FD Dave Baker Whitefish Ambulance Dave Perry Columbia Falls PD Dave Poukish DNRC David Metcalfe Firefighters Assoc. David Prunty FC Public Works Dawn Drollinger Montana Fire Marshall DC Haas Kalispell FD Dennis Lawrence Swan Mission S&R PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Dennis Philmon Hungry Horse Dam Dick Mattson E. Glacier Park FD Dusti Lowndes DEQ Gary Hall FC Commissioners Gary Mahugh Creston FD Gary Moses Glacier National Park FD Gary Troutman Marion Ambulance George Kahn Swan Lake FD Glen Gray FCCHD Gordie Jewett FC Weeds & Parks Ian Jeffcock Eureka Ambulance Jack May MDT James Brower Marion FD James Carl (JC) South Kalispell FD Jay Scott FC Fairgrounds Jed Fisher FC Weeds & Parks Jennifer Rankosky FCCHD Jesse Best DNRC Jim Atkinson FC Agency on Aging Jim Carl S Kalispell FD Jim Mann Daily Interlake Jim Price DNRC Jo Scott ARC Jody White FCCHD Joe Brenneman FC Commissioner Joe Garza FC Finance Joe Russell FCCHD John Fraley FWP Jolie Fish Columbia Falls Mayor Jordan White FC S&R Katie Edwards Big Fork FD Keith Frederickson Olney FD Ken Beck Blankenship FD Kristi Massey OES Lance Westgard 3 Rivers EMS Larry VanRinsum Flathead Conservation Lew Savik ARC Lincoln Chute FC FSA/Badrock FD PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Lori Heatherington Humane Society Lynn Ogle Trail Creek FD Mark Johnson Can -Am S&R Mark Reasner ARC/Baptist Church Marvin Eaves Ferndale FD Mary Granger Lakeside QRU Matt Thompson Mike Jenson Whitefish Mayor Mike Meehan FC Sheriff Mike Wilson Blacktail Ski Patrol Nicholas Ledden Daily Interlake Pam Kennedy Kalispell Mayor Pat Libby Olney Ambulance Paula Robinson FC Clerk & Recorder Peter Felsch NWS Missoula Phil Timm Glacier Airport FC Randy Feller Smith Valley FD Rich Boon Somers FD Rich Sipe MDC Rick Hagen Badrock FD Rick Moore DNRC Rick Trembath Bigfork FD Rod Dresbach West Valley FD Roger Nasset Kalispell PD Ron Sullens Essex FD Thelma Fox Middle Fork QRU Tim Soule Kalispell FD Tom Torpen Martin City FD Tracy Norred Bigfork Ambulance Walt Tabb Coram-W. Glacier FD Wendee Jacobs FCCHD Wes Gwaltney FCExtension Zach Bradley Creston FD PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 APPENDIX D PDM MEETINGS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT DOCUMENTATION FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 N0.13239 NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FLATHEAD COUNTY' PRE -DISASTER MITI3ATION PLAN The Pre -Disaster Mitigation Plain for Flathead County and the incorporated Cities of Columbia Falls, Kalispell and Whitefish is available for public. Review and comment: The 30-day review period begins July' 1, 2008 and ends July LEGAL NOTICES 31, 2008. A paper copy of the plan is available for review at the three City Offices and at the Office of Emergency Services located in the basement of the Justice Building, 920 S. Main, Kalispell. A copy of the, plan is also posted on the Flathead County website at www.flathead.mt.gov. Comments on the plan should be submitted in writing to Cindy Mullaney, Acting Director. Office of Emergency Services 920 S. Main Street, Kalispell. MT, 59901 or via the Internet to oes@flathead.mt.gov. Dated this 25th day of June. 2008. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Flathead County, Montana By Is/ Gary D. Hall Gary D. Hall. Chairman ATTEST: Paula Robinson, Clerk By Isl Diana Kile Diana Kile. Deputy, June 30 and July 7. 2008 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 STATE OF MONTANA FLATHEAD COUNTY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ROCHELLE ROONEY BEING DULY SWORN, DEPOSES AND SAYS: THAT SHE IS THE LEGAL CLERK OF THE DAILY INTER LAKE A DAILY NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION, PRINTED AND PUBLISHED IN THE CITY OF KALISPELL, IN THE COUNTY OF FLATHEAD, STATE OF MONTANA, AND THAT NO. 13239 LEGAL ADVERTISMENT WAS PRINTED AND PUBLISHED IN THE REGULAR AND ENTIRE -ISSUE OF SAID PAPER, AND IN EACH AND EVERY COPY THEREOF ON THE DATES Of June 30, July 7,2008. AND THE RATE CHARGED FOR THE ABOVE PRINTING DOES NOT EXCEED THE MINIMUM GOING RATE CHARGED TO ANY OTHER ADVERTISER FOR THE SAME PUBLICATION, SET IN THE SAME SIZE TYPE AND PUBLISHED FOR THE SAME NUMBER OF INSERTIONS. e Subscrl`bed and sworn to Pd�' , , Before me this July 7, 2008 .�' eel Dorothy Glens s Notary Public or the State of Montana Residing in Kalispell My commission expires 9/11/09 PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Cindy Mullaney To: LEPC Subject: Pre -Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Plan The final revisions to the PDM plan have been completed. A final 30-day public review period began on July 1 ".As part of the public review period, members of the LEPC have an opportunity to review and comment on the plan. Hard copies of the PDM are located at the city offices in Kalispell, Columbia Falls, Whitefish and here in the OES office. A copy of the Plan (2008 Flathead PDM Plan) has been posted to the Flathead County OES website at http://flathead.mt.gov/OES. Please provide any comments to me at the address below. Cndy Mullaney Acting Director Office of Emergency Services 920 S Main Street Kalispell MT 59901 Phone: 406/758/5504 Cellular: 406/249-6913 Fax: 406/758-5562 Email: cmullaney@flathead.mt.gov PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Local Emergency Planning Committee CATEGORY ORGANIZATION NAME AIRPORT AUTHORITY GLACIER NATIONAL AIRPORT CINDI MARTIN 4170 U S HIGHWAY 2 EAST KALISPELL 59901 PHIL TIMM BANKING INDUSTRY GLACIER BANK CONNIE TUMAN P O BOX 27 KALISPELL 59903 CITIZENS CORP/COAD UNITED WAY SHERRY WULF P0BOX 7217 KALISPELL 59904 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF KALISPELL DUANE LARSON P O BOX 1997 KALISPELL 59903-1997 CITY OF COLUMBIA FALLS MICHAEL P. SHEPARD 130 6TH STREET WEST, ROOM A COLUMBIA FALLS CITY OF WHITEFISH TURNER ASKEW P. O. BOX 158 WHITEFISH 59937 CITY MANAGER CITY OF WHITEFISH DENNIS TAYLOR P. O. BOX 158 WHITEFISH 59937 CITY OF COLUMBIA FALLS WILLIAM SHAW 130 6TH STREET WEST, ROOM A COLUMBIA FALLS CIVIL DEFENSE AIR NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY KALISPELL, MT 59901 COLLEGE FVCC TOM DYER 777 GRANDVIEW DRIVE KALISPELL 59901 STEVE LARSON COMMUNICATIONS 911 CENTER MARK PECK-911 920 S MAIN ST KALISPELL 59901 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FLATHEAD COUNTY JOE BRENNEMAN 800 SOUTH MAIN GARY HALL KALISPELL 59901 DALE LAUMAN PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 CATEGORY ORGANIZATION NAME FIRE DEPTS (CITY) CITY OF KALISPELL DAN DIEHL P O BOX 1997 Acting Chief KALISPELL 59903-1997 FIRE DEPTS (RURAL) WEST VALLEY FIRE ROB DRESBACH 2490 FARM TO MARKET KALISPELL 59901 INDUSTRY MAHUGH FIRE & SAFETY GARY MAHUGH P0BOX 5013 KALISPELL 59903-5013 FLATHEAD CITY -COUNTY HEALTH HEALTH JOE RUSSELL 1035 1 ST AVENUE WEST KALISPELL 59901 JODY WHITE HOSPITAL KRMC BILL BOYD 310 SUNNYVIEW LN KALISPELL, MT 59901 LARGE RETAIL TARGET JOHN ROGERS 2365 U S HWY 93 NORTH KALISPELL 59901 LARGE RETAIL LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT KEN SESCHE 2360 U S HWY 93 NORTH KALISPELL 59901 LAW ENFORCEMENT SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT MIKE MEEHAN 920 SOUTH MAIN KALISPELL 59901 MEDIA THE MONSTER DAX VAN FOSSEN 317 1ST AVENUE EAST KALISPELL 59901 OES OES DEPARTMENT CINDY MULLANEY 920 SOUTH MAIN KALISPELL 59901 PROPANE CITY SERVICE GENE CORNE POBOX I KALISPELL 59903 PUBLIC WORKS REP CITY OF KALISPELL P O BOX 1997 KALISPELL 59903-1997 FRANK CASTLES RAILROAD BNSF LANE ROSS 500 DEPOT STREET WHITEFISH, MT 59937 SCHOOLS - RURAL FLATHEAD COUNTY MARCIA SHEFFELS SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 800 SOUTH MAIN STREET KALISPELL, MT 59901 CATEGORY PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 ORGANIZATION NAME SCHOOLS - CITY WHITEFISH PUBLIC SCHOOLS JERRY HOUSE 1500 EAST 7TH STREET WHITEFISH, MT 59937 TIMBER PLUM CREEK DANA JEFFERIES P O BOX 1990 COLUMBIA FALLS, MT 59912 TRANSPORTATION MONTANA DEPT OF TRANS Kyle DeMars P O BOX 7308 KALISPELL 59904 UTILITY ELECTRIC FLATHEAD ELECTRIC 2510 HIGHWAY 2 EAST KALISPELL 59901 UTILITY -NATURAL GAS NORTHWESTERN ENERGY MARK GRONLEY P O BOX 9888 KALISPELL 59904 VOAD RED CROSS LEW SAVIK MARK REASNER LEPC CHAIR MARK HOLSTON W bA bA � CO O l— M CO M M 01 CO l— 01 M M M l� O l� w � � N � � N CO � N � -- `O C; N 4 N C; � � d1 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 N -- 4 � N CO N N N O l- W� O N M N O 4 W� W� C1 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 N N O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N \O O O O O M O O O O O CO O O lr� lr� O M %C d1 W� CO r-� W-� "C "C "C �n � � � d1 64 64 6R 69 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 69 64 64 64 64 M O `c C) CO CO C)l� N C M � M N M � M C., C) CO � l� O CO � M � M � l� � M � l� O CO � -:t � d W-� 0 U bA w qp U Q Q C Q CPU, 55 Q U,4. ct ° o Q A N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N %C CO %C CO l7t I:t O M N N O N O l7t l7t O CO CO %C CO % O l� M l� O -- CO zl- I:t N CO M M � r- I:t I:t I:t � N M N CO CO O l- N O N M N 4 M M N N 4 6�16 -- -- 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 O O O O O O O O CO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 00 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N . O O O O O O O O O� O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O � CO %C O CO %C �C �C �C �C �C �C �C 11C M %C � � 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C CO � CO � � N M N N O N O O CO CO � CO � O l� M l� O -- CO M CO M M l� N M N CO M O l� CO 00 O l� O 06 N O _; O -- 64 64 64 64 64 64 N N N M C CO I:t I:t N M N N N O I:t I:t N O M CO M N Q 7�1ct Q Q Q Q Q Q Q t o Q w Q o wrA o � ct ct Cl > ct �> �, o p Q v w -a v 0 ' Z ct °�' U ° o � � ° � w � u � ct � 0 W ° y ° ul ID U U -6� p- a v W w ti 0 Q0� 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 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N �n Wi Wi �n �n Wi Wi W� W� Wi W� tn co co co co co co co co co N N N N N 4 1- O Oo O O Oo N� Oo N N Oo OIzi- Oo Oo O Oo Oo Oo Oo O l� Oo Oo � Oo Oo r N C Oo m M, M, M, W�' N 4 co M, 4 M, crl 4 �n, N co M, M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 M 64 N N N N N M N N 06 N N N N N N N M N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 00 O 64 64 64 64 64 64 6S 64 64 69 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O 00 O O 00 N C OD % N OD O 00 O OO OO OO OO M OO OO l- 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 W'� OD W� W� M W N OD W� OD W� N 01 Q w w w b ct�- Ct M>--= ct ct L> C �" Ld C'� t -d ct N o b a v o ct U vs o - � ' C�j W H W ct 0-1 U P� C7 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 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 _ NORTH FORK IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION FIRE t Cl3aiw�`ifJ�'r ` AY 1 12."hill ± MITIGATION COMMITTEE SUMMARY OF APRIL 18, 2004 MEETING Atj The North Fork Improvement Association's Fire Mitigation Committee met on April 18, 2004 at Larry Wilson's home in Columbia Falls. Committee members Dick Cowley, Ed Heger, Lynn Ogle, Molly Shepherd, Jerry Wernick and Larry Wilson were present. Alsc attending were Resource Conservation and Development Forester Michael Justus, Flathead National Forest Fire Management Officer Michael Dardis, Glacier National Park Fire Management Office personnel Mitchell Burgard and Jean Tabbert, and community member John Frederick. The group addressed the following topics. 1. Western States Wildland/Urban Interface (WUI) Grant Mailing Committee members revisited the content of the mailing to North Fork landowners about the National Fire Plan/WUI grant. They concluded that the mailing should focus on creating defensible space and in particular, on the availability of a free home/wildfire assessment. They agreed that the assessments will confer long-term benefits on the community, giving "legs" to the program. The mailing therefore will have three components: first, an explanation of the grant and the assessment/cost-share assistance application process (Mike Justus); second, a message about creating defensible space on the North Fork supported by a fire history map (Jean Tabbert and Mitch Burgard); and third, a cover letter about the Fire Mitigation Committee's activities, including an announcement of the pending educational workshops (Molly Shepherd). A tentative timetable for implementation of the grant is as follows: + May 1, 2004 — mail materials to landowners, * June 5, 2004 — hold first educational workshop at Sondreson Hall. * June 15, 2004 — deadline for submission of applications for 2004 assessments. July 1, 2004 — WUI grant funded and assessments may begin. * July 3, 2004 — hold second educational workshop at Sondreson Hall. Committee members also considered who would perform the assessments. They felt that a person or team with both forestry and fire experience would be ideal. Bill Swope, a retired Forest Service silviculturalist and fire management officer, was recommended. Larry Wilson agreed to contact him and determine whether he would be interested performing assessments and developing treatment prescriptions with landowners. Mike Justus pointed out that in order to be cost-effective, the assessment and prescription should be completed in a single visit. The group decided that other fire -related topics under discussion might be covered in a subsequent mailing, in the spring newsletter, at the workshops and perhaps on a Website. Among the topics are post -fire rehabilitation and restoration efforts; timber salvage; soils and watershed concerns; mushroom pickers; noxious weeds; Douglas fir beetles; weather and precipitation projections for the 2004 fire season; fuel conditions; and burning permits and cautions. PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 2. Strategic Planning Lynn Ogle, who is active in county -wide predisaster mitigation planning efforts, asked the group to complete a survey rating the probability of various potential disasters. The information will be compiled into a database and will assist in the development of Flathead County's predisaster mitigation plan. A local government must have a plan in place in order to qualify for federal predisaster mitigation funding under FEMA. The North Form community plan will be an annex or addendum to the county plan. The Fire Mitigation Committee's actions and recommendations will be incorporated into the plan document. October 1, 2004 is the target date for compilation of the requisite materials. In keeping with planning efforts under the National Fire Plan, the committee refined a definition of "Wildland/Urban Interface." The definition reads: The North Fork community occupies a corridor at risk from severe wildfire. The corridor is approximately three miles wide and thirty-five miles long, extending from Big Creek to the Canadian Border along the North Fork of the Flathead River. The community's wildland/urban interface extends up to 1.5 miles from the boundaries of the corridor, where private property adjoins or intermixes with public lands. The committee also discussed a proposed mission statement and related goals and objectives but deferred any decision until a subsequent meeting. Preparedness and prevention must be addressed in the goals and objectives. Committee members further discussed the possibility of additional collaborators, among them the National Center for Landscape Fire Analysis at the University of Montana. According to Mike Dardis, the Center has been engaged in a GIS project in the Nine Mile District of the Lolo National Forest. The layers of information that have been gathered will be helpful for planners as well as for incident management teams, who often must scramble for relevant data when they are assigned to a fire. Committee members recognize the potential for the North Fork to serve as a model of collaboration. Lynn Ogle reported that Flathead County has several GIS program, including ArcView. Mitch Burgard commented that the program also had been used on the East side of Glacier National Park. Several committee members raised potential privacy concerns about the collection and retention of data about private property. Collaboration with Forest Service on Risk Assessment and Miti ag tion The group re viewed a recently -compiled map depicting North Fork fire history. The three major files since 1988 — Red Meadow, Moose and Wedge Canyon — all have started on Flathead National Forest land near the Whitefish Divide and then have run East across the inhabited corridor along the North Fork River into Glacier National Park. The Forest Service has fought PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 the fires, particularly when structures in the inhabited corridor have been threatened. The state and the county also have been active in structure protection efforts. Mike Dardis related that the Forest Service has conducted a preliminary review of the three areas indentified by the committee as most at risk from wildfire: the "North End," the area from Moose Creek to Whale Creek and the area around Hay Creek. Strategically, private and public mitigation efforts must complement one another. The Forest Service has projected a sequence whereby landowners proceed with fuels reduction around their homes followed by Forest Service fuels reduction on interfacing public lands. Mr. Dardis stated that Flathead Forest Ranger Jimmy DeHerrera supports planning and implementation of collaborative projects with the committee. All members of the group again agreed that homes must be the focal point. Mitigation efforts, first by landowners and then by the Forest Service, must radiate from homes. Mr. Dardis suggested that if the Forest Service knew what individual landowners have done or plan to do around their homes, it could make informed, cost-effective decisions about the location and amount of treatment on adjoining public lands. In effect, the Forest Service would build on landowners' efforts, while taking into consideration fuel model maps and natural barriers. It was suggested that focus groups might assist in determining treatments in particular neighborhoods or creek drainages. As soon as it is feasible, members of the committee will visit the sites that already have been identified. Forest Service and Park representatives will accompany them. 4. Education The committee will sponsor several workshops this summer to assist North Fork landowners who want to know more about protecting their homes from wildfire. The first workshop will be held in conjunction with the NFIA meeting on June 5, 2004. Another workshop tentatively is scheduled for July 3, 2004, preceding the NFIA's July meeting. Potential topics to be covered at the workshops include the fuels reduction grant program, Firewise principles, community initial attack capability, predisaster planning, and equipment demonstrations. A "show me" or demonstration tour may be scheduled later in the summer. 5. Miscellaneous Jerry Wernick suggested that the NFIA compile a list of the phone numbers of willing North Fork landowners. He noted that most phone numbers currently are unlisted, making it difficult to provide notice to community members in an emergency. A phone tree might also facilitate communication. Mike Dardis advised the group that the Forest Service has hired James Barnett as a fire/fuels planner and assistant FMO on the Flathead Forest. Mr. Barnett, who has experience as a Hotshot, a forester and a logger, may work with the committee. PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Larry Wilson reminded committee members that the deadline for submission of FY 2004-05 RAC proposals is April 28, 2004. Proposals for neighborhood water systems and/or dry hydrants might be submitted in subsequent years. The next meeting of the Fire Mitigation Committee will be held on Thursday, May 13, 2004 at Larry Wilson's home in Columbia Falls. Molly Shepherd ii PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 FLATHEAD COUNTY LEPC General 1 st Quarter Meeting - Thursday - March 18, 2004 Lane Ross Frank Garner Donna Maddux Alan Marble Gary Mahugh Steve Bech William Boyd Sherry Stevens Wulf, Chair Steve Herzog Lynn Ogle Tina Frownfelter, Acting Secretary Kelly McHenry Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Kalispell Police Department Flathead County Supt. of Schools Flathead County OES Interagency Hazardous Response Team Flathead Electric Company Kalispell Regional Medical Center Flathead County Citizen Corps MT Department of Transportation Flathead County OES Flathead County OES Creston Fire Department LEPC Meeting was called to order by Sherry S. Wulf, Secretary - 9:41 AM CERT Grant Status - Alan Marble s Flathead County Citizen Corps web -based registry/tracking system and CERT Grant fund history was discussed in detail, including the MTDES withdrawal of awarded grant funds after meeting CERT Grant requirement and contractor payment by Flathead County. Further discussion was held on the subsequent reinstatement of grant funds by MTDES after written protest. Discussion held on MTDES reinstatement letter requesting a copy of the web -based MYSQL registry/tracking program from Flathead County Citizen Corps developed by Manresa Information Systems. The Contractor was contacted by the CERT Grant Manager and he was informed copies are available to anyone on the net, but the programming source codes were not purchased by the Flathead County Citizen Corps, they purchased a turn key solution, however, the source codes are available for purchase. + Discussion was held on the CERT Grant detailed expense spread sheet sent to MTDES requesting pre -purchase approval to insure itemized equipment and supplies were eligible expenditures - no written or verbal response was received from MTDES. Follow-up telephone conversation was held with MTDES CERT Grant Administrator (Ray Reed), where he was asked specifically if the expenditures were approved, and he stated that he "doesn't approve expenditures, that would have to be done by someone higher up". Further discussion was held on the grant timing, and the County Grant Administrator stated the CERT Grant is already into an extension period and there isn't much time left to full fill grant requirements. Without expenditure pre -authorization the County Grant Administrator recommended we spend no Flathead County funds. * Donna Maddux made a motion to authorize the Flathead County CERT Grant Manager to meet with MTDES and ODP Federal representatives on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 in Polson and to return the unused portion of the CERT Grant awarded the LEPC, should that be in the best interest of the Flathead County LEPC. Seconded - Steve Herzog. All approved. PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 PDM Plan Status - Lynn Ogle + Flathead County received a $7,500 PDM Grant with a $2,500 match from Flathead County OES. PDM plan submission deadline is June 1, 2004. • Lynn Ogle passed around stakeholders fonns for review. • Community meetings in each city and at various county fire departments will begin the week of March 23rd. + Jurisdictional CEO's appointed representatives: Alan Marble - City of Columbia Falls; Diane Smith - City of Whitefish; Fred Leistiko - City of Kalispell; Alan Marble - Flathead County. + Discussion was held on how to effectively advertise PDM Community Meetings. • LEPC members will be notified of all PDM Community Meeting times via e-mail. ODP FY03 & FY04 Grants - Alan Marble + FY03 Grant Budgets presented and approved by LEPC in November needed minor modifications for PR25 radio grant compliance and will be submitted to the Commissioners for signature March 22, and to MTDES for review and approval by March 26. • Discussions were held on PR25 communication grant requirements and LEPC members were infonned that all radio equipment purchased must meet the PR25 standard to be purchased, and that all radio equipment that is not PR25 ready needs to be PR25 upgradeable to be eligible for purchase. • FY04 ODP Grant allocations were divided into three primary funding areas; Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention; Citizen Corps; Homeland Security Readiness and Preparedness. • The LEPC appointed Frank Garner, Chairman of the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Committee; Sherry S. Wulf, Chairperson of the Citizen Corps Committee; Gary Mahugh, Chairman of the Homeland Security Readiness and Preparedness Committee. Hospital Decontamination - Bill Boyd • Bill reported that HRSA funding stared August 31, 2003 and that the entire state only received $2.3 million which was to be divided between 63 participants. The statewide HRSA focus was on smaller hospital issues, not facility decon. It was generally expressed by HRSA participants that Decon was a County function. * Alan stated that the Flathead County Mass -Medical -Technical Decontamination Plan calls for area hospitals to have fixed -site decontamination facilities to care for the high percentage of patients that arrive outside of the emergency medical transport system. • Discussion was held about FY04 ODP Grant priorities. It was decided that one of the top priorities was to establish fixed hospital decontamination sites to protect critical infrastructure, and a field deployable DMAST medical decon system was also determined to be of high priority. After further discussion Bill agreed to serve as Chairman of the LEPC Decontamination Subcommittee, which will review the hospital, field medical and technical decontamination needs of the County. PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Interagency Hazardous Response Team - Gary Mahugh * Gary reported on the mass/technical decontamination exercise last night (Wednesday 3/17/04) in Columbia Falls, and that the exercise went very well with key CFFD Officers becoming familiar with HRT's technical decon deployment. * Discussion was held on the ODP 02 Grant equipment. Kelly reported breathing equipment was backordered and the level "A" suits were available for service. * Gary reported that the number of Hazardous Response Team call -outs were unusually low when compared to previous years. 03 Exercise Grant - Kelly McHenry Kelly reported on the $70,000 FY03 ODP Grant allocated for local and regional WMD exercises, and that Flathead County has already begun local interagency tabletop and functional WMD exercises. Discussion held on future upcoming exercises and Flathead County's participation level in regional exercises. Kelly will submit the FY03 ODP Grant budget for local and regional exercises to MTDES next week; and reported briefly on the OPD Exercise training program he attended in Denver, Monday - Wednesday of this week. EOP NIMS - Alan Marble Alan reported federal government has established an October 1, 2004 deadline for county governments to convert their Emergency Operations Plan to mirror the adopted National Incident Management System form of emergency management, which is now mandated through Presidential Directives for all local, State and federal emergency response plans. Alan will be attending specialized NIMS training next week in Nevada to begin the County EOP NIMS transition process. GNESA - Lane Ross * Lane gave a summary report on the recent GNESA meeting. Discussion was held in general about avalanche control and communication challenges experienced in the Middle Fork corridor with industry responders not being able to contact the 9-1-1 PSAP. * There was further discussion about radio connnunication interconnectability with private industry and first responders to transmit on -scene status reports. Use and monitoring of the State mutual aid channel (GOLD) was discussed. Alan reported that 9-1-1 PSAP does not monitor GOLD frequency, and that high volume traffic on that frequency would make it extremely difficult for the dispatchers to monitor. * Alan recommended review of the 9-1-1 dispatch protocols and procedures to see if some of the Middle Fork communications challenges can be addressed. * Steve reported the MTDOT was not being notified by 9-1-1 of road closures on a consistent basis. Alan indicated he would review current 9-1-1 notification practices and discuss them with the Sheriff this afternoon. LEPC Meeting was adjourned at 11 :07 AM. PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 APPENDIX E RECORD OF REVIEW PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Record of Review Summary PROGRAM,POLICY,DOCUMENT COUNTY PLANS AND PROGRAMS Comprehensive Plan (Growth Policy) X X X X Capital Improvement Plan X X X X Redevelopment Plan N/A N/A X Area Plan N/A N/A X Watershed Management Plan N/A N/A N/A Post Disaster Recovery Plan N/A N/A N/A N/A Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (County EOP) X N/A N/A N/A Regional Development Plan N/A N/A N/A N/A Special Function Plan Downtown Redevelopment N/A X X Airport X N/A X N/A Land Buyout Program N/A N/A N/A N/A Long Range Recreation Facilities Plan In Progress X School Siting Plan N/A N/A N/A N/A Open Space Plan N/A N/A N/A N/A Transportation Improvement/Retrofit In Progress X X Water & Sewer Construction/Retrofit N/A X X CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Building Codes N/A X X X Land Development Codes N/A X X Zoning Ordinance X X X X Historic Preservation Ordinance N/A N/A N/A Floodplain Ordinance X X X X Tree Protection Ordinance N/A In Public R/W X Landscape Ordinance N/A N/A X Subdivision Regulations X X X X Development Guidelines N/A X X PROGRAMS Beach Conservation and Restoration N/A N/A N/A N/A Local and/or Regional Emergency Evacuation N/A N/A N/A N/A Historic Preservation District N/A N/A N/A N/A NA = the jurisdiction does not have this program/policy/technical document X = the jurisdiction's program/policy/technical document was reviewed during plan development PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Record of Review Flathead County Doesthe MethodJurisdiction have Reviewed by . Existing Program, Policy, this Program/ Plan Authors7 Incorporation into Technical Document Policy/Technical Document? Mitigation Plan PLAN, POLICY OR TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Comprehensive Plan (Growth Policy) Yes Yes 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 4.2, 6.0 Capital Improvement Plan Yes Yes 3.3 Redevelopment Plan No N/A Area Plan No N/A Watershed Management Plan No N/A Post Disaster Recovery Plan No N/A Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (County EOP) Yes Yes 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 6.0 Regional Development Plan No N/A Special Function Plan - Downtown Redevelopment No N/A Airport Yes No Land Buyout Program No N/A Long Range Recreation Facilities Plan In progress Not yet available School Siting Plan No No Open Space Plan No N/A Transportation Improvement/Retrofit In Progress Not yet available Water & Sewer Construction/Retrofit No N/A CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Building Codes No N/A Land Development Codes No N/A Zoning Ordinance Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Historic Preservation Ordinance No N/A Floodplain Ordinance Yes Yes 3.1, 4.2, 6.0 Tree Protection Ordinance No N/A Landscape Ordinance No N/A Subdivision Regulations Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Development Guidelines No N/A PROGRAMS Beach Conservation and Restoration No N/A Local and/or Regional Emergency Evacuation No N/A Historic Preservation District No N/A PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Record of Review Columbia Falls Doesthe MethodJurisdiction have Reviewed by . Existing Program, Policy, this Program/ Plan Authors> Incorporation into Technical Document Policy/Technical Document? Mitigation Plan PLAN, POLICY OR TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Comprehensive Plan (Growth Policy) Yes Yes 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 4.2, 6.0 Capital Improvement Plan Yes No N/A Redevelopment Plan Area Plan Watershed Management Plan Post Disaster Recovery Plan No No N/A Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (County EOP) No No N/A Regional Development Plan Special Function Plan Downtown Redevelopment Airport No No N/A Land Buyout Program Long Range Recreation Facilities Plan School Siting Plan Open Space Plan Transportation Improvement/Retrofit Water & Sewer Construction/Retrofit CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Building Codes Yes Yes 4.2 Land Development Codes Zoning Ordinance Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Historic Preservation Ordinance Floodplain Ordinance Yes Yes 3.1, 4.2, 6.0 Tree Protection Ordinance Landscape Ordinance Subdivision Regulations Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Development Guidelines PROGRAMS Beach Conservation and Restoration No No N/A Local and/or Regional Emergency Evacuation No No N/A Historic Preservation District No No N/A PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Record of Review Kalispell Doesthe MethodJurisdiction have Reviewed by . Existing Program, Policy, this Program/ Plan Authors7 Incorporation into Technical Document Policy/Technical Document? Mitigation Plan I In PLAN, POLICY OR TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Comprehensive Plan (Growth Policy) Yes Yes 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 4.2, 6.0 Capital Improvement Plan Yes Yes 3.3 Redevelopment Plan No N/A Area Plan No N/A Watershed Management Plan No N/A Post Disaster Recovery Plan No N/A Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (County EOP) No N/A Regional Development Plan No N/A Special Function Plan Downtown Redevelopment Yes Airport Yes No Land Buyout Program No N/A Long Range Recreation Facilities Plan Yes School Siting Plan No N/A Open Space Plan No N/A Transportation Improvement/Retrofit Yes Yes Water & Sewer Construction/Retrofit Yes Yes CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Building Codes Yes Yes 4.2 Land Development Codes Yes Yes Zoning Ordinance Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Historic Preservation Ordinance No N/A Floodplain Ordinance Yes Yes 3.1, 4.2, 6.0 Tree Protection Ordinance Yes in Public R/W N/A Landscape Ordinance No N/A Subdivision Regulations Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Development Guidelines Yes PROGRAMS Beach Conservation and Restoration No N/A Local and/or Regional Emergency Evacuation No N/A Historic Preservation District No N/A PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 Record of Review Whitefish Doesthe MethodJurisdiction have Reviewed by . Existing Program, Policy, this Program/ Plan Authors> Incorporation into Technical Document Policy/Technical Document? Mitigation Plan PLAN, POLICY OR TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Comprehensive Plan (Growth Policy) Yes Yes 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 4.2, 6.0 Capital Improvement Plan Yes Yes 3.3 Redevelopment Plan Yes Yes Area Plan Yes Yes Watershed Management Plan No N/A Post Disaster Recovery Plan No N/A Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (County EOP) No N/A Regional Development Plan No N/A Special Function Plan Downtown Redevelopment Yes No Airport No N/A Land Buyout Program No N/A Long Range Recreation Facilities Plan N/A School Siting Plan No N/A Open Space Plan No N/A Transportation Improvement/Retrofit Yes No Water & Sewer Construction/Retrofit Yes No CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Building Codes Yes Yes 4.2 Land Development Codes Yes Yes Zoning Ordinance Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Historic Preservation Ordinance No N/A Floodplain Ordinance Yes Yes 3.1, 4.2, 6.0 Tree Protection Ordinance Yes No Landscape Ordinance Yes No Subdivision Regulations Yes Yes 4.2, 6.0 Development Guidelines Yes No PROGRAMS Beach Conservation and Restoration No N/A Local and/or Regional Emergency Evacuation No N/A Historic Preservation District No N/A PRE -DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN I January, 2009 APPENDIX F FEMA CROSSWALK 3 N O co u) d OO CD 0 � cU U a) 07 O L y ~NQ) �J Q� CY) ) C) a)O } C:) C) a) Q -a N 0 U) U) O O Q >'U) 0 c U O O E a) > 7 Q U U WO U o E c N a) �_ O 0-a) a) LL cry � � a) c L O m � O U) co L O }, c Q O O a) E� L C L O c6 U- N a) O U c6 U) U O O U O c a) a) L a) -aO 0 a) .0)Q O L� CX Coa3 E co O � U c U O 0) O 0 O O U � L a) c V •� U a) a) E E N i F O O E c a) V ¢ L +U) L) L N Q) >, a) (6 _ E U U U O7 E - X U N co m C a) a Q U L L C E Q a) 0 O U ?� cC � U 7 E L Q i1 =' � /N>/ L L.L .4 c \ a) Z —_ � a) E � O E E a a) m :Q .� N cU U a) QN.� > C "UU co C O U 3 N O a) C z a3 Co L a) Q (/) �_ a) a) L U U m m J � o E E E a) E N a) -0LL� E a) o c-a L�.� m QE >'U) oco of C/) co -a a) U a) —. LL Ea) ��0 Q) +J a)Z m a) a) 3�rn c a)Q CI O r N N p a) U U C U CON Q O Q — L U N O.O U� a) E a) O UU O U O 3 J �(D W O> Q O Co O O c U) O E �� O 3 C U a) L) Tw! �F _ O U) U) a) > cU c 4- LL � O o� V w Z wr�m c c .� L � � m m U 0 � zU) O Co U) U Q-0 L) I I L U a) u 6 c 0 "O m U U)Z U) L, aa)) O Z � Uj O a) >> ,i ��a3d m0�-O �E'� vEU m0 > QUA m w vim) � �.cna''U �.,� m O cn N W � Q) O y c Z O � wU c ai O O_ a) T co a) y E a) co U_ O a) — — Q L p_ -p O Q co O cn U C) co in 0 � E O N Q O O co U Y N co a �co co N N T N 7 co U O 'O j a) co > w 'O a) N 2 i U a) co co coo U 0 L N �� O O O U Q O 0 O a) U p U (0 U Q Q O E Q U) a) p U= T O U) U p r 0 Cl s- .CL U N OC U d' O O v O N O o V U) U N O aa)io a�i ' g i E _0 _0 d E co N O c0 C y 0 E 0 .� E 3 a� a n3 c)Ec a s Q) .E d co O — Q) co L s O U Co N O Q _ C co Q Q Q t U O- i U U) r_ — — co mO `�' co x r 0 0 Q G O O C J d U a) U U a) p UN c0 y -O L U U C- CU y O Na) U a) Q) p O O p C O z co j O Q CL 2 Co CL NON 'a C) -a Co N. U_ Q CL U co <O L E O L i = E > O �O dNco 3� 3 �. dcn -U) c �.�.a a)Qo C U .0 '; U -p — E U — •� U O U a"i O N O p i cp 0 a) i N a) E a) L_ L O E � E L O a) E }'S Ea) a) OL C_ � c U) 7 a` )i E a) -p0 U — a) E a E o L p ai U a a) ) Co p C N N O ~ C O > E a) OL �2 O Q C �O U C) _L W a) E a) W Mn cn O 'a 3: N cn U 4) o cn > Z U Z Fe a) Z fA O cn n a) >,.U) O c (0 N O 0 r- C) fn U U)•- '> N U 7 E LL E > Q� 0) OL E 'O O C Q U '- O O O .� O O (0 cn (0 O O E Qm C >' co O a)Ey O N C O Q c c 0 a)) O N .c � .T C-) •a) E 0-- U Wcoo QECc) > a E �Qa)a)Ec� E L o J o(UOZ� o d �cLoLa)= •�� Z O (O a) Q cr L Q a) . O a( pY LCZ U) > (O U).� a) N C Q Q � a)E a) m O L N O O W L H 0C) U� U) cm:`° E C U C O Q a) ) E a) ciO c E O 0 co OU O H W H W O z 11 10 O cNa� d � N C U) z N C O 2 x I x I x 00 N z x CO O N cp) N U O d C C m d 0 N N O T d . U a a CD E r C UCN O C Q am a v m m a m U C o O C LO Q C D C d N ^ E X O> O LL U C a) m C Lu co o d c C U O C C C Co U C U (p O (Dd - C 2 ON N z Q E E E Cf) Cf) Cf) C C C Hx o N 0 > N > E a c a Q U Q N z 3 Z d a Q > J a d N 000��f0� v = N U CO CO a c d o 0 U i Cp O > CO') CO') M _ C Cf) O CL c1 N Z >, N a w Q O N a o Q - cNm O —_ (o —_ m m U Of .m -2 cm Cccm CU C� Cv O y co co 7 7 N 7_C >� >� U x > > 0)> m 0)(0 a)( a 0) >, 'Fn 'y O. ,Fn O N N N N M N - N N O N U (D CO') a) cm .� a O a N a d N Q N EnN Q y Q (6 Q '0' Q C LO CO I� _ C6 J 6) C OT J a) r N co U) L O O L E Q Q U co O U) co a) U •0) -2 c O a) co a) EEL O i p Y O co a5 >: ,� U) (O OL o�U co -O Co '> (O = a) � C .� Coco U O O J a) N �T ) ' O � 3 E a) C O N a 0 L > O 0 � E ca Cn rn LO ca C a c to co a •� ca 'a o . QrnY W L) LL O �U FL _0 4- M 0 O H LL d O U Ln U C O a� E 0 V O � U 0 O V L i O O y� Q O 0U c U ELO IL� =LO (D O 0 -C ++ a)0 -9 L (.0 �LL JU HM QU- ILA w 0 0 N lir L 0 E CL R 0 co v O _O Cam_ G E L m N ca 0 D H co 3 0 00 (DQ (� c coY R 0 0 H 0 * W w w > O L 0 L Q ? CL CL ~d0 LLLL z z o w z J >_ a � mow/ I.fi w w w o w LL � rn � cya UV � Q H Z Q H a M z z >- xxxx P- C) op N I` P- P- 0-) C) 00 pp CL Oo N N E 0') >CL (6 E U E E p ama,w> > a)L)U)� M W W W LL O U • U) �= o-0YU� �moo0 y0�� 'E�UUU Nco4 0 IZ IZ O z II Q z .. as c Q E m IL IC 0 z -c e LU $ w w a 0 U)z� w 0 U) � « � � 2 k E E 0 U f 7 2 w 2 0 \ E .2 . f 2 0 I n 0 x < < -j a n T*l 2 2 e w � 0 z� k E E 0 U L ■ 2 w g / < m m a a \ cri \ co co < 0 \ \ \E \ gnE /m n \ 0) .g n .g 5 = _ .m e o a m— k\\2£.E 2 $ � 0-f 0 c .0 0 ( \ 0 t ■: ■ \ 5 ■ 0 § a5./a=e /\��77\ ® t 0= k a) a) $ o y g 0 §o\223.t w 4 a d w w 0 U m � « � � � m q 3 H W LU 2 a' O V p W Z� W w O tU U) Q U) N C E O tU w N N N w L r m C Q C O O7 O7 � O J d N *k cm Q N cm Q N U C L O Q Q) C Cl y } N C L CL 0 C Ocl m o U � N u U) Q) O O O v) O O O Q) U p cn cn E ° - LU Q m O Q) U � � 0 t Q) cn N C N 4 co N N C Q) O Q) ,C -0 C U C c0 cn coU — Q) Q) Cl)Cl)o co '— Cl) C co o U a - Co i Q) C O C co co N OUP U co C Q) O Q) co O rC" c6 v6 N U C .� Q) 4 O U) O Cl) O _ ti U) O C Q) O U y Q) a O U N O o p coco a O � — D N Q) Q) co ` Q N N O N N W Uco �y C7 7 O O j vj Z t,.) •� C C � Q) •� cn z � a•QQ o•co) Q) Q) O ct W U) w O tU U) Z N C E O tU N N N L c ai C O U U O C (6 C Q) 0)0) 0- v O c Q Q Q co 0 d N *k Go Go cm cm N O> N N U 3L QN fC � O Q 0 p c 7 O c.• N U) Q) 3 U) i) Q Y O U L L U }' N v O C ' fn _ O O � C C c m�-m`6CC Q r > O Q) Q L � O 0 y c O 0 o m=-a O O O O > > Q) > O m O Q) p L L O ~ Q a) -C U Q) U' U Q) cam• U > E �L° E �.• O U o co O> N U C y E X c O O a� LU Q m M O N U � � 0 o co 0 O C'o co N 4 N co N C', c0 i co C/) .� co +� � LEE - co N O coco c0 N N N N O N 4 N .� 4 o i� a� L U � Z p .� -a p O N .O z co O C', � 2 C) LO U) O U c0 Co Co Q a N Vj j co -sz O +� O O N N 4� U N N O N a U U� N L N co .C� c6 c6 N U N O,N N4� O Cl) N O _ N O N U 0 N 4 ago°�Ocoo'o C O O .i N co co w — N N N N` Q O O 4 O' 1 o i a+ 04 co, N C O C O O O O j 0 c t) p p 0) N cn 0 a•a•Q) O W N M O O W w O tU U) c'7 N 67 c'7 O •— V) V) V) N 66 V) (' T T W 0 Q Q Q Q J co) co) Q CO) cam cNm ccm ccm Q Z L 0) (1) U) V o�°' U)C: 3� 3�a j Q O O� O i O L N N c6 O > Ul (6 cn C`• a+ N .tf Q � � c a) a E O O O O U O "O 2 CS .� U N+O+ •a t cC r m O c a U -M U)Qc a°'3n 3 O L 7 o .� U- U mo N O Q O 7C`• = i� O O N N O E Q O O .�P O QO m O ++ Y O> O c N Q C 7 3 OO > N L C 4 ca N � O r Q L Q Y r r Q U_ N� U Q O O O m L C1 O cC c 3 Y c U) �• U) v) O cn vl N C C •a cn .� p }�— U Ul p c 0 U O O U L '— O O N r a+ Ul _ � �0 o�.� o.� � aU)i 0 U ui ii W w O tU U) Q U) luml NEI W w O tU U) Q U) Ci c 0 BEENE U .O N U (0 O (0 U (0 C6 O N (0 (0 o M � O N � N o E = O o a� 3 a, D > o c o +� I? I? C O m co c? -0 O Ucl O m O m C N X N X co X m J ca d N cm Q CO) Q Q cm Q cli CO) N aid Q) fC U =c V) N +� L N � "U a) O O r N N U O � O O i � U _O _ fC L X U C c/) O O c6 m O -p _^ M •� �.' a) O a)�.. U '^ Q U Q� m N �� Y �� m �- CO4 > (6 (6 O U � O o a)L O U L N O �01 N a r L fC MQ N p c E O (6 L O O •� O � 3 U Q> o O O 3 v L v m co 'a U) N O > +' N O a� . c C N O 0 U N N L N U L p �p U .Z N fQ� .— U .L O 7 Q Ul O Q Q - c C10t Q O �+ �O p N p 0 p N O O V O a) N IL s ai 0 m E� 0 o 0 0 (D m a laoll 0■l1 L (0 4 W w O t) U) ai Q N N U N O C � O U r � cn � N +� O O E U O tU 0 M w o � � o_ � N L Q O *k O r O LO CO �-O C O N CO U Cl U)cn N N ao) O O O O O Q ++ i X U V CC') Lo O c CO CO J d m cm cm O C'7 O O Q Q Lq CY) CY) co c07 0 O cn N cn 3 Cl)" C: - Ni . C — a..1 �.. N - � C O > O O C`• Q v O O r N N U O� cYC 7 V Cl) CL 7.�� QO YEN i U (6 O O i v� ° O O �04 > ~ 3� N Mo N m r U i L U) E (D O O U) O �� o W Q m W w O tU U) Q U) LO U) a� a 0 a U) U) O J N Q N Cl C N N Q r N C 7 Cl C N N N N Q 00 N llml NMI W w O tU U) Q U) lammi ammi o� L �0QCO t co 0� U) A -m o •• m� x Q V O C m LO W w O U U) Q 0 � f \ ) \ \ \ \ & \ \ f \ � \ / \ ' / Co \ Cl) E E .( 3 \ \ ■ # \o > (� \ƒ2b#o r » _ e I n \�/n\ \ \\ $ $ a -a / / / / \ C cli m e z 0 2 E a a n cm cm ©§\ R\\ � f_ �0o a g $ ) \ m 0(0 2 $2 \ k) ) E / _ e e n e �f L ) ca 7 # n �/ 7/C§ � ' —N\ T 0 0 = o > $ > ■ a > 2 r© E ■e_ /c \0 $ » a \ e e = J 2 E E O O E 0 7 a 7 2= E lall all w ol 0 U m � « � � � m k 1101 NEI k E E 0 U L ■ 2 J Ab r- 0 n \ \ Cl \_$$ 0 U)§// M r° o2E\n - a n cm cm w 0 U m � « � � � m rl- % e � a ƒ 2 \ � � \ \ \ \ / \ [ \ a \ / \ � / � \ \ 2 e E k \ � •e � �7 2 7 ( 2 \\ � \ \ � \ \ t 3 : \w % § % .\ \ \ � 7 / \ \ � \� \ \ e $% \ {$ \ zi \ / % � � \ ,w 2 \ § # \ ( � 2 % � � � \ ®� q / \ / ..{Ie �IZ y \ a = CD Q\�2 �22N\ A \ § t § m « = G / ME o [ o e §0 }Ci ® _�2 � § 1101 NEI \ § : jimmol NONNI / . LU 0 U �\ m e e »� k �\ f § ( 7 \ \� k/ e# ■ E ■ c ® E \ t 3 k \ \ w .@ .± ■ \/ 2 J / \ J / \ 2 b ■¥# / § \ 9 \ \ � \ / / _ �t e a 7\\ mm \ \ o xEE §�§2 a Q x E E m E o % § ° � 4 � C o§ o — \§ 0 2 -1 a E n � � � CO) EL n CO) % n m c= m m $ f 2 [ ° ■ % § r / E g \ f o a° =�\ 5§ = m �E E « ® §_ y 5 m 2 \ 0 _ 0 §\ Pg \ ns a)> m \ Co f = - 2 / � f � U) a § \ b § � § \ -a / \ § \ e n e= 0 = e \§ = 7 n m g a/\ ■ 2 g a a m -0 2 m n °© -\ %% m 2) 2 2\\ §�2 § y/ n o CL f§ «v7 r.Lr=°n 2§ t= m = f m o § - ° o ■ ■ § ■ $ » / ° �m = gf e u m �(\ \/ � a k =_ m E k 2 %> \ a� EEonE£.gE�n § 7 o e/ o 7 \ w w 0 U m � « � � � m R c N z C 0 CL N U O N c 0 0 io O O N �z 'Q o o L) a •� z 4 E C/) cYa � O IL O •� CYC N 7 � C C/) _ N O O � LL O C cn �O z Es) O O 4 Q co co O m•�o o y T�-z C `. -Z Q V � � N � O O O N .m _O �0. � O r E� c�0a) O � � a O O T O 11101 c a� E 0 tU N N N w t C V Q N 'Q i >' E N O C� �a �-0 a E: S O T 0 M O tmO r _O ++ C r �_ 0.2 C N O i C Cn = ++ d r O E N LL N N z r o-a Nr E�� 00O_ wQ m a3 W w O tU U) Q U) x N O ` U O CU N U N � c a� � o a� c k c a� 0 0 N O N O �cn C a� 4 O U U O t c) O U � O � U N co MN i O t CL co co Cn i O O -sz U U � o co —Cl) N CO O N O :Z� cc ) m '' a U� O c o E � o � Z Q o c� ° O N =`o� 4Z O co a� O O N N Cn N i co O o aEiE�a� 4 co U) w w O tU U) z c a� E O tU w N N O L O :E N LO a) L (6 co OO Q U U U X Q Q Q C•M C'7 Q m cam cam cam Z a� a� U a) O L - O O L U GT U "U a) M 'E .o) 0 '> O N O z� U U Q -0a) -0 X O U a+ U C mEa) m`6°�� o� (6 U L O a) Q O Q U U aa)i c E N E c a� � m m O m 0 LL o�E0 my a)Ua�� CA L C (6 E N O (6 L (6 E Ea) omo N M 4) L Q C a) 'D +r U -0 Q a� O a) m M o - r U 73 -aI' iI' UO 4) � ii ii L CLO 'a a) Q .O 7 � 7 =_ Q U CL a) C.. _ a)O O 3 U i N :� O O CC E "O O U O O U +� O s U)-0 7 0 _ O a) m .� a) m a) a) a) L ui = U U) � a)T a) ��X ��m 0 0 0-0 m 0 0 .� Q 6 � m E 0 o Q-o 0 W Q m U W w O tU U) Q U) 0 JIMMI IMMI w w 0 U m � « � � � m k E E 0 U / k 2 w �0— f=e~ \ r\n\ k 0 x e \ 0a(cm / / %% b\/ .\ 7%m ' 2L anao EE °\ $ < §/ _\ �n=\ ' �P fq\o P 3 _ = f m § \ CL u) 0 .� 0\ e\mb 5 w ■ § CL ■ �e 0\\g \�2\\ 0 woE/§k=f � % \ o 2 £ 0-8 $ 0011 k E E 0 U 2 k 2 J �0# \ c a 7 ƒ \ \ 0 a E E \�(� ° . . e = r FL m co co co = Cl. e 0 0 0 E f> 7 $ E E ¥ E \ ge g59g/ k/ k\fk\ ns ng\g= e 26 2£?2e e— o #� #2§#£ C _ C \ CL r 00 0ee� o§ 0 a)o 2 >_ r/\\m\�m\ Cl (/\ f/\\/) w 4 a d w 0 U m � « � � � m O U) W w O tU U) Z c 0 a3 Q) 0 c a� a a� w EL E O o U U N � N N Q) D E B O O O � 4 O U U cl N N N cn U)O W coo O.,m m 0) 0) O V O C N O N N co U Q) 'O 0) 4 i c O U 0).U) O a) O a) E(u O E O a3 �' U a) L O N 4 N E U Q) U O C C U U U.o.�E M- t •z U O U (6 C C � O Cl) a) � a..� m a) O 4 0 a) Q if 0 oU m O a) c c— c Q c m Q U N`a3 m _ U O Q50 W v U a) 3 m m 3 o am E ac o Q.�m vi C_ �o cn 7 — a) 7 a) O � m y � E °r) o cEc O U E m E E m O c c i O U U Cl 0 0 U .L U O O U O ��o E E o�CT C 0p0�� o0om ac � of W Q m U W w O tU U) Q U) laml NEI c W c? C O N N U Cl U) a) -0 a) mQ X t) r C O — c —i d m cm Y � L Q O E .O C)m N O 3 X 0) L E N O U LL ) X 0) U a) r vi � ca = a) > a 3 .� 7 O O O r O 3 CL N C co a) L CL N E E a) Eai a ° W Q W w O tU U) Q U) LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK J U L Y 1, 2 00 8