01-08-2014 Regional Planning Regular Meeting Packet
Hall County Regional
Planning Commission
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Regular Meeting Packet
Commission Members:
Terry Connick Hall County
Karen Bredthauer Grand Island Vice Chairperson
Julie Connelly Grand Island
Craig Vincent Grand Island
Mark Haskins Hall County
Bill Hayes Doniphan
Dennis McCarty Grand Island
Richard Heckman Cairo
Pat O’Neill Hall County Chairperson
Deb Reynolds Hall County
Leslie Ruge Alda Secretary
Don Snodgrass Wood River
Regional Planning Director: Chad Nabity
Planning Technician:
Edwin Maslonka
Planning Secretary:
Rose Rhoads
6:00 PM
City Hall
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 1 / 124
Call to Order
Roll Call
A - SUBMITTAL OF REQUESTS FOR FUTURE ITEMS
Individuals who have appropriate items for City Council consideration should complete the Request for
Future Agenda Items form located at the Information Booth. If the issue can be handled administratively
without Council action, notification will be provided. If the item is scheduled for a meeting or study
session, notification of the date will be given.
B - RESERVE TIME TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS
This is an opportunity for individuals wishing to provide input on any of tonight's agenda items to reserve
time to speak. Please come forward, state your name and address, and the Agenda topic on which you will
be speaking.
DIRECTOR COMMUNICATION
This is an opportunity for the Director to comment on current events, activities, and issues of interest to
the commission.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 2 / 124
Hall County Regional Planning
Commission
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Regular Meeting
Item A1
Agenda
Staff Contact: Chad Nabity
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 3 / 124
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA AND NOTICE OF MEETING
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers — Grand Island
1. Call to Order.
This is a public meeting subject to the open meetings laws of the State
of Nebraska. The requirements for an open meeting are posted on the
wall in this room and anyone who would like to find out what those are
is welcome to read through them.
2. Minutes of December 4, 2013.
3.Request Time to Speak.
4.Discussion – Street Standards.
5.Discussion – Hazard Mitigation Plan.
6.Next Meeting February 5, 2014
7. Adjourn
PLEASE NOTE: This meeting is open to the public, and a current agenda is
on file at the office of the Regional Planning Commission, located on the
second floor of City Hall in Grand Island, Nebraska.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 4 / 124
Hall County Regional Planning
Commission
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Regular Meeting
Item E1
Meeting Minutes
Staff Contact: Chad Nabity
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 5 / 124
THE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF HALL COUNTY, GRAND ISLAND,
WOOD RIVER AND THE VILLAGES OF ALDA, CAIRO, AND DONIPHAN,
NEBRASKA
Minutes
for
December 4, 2013
The meeting of the Regional Planning Commission was held Wednesday, December 4, 2013,
in the Community Meeting Room - City Hall – Grand Island, Nebraska. Notice of this meeting
appeared in the "Grand Island Independent" November 23, 2013.
Present: Pat O’Neill Julie Connelly
Les Ruge Deb Reynolds
Don Snodgrass Karen Bredthauer
Mark Haskins Richard Heckman
Bill Hayes
Absent: Dennis McCarty
Other:
Staff:Chad Nabity, Rose Rhoads
Press:
1.Call to order.
Chairman O’Neill called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
O’Neill stated that this was a public meeting subject to the open meetings laws
of the State of Nebraska. He noted that the requirements for an open meeting
were posted on the wall in the room and easily accessible to anyone who may be
interested in reading them.
2. Minutes of November 6, 2013 meeting.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 6 / 124
A motion was made by Bredthauer to approve the meeting minutes and
seconded by Reynolds to approve the Minutes of the November 6, 2013 meeting
as mailed.
The motion carried with 9 members present and 5 voting in favor (O’Neill
Ruge, Reynolds, Haskins and Snodgrass) and 4 member present abstaining
(Hayes, Bredthauer, Connelly and Heckman).
Chairman O’Neill introduced the newest member to the Planning Board;
Richard Heckman joined the Planning Commission from Cairo. Richard
Heckman replaces Jaye Monter.
3.Request Time to Speak.
Ron Depue, 308 N Locust, Grand Island, NE and Keith Marvin, 457 D Street,
David City, NE, Agenda Item #5.
4.Public Hearing - Rezone - A request to rezone properties located at 815-823 Orleans
Drive, north of Faidley Ave and east of Kennedy Drive from RD Residential
Development Zone to RO Residential Office, in Grand Island, Hall County, Nebraska.
(C-01-2014GI)
O’Neill opened the public hearing.
Nabity explained an application has been made to rezone .43 acres along Orleans Drive
north of Faidley Avenue and west St. Francis Hospital from RD Residential
Development Zone to RO Residential Office. The apartments that were originally built
on the site in conformance with the approved development plan have been demolished
and the Hospital owns the property and would like to use the existing garages as
accessory buildings to the Hospital. Rezoning the property is necessary prior to
allowing this use to continue.
O’Neill closed the public hearing.
A motion was made by Haskins to approve the request for rezone for 815-823 Orleans
Drive. The motion was seconded by Connelly. Upon roll call vote all present voted in
favor. (O’Neill, Ruge, Hayes, Reynolds, Heckman, Haskins, Bredthauer, Connelly and
Snodgrass).
5.Public Hearing - Concerning adoption of a blight and substandard Area 15. This
property is located between Webb Rd and and US Hwy 281 and Old Potash Hwy and
Old Hwy 30, in the City of Grand Island. (C-02-2014GI)
O’Neill opened the public hearing.
Nabity explained the request of a Substandard and Blight Study as prepared by Marvin
Planning Consultants entitled “City of Grand Island, NE Blighted and Substandard
Study Area 15”. This area as defined by the study will be referred to as Community
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 7 / 124
Redevelopment Authority (CRA) Area #15. The study as prepared and submitted
indicates that this property could be considered substandard and blighted. The study as
presented shows that this property meets the criteria to be declared blighted and
substandard of its own accord. If the Planning Commission does not make a
recommendation within 30 days Council can proceed with a decision on the declaration
without recommendation from Planning Commission.
O’Neill closed the public hearing.
A motion was made by Bredthauer and seconded by Ruge to approve the Substandard
and Blight Study Area 15 as presented. Upon roll call vote all present voted in favor.
(O’Neill, Ruge, Hayes, Reynolds, Heckman, Haskins, Bredthauer, Connelly and
Snodgrass).
6.Public Hearing – Concerning an amendment to the Cairo Comprehensive Plan and
Future Land use Map for property described as: A parcel of land west of Hwy 11 to the
west edge of the old Vogel property between the north railroad right-of-way and Hwy 2
and a parcel of land from the south right-of-way of Hwy 2 to include Lots and part of
Lots 1 & 2, Block 7, Original Town of Cairo between Thebe Street easterly to alley.
(C-03-2014Cairo)
7.Public Hearing – Concerning the adoption of the Cairo Zoning Map. (C-04-
2014Cairo)
O’Neill opened the public hearing.
Nabity described The Village of Cairo approved a future land use map as part of their
comprehensive development plan on December 9, 2003. This map has been amended
since then to accommodate development such as Centura Hills East Subdivision. The
Village is requesting that the planning commission consider the following amendment
to the future land use map. The amendment as shown on the attached map would
declare the highway and railroad right of way including the BNSF ROW and the ROW
for Nebraska Highway 2 to be developable for highway commercial enterprises.
Nabity also expounded that on December 9, 2003 the Cairo Village Board approved the
zoning regulation and zoning map for the Village of Cairo. This map was produced
using the Hall County GIS system as the official zoning map for the Village of Cairo
based on the 2003 Comprehensive Plan for the Village of Cairo. As a matter of course,
the Village of Cairo occasionally re-adopts the zoning map incorporating all changes
since the last re-adoption of the entire map along with other changes as recommended
by staff and the Hall County Regional Planning Commission. This will allow a newly
revised and adopted copy of the map to be printed for official use by the Board, staff
and the general public. This hearing is being held for that purpose. This map will also
serve to give notice to all parties that the Cairo Village limits, and 1 mile extraterritorial
jurisdiction, is as shown on the map.
O’Neill closed the public hearing.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 8 / 124
A motion was made by Reynolds and seconded by Heckman to approve an amendment
to the Cairo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use map. A roll call vote was
taken all present voted in favor of the motion. (O’Neill, Ruge, Hayes, Reynolds,
Heckman, Haskins, Bredthauer, Connelly and Snodgrass.) No one present voting no.
A motion was made by Ruge and seconded by Connelly to approve the adoption of the
Cairo Zoning map. A roll call vote was taken all present voted in favor of the motion.
(O’Neill, Ruge, Hayes, Reynolds, Heckman, Haskins, Bredthauer, Connelly and
Snodgrass.) No one present voting no.
8.Election of Officers - A motion was made Haskins and seconded by Reynolds to keep
the Chair as Pat O’Neill, the Vice Chair as Karen Bredthauer and the Secretary as Les
Ruge. A roll call vote was taken all present voted in favor of the motion. (O’Neill,
Ruge, Hayes, Reynolds, Heckman, Haskins, Bredthauer, Connelly and Snodgrass.) No
one present voting no.
9.Planning Director’s Report – Hazard Mitigation Plan update.
10.Next Meeting January 8, 2014
11. Adjourn
Chairman Pat O’Neill adjourned the meeting at 6:37 p.m.
___________________________________________
Leslie Ruge, Secretary
By Rose Rhoads
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 9 / 124
Hall County Regional Planning
Commission
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Regular Meeting
Item 1
Discussion - Street Standards
Staff Contact: Chad Nabity
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 10 / 124
Grand IslandRegular Meeting - 1/8/2014Page 11 / 124
Grand IslandRegular Meeting - 1/8/2014Page 12 / 124
Grand IslandRegular Meeting - 1/8/2014Page 13 / 124
Grand IslandRegular Meeting - 1/8/2014Page 14 / 124
Hall County Regional Planning
Commission
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Regular Meeting
Item 2
Discussion - Hazard Mitigation Plan
Staff Contact: Chad Nabity
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 15 / 124
Hall County
All-Hazards Mitigation Plan
Completed by
Nebraska Department of Natural Resources
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
2008
Revised by
Grand Island-Hall County Emergency Management
November 2013
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 16 / 124
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Purpose of this Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Organization of Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Hall County – Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.0 Risk Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.10 Severe Weather . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.11 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.12 Severe Weather History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.13 Probability of Future Severe Weather Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.14 Vulnerability Assessment of the Severe Weather Hazard . . . . . . . 16
2.15 Potential Severe Weather Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.20 Flood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.21 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.22 Flood History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.23 Probability of Future Flood Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.24 Vulnerability Assessment of the Flood Hazard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.25 Potential Flood Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.30 Tornado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.31 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.32 Tornado History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.33 Probability of Future Tornado Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.34 Vulnerability Assessment of the Tornado Hazard . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.35 Potential Tornado Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.40 Drought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.41 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.42 Drought History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.43 Probability of Future Drought Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.44 Vulnerability Assessment of the Drought Hazard . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.45 Potential Drought Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.50 Dam Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.51 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.52 Dam Failure History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.53 Probability of Future Dam Failure Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.54 Vulnerability Assessment of the Dam Failure Hazard . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.55 Potential Dam Failure Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.60 Levee Failure
2.61 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.62 Levee Failure History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.63 Probability of Future Levee Failure Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.64 Vulnerability Assessment of the Levee Failure Hazard . . . . . . . . . 36
2.65 Potential Dam Failure Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 17 / 124
3
2.70 Future Development and Hazard Vulnerability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.0 Public Participation on Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Plans and Other Information Used in the Development of this Plan . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.0 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Plan Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Corps of Engineers Structural Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Appendix B – Sample Plan Update Worksheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Appendix C – Compendium of Public Meeting Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Appendix D – Community-Specific Mitigation Planning Information . . . . . . 60
Alda . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Cairo . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Doniphan . . . . . . . . 74
Grand Island . . . . . . 80
Wood River . . . . . . 93
Appendix E – Adoption Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 18 / 124
4
Chapter 1 – Introduction
I. Purpose of this Plan
The purpose of this plan is to fulfill local multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
requirements. The plan will identify hazards, establish community goals and objectives, and
select mitigation activities that are appropriate for Hall County.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2000), Section 322 (a-d) requires that local
governments, as a condition of receiving federal disaster mitigation funds, have a mitigation plan
that describes the process of identifying hazards, risks and vulnerabilities, identify and prioritize
mitigation actions, encourage the development of local mitigation, and provide technical support
for those efforts.
In addition, this plan has fulfilled the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Reform Act
of 1994 (NFIRA). With this Act, Congress authorized the establishment of a Federal grant
program to provide financial assistance to States and communities for flood mitigation planning
and activities. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has designated this the
Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program.
Under the FMA program, FEMA provides assistance to states and communities for activities that
will reduce the risk of flood damages to structures insurance under the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP). FMA is a State-administered cost-share program through which states and
communities can receive grants for flood mitigation planning, technical assistance, and
mitigation projects.
Only projects for mitigation activities specified in an approved Flood Mitigation Plan are eligible
for FMA project grants. These activities include elevation, acquisition, and relocation of flood-
prone insurable structures.
The purpose of this plan is to produce a program of activities that will best tackle Hall County’s
hazard and flood problems and meet other, community-specific needs. Consistent with FEMA
planning process guidelines, the purpose of this plan is to accomplish the following objectives:
Ensure that all possible activities are reviewed and implemented so that disaster related
hazards are addressed by the most appropriate and efficient solution;
Link hazard management policies to specific activities;
Educate residents about potential hazards that threaten the community, including but not
limited to floods, extreme weather events, tornadoes and high wind events, earthquakes, and
human-made events;
Build public and political support for projects that prevent new problems from known
hazards and reduce future losses;
Fulfill planning requirements for future hazard mitigation project grants, and;
Facilitate implementation of hazard mitigation management activities through an action plan.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 19 / 124
5
II. Methodology
The methodology used for the development and updating of the Hall County Hazard Mitigation
Plan, consisted of the following tasks:
1. Public Involvement
2. Coordination with other agencies or organizations
3. Hazard area inventory
4. Problem identification
5. Review and analysis of possible mitigation activities
6. Local adoption following a public hearing
7. Periodic review and update
This hazard mitigation plan contains a list of potential projects and a brief rationale or
explanation of how each project or group of projects contributes to the overall mitigation strategy
outlined in the plan.
This plan summarizes the activities outlined above to assess the effects of the hazards to which
Hall County residents deemed they were most vulnerable, and recommends mitigation solutions.
The Mitigation Plan will be evaluated and updated every five years. In addition, the plan will be
updated as appropriate when a disaster occurs that significantly affects the County, whether or
not it receives a Presidential Declaration. The update will be completed as soon as possible, but
no later than 12 months following the date of the disaster event.
Routine maintenance of the plan will include adding projects as new funding sources become
available, or removing projects as they are completed.
People involved in the updated planning process:
Jon Rosenlund – Hall County Emergency Management
Chad Nabity – Hall County Regional Planning Commission
Elected officials and/or personnel involved in this multi-jurisdictional planning process:
Hall, County of
John Amick, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Mark Haskins, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Patrick O’Neill, Commissioner, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Debra Reynolds, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Alda, Village of
Dave Harders, Alda Village Board
Ron Miles, Alda Village Board
Leslie Ruge, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Cairo, Village of
Terry Gallagher, Cairo Emergency Management Director
Doniphan, Village of
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 20 / 124
6
Bill Hayes, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Grand Island, City of
Mitchell Nickerson, Grand Island City Council
Rose Rhoads, City of Grand Island
Dan Petsch, Grand Island Public Schools
Rick Ressel, Grand Island Public Schools
John Collins, Grand Island City Engineer/Public Works Department
Dennis McCarty, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Karen Bredthauer, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Scott Erickson, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Julie Connelly, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Tom Oshlo, Citizen, Stuhr Museum
Wood River, City of
Eric Nielsen, Wood River City Council
Don Snodgrass, Citizen, Regional Planning Commission member
Hall County Emergency Management Agency
Jon Rosenlund, Director
Larry J. Smith, Deputy Director
Mindy Osterman , Coordinator
Other plans/documents used in the development of this mitigation plan:
The flood portion of this plan was largely completed by the US Army Corps of Engineers,
which has a different flood document library.
Flood Insurance Study was used to supplement the information from the Corps of Engineers
with additional information about specific flood history. FIS information was obtained for
Grand Island and Wood River.
Community Comprehensive Plans were used to identify future growth areas and objectives.
Proprietary NDNR spreadsheet of significant historic flood events in Nebraska.
Public Participation
The initial public meeting was held on June 5, 2013. During this meeting, citizens and officials
of Hall County identified three main goals of this mitigation planning effort:
1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety, and
3) Increase public education about natural hazard events in their community.
Sign-in sheets and other public participation documentation is provided in this report as
Appendix C.
III. Organization of Plan
Chapter 1 – presents the purpose and goals of the plan, methodology used, organization of the
plan, and a background study of Hall County.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 21 / 124
7
Chapter 2 – by section, known hazards in Hall County are identified. For each hazard, a
background, list of historical events, hazard assessment, vulnerability assessment, and possible
mitigation actions is also given.
Chapter 3 – outlines the public participation process undertaken during the planning process, for
prioritizing projects, and for updating the plan.
Chapter 4 – addresses implementation procedures and a process for updating the plan.
IV. Hall County – Background
Hall County
Hall County was created by an act of the Nebraska Territory Legislature on November 4, 1858.
Its boundaries were redefined on February 1, 1864, and again March 1, 1871. It was named in
honor of Augustus Hall (1814-1861), chief justice of the Nebraska Territory, and former
congressman from Iowa. Today, there are five incorporated communities in Hall County – the
cities of Grand Island and Wood River, and the Villages of Alda, Cairo, and Doniphan. The
location of Hall County and these communities is shown on the next page as Figure 1.
Grand Island
In 1857, a group of settlers from Davenport, Iowa, supported by banking interests set out to find
and start a settlement located within an area named by French fur traders as “La Grande Isle”, an
island in the Platte River. The group of settlers arrived at their destination and began their
settlement on July 4, 1857. In the spring of 1866, the Union Pacific surveyors laid out and
platted a town called Grand Island on the north side of the Platte River, but decided to keep the
name of Grand Island as a place name. Around this time, Grand Island had a population of 500.
By July of 1868, the Union Pacific Railroad had extended west to Grand Island. This railroad
and the Overland Route contributed to significant growth for Grand Island. At that time, gold
had been discovered at Pike’s Peak in Colorado. Thousands of people traveled to Western states
in seek of great fortune. Everything that Grand Island sold was offered at high prices, bringing
financial gain for its merchants. By 1870, the census reported that Grand Island’s population had
grown to 1,057 people. Grand Island was later incorporated as the County’s first city on
November 28, 1872.
Wood River
After the Union Pacific rails were laid in 1866, a depot and boarding house called “Wood River
Station” was constructed, named for the Wood River valley in which it is located. It was first
laid out in 1869, but in an effort to centralize their depots, Union Pacific moved the Wood River
Station two miles east where the City of Wood River is located today.
Alda
In 1858, a stage station and post office called “Pawnee” were established just south of what is
now Alda. In 1871, because of confusion with the town of “Pawnee City” in southeastern
Nebraska, the post office for a different name. “Alda” was chosen since it was the name of the
first child born at this location. In 1873, the railroad decided to centralize their stations to
accommodate homesteaders hauling their grain to market. The little settlement of Alda was
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 22 / 124
8
obliged to re-locate to a site eight miles southwest of Grand Island. It was incorporated as a
Village in 1916.
Cairo
In 1886, the Burlington & Missouri River Railroad built a line from Grand Island to Billings,
Montana, to penetrate the Sandhills ranching country and the lumber regions of Montana. Water
stops were placed eight to ten miles apart and were used as freight centers for the farmer’s crops
and, as a result, became towns. Also in 1886, the Lincoln Land Company bought a farmstead for
the platting and incorporated the community and called it Cairo because it reminded them of a
desert in Egypt. In keeping with that theme, many of the town’s roads have Egyptian names
such as Thebe, Alexandria, Medina, Nubia, Suez, Mecca, and Nile. One year later, Cairo
boasted a booming population of 200.
Doniphan
The Union Pacific Railroad crossed Nebraska in the 1860s and opened the area to settlement. In
1879, a line which became part of the St. Joseph & Western Railroad was built. It was inevitable
that a town should grow between Grand Island and Hastings. This town was named in honor of
Colonel John Doniphan of Saint Joseph, Missouri, who was then attorney for the railroad on
which it is located. The town was surveyed in 1879, and the Village of Doniphan was
incorporated on January 9, 1884.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 23 / 124
9
Chapter 2 – Risk Assessment Review and Re-assessment
Hall County
2013
Dam
Failure
Earth-
quake Drought Flood
Summer
Storm
Land
slide
Winter
Storm
Tornado/
Wind Wildfire
Crime/
Terror Hazmat
Probability Unlikely Unlikely Likely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely Likely Likely Likely
Risk Low Low Low Med High Low High High Low Low Med
Impact 1 0 2 3 4 0 4 5 Yes 2 3
Criteria Definition
Probability Based on history, what is the likelihood this type of event will happen again?
None, Low, Medium, or High
Risk What is Risk of Damage/Injuries, Etc?
High, Medium, Low
Impact The severity level to which the event will impact residents of the County.
(5=Full, 0=None)
The above table shows the cumulative input from the initial public meeting and subsequent
survey and is not necessarily representative of individual communities. Community-specific
information is provided in the sections in this plan for each participating community in
Appendix D. The County adoption and each community’s adoption resolution is provided in
Appendix E.
In the initial public meeting for the development of this hazard mitigation plan, representatives
from Hall County’s communities were asked to rate their community’s risk and vulnerability for
a list of hazards. The tabulation of the responses is included with the public meeting
documentation in Appendix C. In order from highest likelihood to lowest, meeting attendees
ranked their community most vulnerable to the hazard types of: severe winter and summer storm,
tornado, flood, drought, wildfire, and dam failure. Hazards receiving zero votes were earthquake
and landslide.
In the following sections of this plan, only the hazard types which have a significant likelihood
of occurring or have a reason to potentially occur are listed. These types are: severe weather
(summer and winter), tornado, flood, drought, and dam failure. Earthquake will not be
considered in this plan because of the lack of recognized underlying geological features and
because of no past instances of a damaging earthquake. Landslide will not be considered
because there is little topographic relief in most of Hall County and because the University of
Nebraska’s Center for Advanced Land Management Information Technologies (CALMIT) does
not have any landslide hazard mapped in the County. The wildfire hazard will not be addressed
in this plan because the threat and associated risk is not high enough and there are no realistic or
feasible mitigation action which can be taken to reduce the level of risk there is in Hall County.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 24 / 124
10
Also, for obvious geographical and geological reasons, the following hazard types were not
considered due to there being no likelihood of occurring in Nebraska: volcanic eruptions,
avalanches, hurricanes, tidal surges, and tsunamis. Any additional hazards not listed here which
do occur will be added to the mitigation plan through future updates.
Hall County Vulnerability Assessment – Review Assessment amounts
With a financial vulnerability perspective, the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and
Taxation keeps records for counties. The entire taxable value of assets in Hall County for 2013
was $4,258,409,140. Broken out by property class, the total assessment valuation and
percentage of total is:
Residential real property: $ 1,907,260,700 (44.8%)
Commercial real property: $ 865,176,004 (20.3%)
Agricultural Land and homes/outbuildings: $ 995,023,454 (23.4%)
Commercial/Industrial personal property: $ 204,994,084 ( 4.8%)
Public service corporation real and personal: $ 32,715,553 ( 0.8%)
Railroad real and personal property: $ 119,497,056 ( 2.8%)
Industrial real property: $ 67,350,949 ( 1.6%)
Agricultural personal property: $ 65,863,010 ( 1.5%)
Recreational real property: $ 528,330 ( .01%)
Realistically, the entire building stock within the whole County will not all be impacted by one
disaster event. However, each structure in the County is at the same vulnerability to disaster
types like severe weather and tornadoes.
For smaller communities, the NDNR completed fieldwork which determined the number of
structures by main structure type (residential, commercial, public, non-profit, and out buildings).
For the larger community of Grand Island, the computer vulnerability assessment program
HAZUS® was used to assist with the vulnerability assessment since it would not be possible to
drive every street in the community.
2.10 SEVERE WEATHER
2.11 Background
Severe weather can be separated into severe winter storms and severe summer storms. Weather
hazards for severe summer storms include the qualities of a storm which make it officially
classified as severe by the National Weather Service: winds exceeding 58 mph, hail in excess of
1.00 inch diameter, or a tornado. For the purposes of this plan, severe summer weather will also
include intense rainfall, frequent lightning, and non-storm-related intense heat. Weather hazards
for severe winter storms are not defined, but usually include many of the following: extreme
cold, heavy snowfall (defined as 4 inches in 12 hours or 6 inches in 24 hours), ice, and strong
winds which push the wind chill well below zero degrees.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 25 / 124
11
Severe Summer Storms
In the warm season months, thunderstorms and supercell thunderstorms produce lightning, and
severe storms can produce hail. Lightning is one of the most consistent causes of death for
natural hazards in Nebraska because it can kill people who are outside when a thunderstorm is
overhead or nearby. Although hail has the potential to kill people, the primary risk is to property
like windows, roofs, siding, trees, and cars. In Nebraska, hail can also cause total losses in
agricultural fields across extensive areas. Strong winds down tree limbs and power lines, in
addition to having the potential for causing significant property damage and community
interruption. Property owners can obtain insurance to cover themselves financially, but there
may be ways to prevent tree and power line damage from occurring through property urban tree
management.
Periods of extreme heat are common in all parts of Nebraska during the warmest months. The
problem is made worse when the high temperature is accompanied by high humidity. The main
risk for intense heat is to persons who may become isolated in an unventilated area. Recorded
deaths in Nebraska that are associated with extreme heat are largely a result of outdoor exercise
or work during this kind of weather condition. The very young and very old are at additional
risk because they tend to have weaker respiratory systems.
Severe Winter Storms
For severe winter storms, heavy snow can bring a community to a standstill by inhibiting
transportation (like whiteout conditions), knocking down utility lines, and by causing structural
collapse in buildings not designed to withstand the weight of the snow. Repair and snow
removal costs can be significant. Ice buildup can collapse utility lines and communication
towers, as well as make transportation difficult and hazardous. Ice can also become a problem
on roadways if the air temperature is high enough so that precipitation falls as freezing rain
rather than snow.
Extreme cold can lead to hypothermia and frostbite in people who are exposed to the weather
without adequate clothing protection. Cold causes fuel to congeal in storage tanks and supply
lines, stopping electric generators. Cold temperatures can also overpower a building’s heating
system and cause water and sewer pipes to freeze and rupture. Extreme cold increases the
likelihood for ice jams on flat rivers or streams. When combined with high winds, extreme cold
becomes a very dangerous wind chill, which is hazardous to health and safety.
2.12 Severe Weather History
Through its National Climate Data Center (NCDC), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) compiles a list of recorded storm events. These records go back to
1950; however, reports were given by county only, and community-specific information was not
started until 1994.
Hail
According to NCDC, from 2007-2012, there were 61 recorded significant hail events impacting
Hall County – this averages out to slightly more than 10 events per year. The largest recorded
hail in Hall County was 5 inches in diameter and fell on April 7, 1978. Four-inch diameter hail
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 26 / 124
12
fell in July of 1975. The average of the 61 hail events for hail diameters was approximately 1.25
inches. Based on more than 50 years of history, five-inch hail should be the largest hail to
expect; however, the current national record size for a hailstone is seven inches, which fell near
Aurora in neighboring Hamilton County in 2003.
The National Weather Service uses a guide to equate common items with an approximate hail
diameter. Often, hail is reported based on the size comparison to these items and is not directly
measured with a measuring device. The relationship is as follows:
Approximate Hail Size
Appearance Approximate Size (in.)
Pea 0.25-0.50 inch
Penny 0.75
Nickel 0.88
Quarter 1.00
Half dollar 1.25
Walnut/Ping Pong ball 1.50
Golf ball 1.75
Hen egg 2.00
Tennis ball 2.50
Baseball 2.75
Tea cup 3.00
Grapefruit 4.00
Softball 4.50
Aug. 5, 1995: Grand Island – $1.5 million in property damage caused by 2-inch hail
June 15, 1997: Cairo – $100,000 damage caused by ¾-inch hail
Alda – $50,000 damage caused by 1-inch hail
Aug. 21, 1997: Grand Island – $150,000 damage caused by 2-inch hail
May 5, 2002: Doniphan – $1 million damage caused by 2¾-inch hail
Grand Island – $2 million damage caused by 3-inch hail
May 4, 2003: Cairo – $200,000 damage caused by 2¾-inch hail
Grand Island – $250,000 damage caused by 1¾-inch hail
May 10, 2005: Cairo – $100,000 damage caused by baseball sized hail
Grand Island – $100,000 damage caused by 1¾-inch hail
June 16, 2006: Wood River – $200,000 damage caused by 1¾-inch hail
Sept. 15, 2006: Grand Island – $100,000 damage caused by 2¾-inch hail
Location Date Time Type Mag. Death Injuries Property
Damage (K)
Crop
Damage (K)
GRAND IS 5/14/2007 1550 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 10.00 75.00
GRAND IS 5/23/2008 1508 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 2.00
CAMERON 5/29/2008 1700 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 2.00 300.00
WOOD RIVER 5/29/2008 1702 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 2.00 100.00
GRAND IS 6/3/2008 203 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 75.00
GRAND IS 6/4/2008 1714 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 5.00 50.00
CAMERON 6/4/2008 1716 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 10.00 250.00
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 27 / 124
13
CAMERON 6/4/2008 1726 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 5.00 250.00
GRAND IS 6/4/2008 1740 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 50.00
WOOD RIVER 6/4/2008 1935 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 2.00 50.00
GRAND IS 6/4/2008 1959 Hail 1.25 in. 0 0 5.00 75.00
GRAND IS 6/7/2008 1952 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 50.00
ROSEDALE 6/7/2008 2044 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 2.00 100.00
DONIPHAN 6/7/2008 2316 Hail 2.75 in. 0 0 50.00 1,000.00
GRAND IS 6/7/2008 2329 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 75.00
ABBOTT 6/19/2008 1720 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 5.00 100.00
GRAND IS 6/19/2008 1742 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 75.00 100.00
CAMERON 6/21/2008 1647 Hail 0.75 in. 0 0 10.00 100.00
ALDA 6/21/2008 1651 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 5.00 250.00
DONIPHAN 6/21/2008 1703 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 10.00 100.00
WOOD RIVER 6/5/2009 2206 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 150.00 8,000.00
DONIPHAN 6/5/2009 2225 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 5.00 50.00
CAMERON 6/17/2009 1826 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 75.00
BURKETT 6/17/2009 1922 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 40.00
GRAND IS 6/19/2009 0 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 50.00
CAIRO 7/24/2009 1749 Hail 1.25 in. 0 0 100.00
GRAND IS 7/24/2009 1822 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 10.00
BURKETT 7/24/2009 1850 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 100.00
CAMERON 7/24/2009 2021 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 150.00
ROSEDALE 9/3/2009 1640 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 50.00
HALL 6/20/2011 1548 Hail 1.75 in. 0 0 25.00 250.00
GRAND IS 5/23/2012 2345 Hail 1.00 in. 0 0 25.00 500.00
TOTAL 857.00 12,125.00
Source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
From 2006 to 2012, hail has caused $12,982,000.00 damage to property in Hall County. Over
this eleven year period, that averages approximately $705,000 in property damage every year. In
this same period, there have not been any years which have not witnessed a significant hail event
somewhere in the County. Therefore, it would be safe to assume that damaging hail storms
occur somewhere in Hall County at least one time per year.
Severe Summer Storms:
From 2007-2012, severe storms caused $1,552,000 in property damage – this averages $258,000
in damage per year. There have been two injuries caused by severe storms since 1950 – both
were from impacts caused by high winds: one was on July 9, 1986, and the other on August 2,
1992. Since both events occurred before community-specific reporting started in 1994, it is not
possible to tell where or how the injuries occurred. Although unofficial wind gusts have been
estimated over 90 mph, the highest measured wind speed was 85 mph (74 knots) recorded on
June 25, 1990, at an unknown location in Hall County. In neighboring counties, wind speeds
have been recorded as high as 90 mph near Central City in 2004 and in June of 2003, gusts of 90
mph were recorded near Axtell and 107 mph in Dawson County. This means that winds up to 70
mph should be expected from severe thunderstorms, gusts up to 80 mph are certainly not
unusual, and gusts over 100 mph are possible in the County.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 28 / 124
14
It is safe to say that at least one severe summer storm will occur every year, and a detailed
history of these events would be too extensive to chronicle. According to the NCDC statistics
since 2000, Hall County experienced this many severe thunderstorms (in parenthesis) in each
year:
2008 (6) 2009 (3) 2010 (5) 2011 (9) 2012 (1)
Noteworthy severe summer storms and weather events are:
August 17, 1999: The area received 2-3 inches of rain in an hour and intense straight-line winds
damaged five homes west of Doniphan. Property damage was set at $125,000.
May 26, 2002: 80 mph winds developed and roared through Cairo. Windows were blown out of
cars, and roofs were blown off a few businesses. Property damage was set at $150,000.
May 13, 2003: Property damage was set at $100,000 in Grand Island after a strong thunderstorm
rolled through and destroyed a sign, and caused damage to trees and sheds.
June 23, 2003: With a top wind gust measured at 78 mph, a total of $725,000 in damage across
five counties was sustained from strong thunderstorms.
July 6/7, 2003: A storm of similar strength followed the same path as the June storms.
Extremely high winds over 70 mph were reported north of Grand Island, and across several
counties, the total damage estimate was $1.3 million.
May 10, 2005: 70 mph winds destroyed a construction trailer at the Grand Island Airport and
caused minor damage southeast of town. Total damage was estimated at $100,000.
April 6, 2006: Wind gusts over 60 mph winds blew over a semi trailer on Interstate 80 south of
Grand Island and caused property damage of $75,000 north and east of Doniphan.
June 16, 2006: 65 mph winds took down large tree limbs and power poles, causing
approximately $10,000 in property damage.
September 15, 2006: 60 mph winds blew down trees and caused property damage of about
$10,000 in Wood River.
May-June 2008: Flooding throughout Grand Island, Presidential Declaration (FEMA-1770?);
Damage to lift stations, Eagle Scout Lake, Jack Rabbit Run Golf Course.
May 30, 2011, Wind gusts estimated near 80 MPH destroyed a show home when it rolled, siding
and window damage to a number of homes and recreational vehicles, and vehicle and roof
damage at a local manufacturing plant. Tree damage and downed power lines was reported
across town. Near the intersection of Highways 30 and 281, a personal storage facility was
destroyed and a power pole was snapped and fell on a business. West of town, pivots were
overturned and a number of train cars were derailed.
July 10, 2011: Wood River: Tree damage was reported across Wood River, and $5 Million in
crop damage north of town.
May 27, 2012: Wood River: Numerous irrigation pivots were overturned along an approximately
6 mile long path from Wood River south to near Interstate 80. In Wood River, large trees were
damaged or destroyed and power poles were knocked down. Heavy rain from these
thunderstorms resulted in the intersection of 140th and Holling Roads, just south of town, being
covered in water.
Lightning:
Since 1950, there were no reported lightning strike damages for Hall County.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 29 / 124
15
Severe Winter Storm
With its location on the prairie, Hall County has been visited frequently by severe winter storms
throughout its history. One of the most spectacular and harrowing events in the history of the
Great Plains was the Blizzard of January 12, 1888. Other storms had produced colder
temperatures and greater amounts of snow, but it was the combination of gale winds, blinding
snow, and rapidly falling temperatures that made the 1888 blizzard so dangerous. No accurate
count of the total deaths from the storm is possible, but estimates for Nebraska have ranged from
40 to 100.
The worst natural disaster on record was an ice storm which occurred in late December, 2006.
Called the “New Year’s Ice Storm,” this disaster caused an estimated $240 million in damage,
largely to the State’s public power electricity infrastructure system. At the height of the storm,
the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) and its public power utility wholesale customers lost
service to more than 40,000 customers, primarily in Central Nebraska, including some in Hall
County. Service was restored to all customers by January 19th. NPPD sustained damage to 18
substations and a total of 37 transmission line segments totaling 1,053 miles. A total of 1,137 of
NPPD’s transmission line structures were damaged as well as 301 miles of transmission line
conductor (wire). Between 200 and 300 contract workers assisted in the reconstruction effort.
Total expenses for restoration and reconstruction were $123.7 million, with approximately $74
million of this amount expected to be reimbursed by post-disaster Public Assistance the Federal
Emergency Management Agency. The remaining amount will be financed through long-term
debt and paid over 20 to 25 years.
The impacts of this ice storm were not only felt with power outages. Due to the loss of
transmission capability from the Gerald Gentleman Station, which is situated west of the
impacted area. NPPD and Lincoln Electric System were forced to purchase replacement power
on the open energy market. NPPD paid $34 million. NPPD is using $22 million of existing
District funds in a Rate Stabilization Account to partially off-set the $34 million in increased
energy costs. The remaining balance of $12 million is being recovered over a 12-month period
through a Production Cost Adjustment charge. Lincoln Electric System paid $9.77 million for
replacement power and was able to recoup this added expense by October 19th by placing a 5.5%
surcharge on all electric bills.
The Christmas 2009 Blizzard featured northeast winds of 40-60 mph and 4-8 inches of snow.
The combination of snow and wind resulted in white-out conditions as roads throughout the
county became impassible. Major roads closed included Interstate 80 from Grand Island east to
the Missouri River.
Like severe summer storms, it is a virtual certainty that Hall County will experience a severe
winter storm every year. Since 2000, the County has experienced the following number (in
parenthesis) of severe winter storms each year:
2000 (5); 2001 (5); 2002 (2); 2003 (1); 2004 (4); 2005 (3); 2006 (4); 2007 (2) 2008 (1) 2009 (4)
2010 (1) 2011 (6) 2012 (1)1
1 NWS Hastings
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 30 / 124
16
Temperature extremes:
Although extreme heat and extreme cold are not common, they are also not rare. What makes
these events truly dangerous is when extreme heat is combined with high humidity and when
extreme cold combines with high winds to produce dangerous windchills.
Instances of Heat: 2009 (1), 2011 (1) 2
Instances of Cold: 1996 (1), 1997 (12), 1998 (1)
Extreme cold temperatures can get down to –10 or –20 degrees. When combined with high
winds, recorded extreme wind chills are most commonly –30 to –60 degrees.
Extremely cold temperatures and a stiff northwest breeze combined to drop the wind chill factor
to –60 degrees on January 9, 1997. A week later, bitterly cold wind chills returned aboard strong
north winds. Temperatures dropped sharply to single-digits – in turn, the wind chill dropped to
between –35 to -50 degrees.
On December 20, 1998, a deepening arctic air mass settled in and dropped the air
temperature down to –17 degrees as wind chill readings ranged from –20 to –45 degrees.
On January 3, 1999, a Cairo man died from hypothermia after being exposed to the sub-
zero temperatures on a walk home after a wedding celebration. The growing season
officially ended a bit early in 2000 when, on October 8 and 9, consecutive morning low
temperature records were broken. In Grand Island, the thermometer dropped to 17
degrees.
Previous County Severe Weather Mitigation Actions
Hall County was a Project Impact community in 2000. As a function of this designation, the
City distributed 4,500 NOAA weather radios for $15 each, and these were available to any
resident in the County. Grand Island has also been a Tree City USA since 1987 and Doniphan
since 1995. Meeting the requirements to be declared a Tree City USA community means there is
a reduced damage potential resulting from falling trees and limbs from tornadoes, high wind, and
ice events.
Severe weather preparedness, response, and mitigation are primarily responsibilities of the Hall
County Emergency Management Agency (HCEMA). HCEMA participates in Severe Weather
Awareness Week each year by placing articles in the local paper and running information over
the City’s local government television channel. HCEMA also participates during the test
warning day by using all of our normal procedures like in an actual event. HCEMA also
participates in National Preparedness Month, Severe Weather Awareness Week, Winter
Awareness Week and by hosting training meetings, providing public presentations, media
interviews and placing articles in the local newspaper. Each spring, HCEMA also completes
grade school tours, talking to 500-600 kids about severe weather and what to do for severe
weather.
Grand Island and Cairo are StormReady® communities through the National Weather Service
(NWS). To be a StormReady community, communities prepare an action plan which helps them
respond to all types of severe weather. There are six main guidelines: Communication, NWS
2 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 31 / 124
17
Information Reception, Hydrometeorological Monitoring, Local Warning Dissemination,
Community Preparedness, and Administrative. The guidelines for successful participation are
based on population, which are separated into four population ranges. Grand Island is in the top
population range (more than 40,000) while Cairo is in the lowest population range (less than
2,500). The higher the population range, the more activities the communities need to do in order
to receive a StormReady certification. For more information about the StormReady program,
visit: http://www.stormready.noaa.gov/.
Hall County manages 40 outdoor warning devices in each of the cities and villages. Over time,
many of these sirens have suffered mechanical failures and needed replacement. Two separate
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) awards have been received to replace six (6) older
sirens as well as expand into two (2) new areas of outdoor recreation near the Mormon Island
Recreation Area and the Grand Island Eagle Scout Lake.
2.13 Probability of Severe Weather Events
It is certain that Hall County will continue to be impacted by severe summer storms and severe
winter storms, along with the various dangerous and damaging components which accompany
both.
2.14 Vulnerability Assessment of the Severe Weather Hazard
Every structure in the entire County is at equal risk to hail damage or being impacted by other
severe weather events. According to the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and
Taxation, this represents approximately $4,258,409,140 See the community-specific section for
a more structural inventory and financial damage potential for each city.
2.15 Potential Severe Weather Mitigation Measures
Like tornadoes, there is little one can do to mitigate severe weather events – just be prepared.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
Objective 1.1 Ensure continued operation of critical facilities, utilities, and the local
transportation system.
- Action 1.1.1: Obtain emergency generators to be used as backup power in case of complete
power outage – as seen from ice storm of December, 2006.
- Action 1.1.2: Work with owners of critical facilities to ensure they are adequately
protected against extreme winter conditions and have an uninterruptible power supply.
- Action 1.1.3: Work with schools and other critical facilities to ensure that they receive
severe weather warnings – perhaps have them purchase weather radios.
- Action 1.1.4: Develop a snow route plan for the community that takes major streets
and critical facilities into account. Post “Emergency Snow Route” signs along this route
and educate the public to keep their vehicles off of these routes during heavy snow
events, or risk being towed. Publish this route in the local telephone books or other
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 32 / 124
18
locations which could be referenced by residents. This option would be most useful for
larger populations concentrations like Grand Island.
- Action 1.1.5: Require all new development, where appropriate, to bury all electric lines.
- Action 1.1.6: Work with local property owners in developed areas to bury power lines in
areas which experience power outages due to downed lines.
Objective 1.2: Reduce tree-related damage to property and utilities
- Action 1.2.1: Develop an urban tree management plan. As a free service, the Nebraska
Forest Service offers advice on proper “urban forest” planning, tree selection, planting,
and tree care. This service should be utilized in areas of the city which experience more
tree-related problems. The Nebraska Forest Service performs a free “Tree inventory” and
offers technical advice for communities. Communities can then use this information to
develop or change their local tree programs.
- Action 1.2.2: Bury overhead power lines and service lines in areas where tree problems
exist.
- Action 1.2.3: Communities can provide information about proper tree selection
(especially in power line rights-of-way) and maintenance to residents.
- Action 1.2.4: Communities should consider becoming a “Tree City USA”. This program is
offered through the National Arbor Day Foundation, and through it communities receive
direction, technical assistance, public attention, and national recognition for their urban
and community forestry programs through the Nebraska Forest Service and USDA Forest
Service.
- Action 1.2.5: Educate homeowners about how to maintain trees on their property since it is
their liability if a tree on their property damages someone else’s personal property.
- Action 1.2.6: Have available information to educate homeowners about types of desired
trees for planting on private property. Information should include: insect susceptibility,
potential disease problems, blossom or seed characteristics, cold weather hardiness, and
other items.
Goal 3: Increase Public Education
Objective 1.3: Increase severe weather awareness
- Action 1.3.1: Continue to promote severe weather awareness, education, and safety tips
through local media outlets. Such a campaign should include practical tips like staying
indoors when lightning is around and recommended behavior during extreme
temperatures. This could be combined with awareness campaigns from other disasters.
- Action 1.3.2: Communities could develop a more detailed Severe Weather Preparedness
Week and Winter Awareness Week outreach programs to educate children and/or the
public about the nature of different disaster types, where to watch for storm warnings,
what to do, where to go during a severe weather warning, and others.
-Action 1.3.3 Utilize Social Media including but not limited to Facebook and Twitter to
distribute outreach programs and information regarding severe weather and severe
weather mitigation and preparedness.
2.20 FLOOD
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 33 / 124
19
2.21 Background
The majority of Hall County is situated in the Platte River valley, which means that there is very
little vertical relief (See Figure 2), even from watershed to watershed. The drainage system of
Hall County is dominated by the Platte River, which flows from southwest to northeast (See
Figure 3). Only in the extreme northwest corner of the county is there the relief required for
upland streams. The communities of Hall County developed where they did due to the proximity
to water sources and railroad As the reliance on proximity to surface water has declined over
time, this has left many Hall County communities with significant water issues – not only
flooding, but also related to a high water table.
Other than the Platte River, significant water courses in Hall County are: Wood River, Prairie
Creek, Moores Creek, Silver Creek, and Dry Creek. Platte River is the controlling drainage for
most of the County, which means that all of the water courses listed above either parallel or drain
into the Platte. A small portion of Hall County south and east of Doniphan is at the upper
reaches of the Big Blue River watershed.
Hall County’s largest population center, Grand Island, has an extensive floodplain that is
associated with the Prairie/Moores/Silver Creeks. They are often mentioned together as one
flood source because they all drain areas parallel to each other and because a large enough rain
will allow water to cascade from one of the creeks into the others.
Due to the shallow depth of the Platte River channel, ice jams are possible during winter and
early spring months. However, the primary flood risk is to flash floods from intense warm-
month rainfall events and from slower moving riverine floods on the Platte River, which result
from rapid snowmelt, excessive and sustained rainfall upstream, or both.
Repetitive Loss Properties in Hall County
A repetitive loss property is defined as any structure which has had two or more flood insurance
claims filed for it in any ten-year period since 1978. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has started targeting mitigation efforts for these repetitive loss properties
because of the significant drain they represent to the flood insurance pool of the National Flood
Insurance Program. Mitigation of these properties in Nebraska has been slow because of the
regulation which requires the jurisdictions the properties are in to have an adopted and approved
all-hazards mitigation plan as a condition of eligibility for federal mitigation assistance. Once
all-hazards mitigation plans like this one are approved, Nebraska will be in a better situation to
mitigate some of these repetitive loss properties.
According to the 2013 Repetitive Loss list provided by FEMA, the following communities have
this many repetitive loss properties: update with FEMA
Hall County: 1 (Doniphan address)
Alda: 0
Cairo: 0
Doniphan: 0
Grand Island: 2
Wood River: 0
HALL COUNTY TOTAL: 3
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 34 / 124
20
2.22 Flood History
Historic Flood Events
Since floods impact communities and not areas, a more detailed and extensive list of flood
records have been placed in the community-specific section in Appendix D.
Official flood reports for watercourses other than the Platte River are difficult to find because
there is a lack of good and consistent river gauge data for Hall County. The primary gauge in the
County which is currently operating full-time is the Platte River gauge at Grand Island, which is
located approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the City on the Highway 34 bridge on the Hall
County/Hamilton County line. A second gauge is located at the Wood River Diversion project
on US Highway 281 south of Grand Island.
Other gauges on different water courses were operated as follows:
Most communities in Hall County were incorporated in the late 1800s, and the first flood reports
on the Platte River date to that era. Little is known about the “Great Flood of 1883” because
there was so little population in Hall County at the time. However, the sketchy reports that do
exist point to flood damage in Kearney and Ashland; therefore, the Platte was also flooding in
Hall County. Hydrological journals of the day only reference this flood by saying there was a
major inflow into the Missouri River somewhere between the established towns of Sioux City,
Iowa, and Kansas City, Missouri.
The most extensive flood event to impact Hall County occurred from a long period of excessive
rainfall in May and June of 1967. The total damage from the Platte River flood of 1967 was
$49,309,015 – of which $40.8 million was private damage ($23 million in agricultural damage,
$12 million in transportation damage, and $5 million was classified as “urban” damage) and $8.5
million was public damage. The Wood River was on the rampage in Grand Island, where three
people were killed, 1800 buildings were flooded, and 11,000 of the City’s 28,600 residents were
directly impacted. Total damage in Grand Island was set at $6.25 million ($43.8 million in 2013
dollars).
On May 11 and 12, 2005, portions of Hall County received more than seven inches of rain in a
24-hour period, causing between $12 and 15 million in damage in the County, and damaged
Gage Dates of Operation Agency
Wood River near Alda 1953 to 1994 USGS
Wood River near Alda 1994 to 2002 NDNR
Platte River S. Channel near Gr. Island 1983 to 1989 USGS
Dry Creek at Cairo 1949 to 1953 USGS
Silver Creek at Ovina 1991 to 1995 USGS
Silver Creek near Ovina 1991 to 1999 USGS
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 35 / 124
21
2769 homes and businesses. Hall County was later declared a federal disaster area (FEMA-
1590-NE-DR) by President Bush on June 23.
In May and June of 2008, the Prairie and Silver Creeks flooded north and northwest of Grand
Island, including the northwest corner of the City itself following several inches of rain. Heavy
winds and rains caused damage to trees and run off in the City that resulted damage to public
infrastructure, the failure of sanitary sewer lift stations in Grand Island and water damage was
reported in over 100 homes. Hall County was later declared a federal disaster area (FEMA-
1770-NE-DR).
Figure 1: Flooding and Water Reports, FEMA 1770-NE-DR
Previous Hall County Flood Mitigation Actions
Hall County is situated in the Central Platte Natural Resources District (CPNRD). Natural
resources districts were created along major watershed boundaries in the 1970s with the intent to
steward the area’s natural resources. In addition to the having an authority for flood control, the
CPNRD also operates a rain gage reporting network called NeRAIN and undertakes information
and outreach programs for the NRDs population.
In combination with the CPNRD, Hall County has undertaken several major flood reduction
projects.
Wood River Flood Control Project
After 30 years of planning, the Wood River Flood Control Project was dedicated in spring of
2004. The 300-foot wide diversion channel diverts excess water from the Wood River and
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 36 / 124
22
Warm Slough to the east and into the Platte River. This project provides flood control protection
for 1500 homes and businesses. The project was tested by a flood event one year later on May
11, 2005, when 7.21 inches of rain fell in a 24-hour period. From a hydrological standpoint, this
event would have resulted in a flood similar to the devastating 1967 flood; however, the Project
functioned as designed, and flood damages were minimal for the protected area. The Central
Platte Natural Resources District estimated that the $17 million project paid for itself in this
event, less than one year after dedication. The project was sponsored by CPNRD and was
funded 42.5% by CPNRD, 35% by City of Grand Island, 11.25% Hall County, and 11.25%
Merrick County. The project was constructed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, and the
Natural Resources Development Fund (administered by the Nebraska Department of Natural
Resources) provided the 60% of the non-federal share of the planning.
Prairie/Silver/Moores Creek Flood Control Project: Project Update
In May of 2000, the CPNRD and City of Grand Island contracted out to perform a detailed
hydrologic analysis of northern and western Grand Island. The analysis was also to evaluate
options for reducing flood damages and to present the preferred alternative. An engineering firm
was selected in September of 2005 to provide engineering services for the design and oversight
of the flood control project. The flood control project is designed in three phases, expecting to
be completed in 2015. Construction of Phase 1 began in January of 2007. The phases are:
Phase 1 – Silver Creek Low Land Stormwater Detention Cells
The first phase of the project is the construction of four large floodwater detention cells along
the Silver Creek channel with a total excavation near 4.5 million cubic yards of earth. The
cell design includes the lowering and re-grading of Silver Creek for more then two miles.
The detention cells will detain stormwater runoff in excess of the 2-year storm. A 3’ x 3’
concrete box culvert will be used as the outlet and will release the water from the cells at a
rate equal to the 2-year storm. A second 3’ x 6’ gated box culvert will be used for rapid draw
down of the cells. A berm is being placed around the cells, approximately 2 foot above
existing ground, to provide sufficient capacity to detain runoff from the 100-year storm with
a 1-foot freeboard.
Phase 2 – Basin Divide and Silver/Moores Creek Diversion Channel
A diversion channel that will connect Silver Creek to Moores Creek and a levee that will
prevent flood water from flowing from one basin the adjacent basin. The stormwater
released from the cells when combined with runoff excess, flows from the Prairie Creek and
will cause flooding within the city of Grand Island. This levee will be designed to meet the
requirements set forth by FEMA. A diversion channel will be constructed to divert water
from Silver Creek to the Moores Creek floodway.
Phase 3 – Upland Dams and Prairie/Silver Creek Channel
A series of upland detention dams and an overflow channel from Prairie Creek to Silver
Creek. The exact locations of the detention sites will be finalized in the final design phase of
this project. Several sites are available and will be evaluated after geological investigations
have been completed. The channel between Prairie and Silver Creek will serve to carry
excess flows from Prairie Creek to Silver Creek.
Prairie Creek Clearing: Update
Although the Prairie Creek Flood Control Project had a local effect, damages could be reduced
on Prairie Creek by keeping the channel clear. Projects have been completed from the mouth of
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 37 / 124
23
Prairie Creek in Merrick County to the Hall-Buffalo county line. Annual maintenance cost to
CPNRD is $10,000.
Dry Creek Clearing: Project Update
After a windstorm/tornado in 1998, landowners requested CPNRD to clear a channel northeast of
Cairo. The project was completed in 1998, however, area landowners petitioned the NRD to
clear an additional 21,000 feet. That project will be completed the winter of 2007/08.
Maintenance is done by the NRD.
Lower Warm Slough Prairie
In 2002, CPNRD spent $110,000 to complete snagging and clearing from Grand Island to
Central City.
Moores Creek Flood Control Project: Update
Project sponsors of the feasibility study for the flood control on Moores Creek include CPNRD,
the City of Grand Island, Merrick County and Hall County. The three-phase project consisted of
channel improvements, construction of three detention/retention and wildlife habitat
enhancement cells, and construction of waterways and bridges to enable storm runoff. Annual
maintenance cost is estimated at $20,000.
2.23 Probability of Future Flood Events
It is certain that the Hall County area will continue to be impacted by flash flood and riverine
flood events while ice jam floods may be less common.
2.24 Vulnerability Assessment of the Flood Hazard
The US Army Corps of Engineers completed the vulnerability assessment portion of this report.
Community-specific flood vulnerability information is given for each community in Appendix
D. As shown in Appendix A, the Corps was able to find 1478 (398 Zone A, 69 Floodway, and
1011 Zone AE) structures in the floodplain in Hall County and was able to determine assessed
valuations for many of them, which have a total of $126,100,206. The table below shows the
number of structures that the Corps of Engineers found in a regulated floodplain by community.
Community
Floodplain
Structures Value
Hall County 408 $29,961,679
Alda 7 $518,285
Cairo 13 $650,447
Doniphan 0 $0
Grand Island 1045 $94,872,642
Wood River 5 $97,153
Totals 1478 $126,100,206
For the 408 structures in the floodplain in unincorporated areas of Hall County, 294 are in Zone
A, 23 are in a floodway, and 91 are in Zone AE.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 38 / 124
24
Critical facilities and valuations in the floodplain in unincorporated Hall County are:
Eight Interstate 80 interchanges (no value)
Note that these numbers are slightly different from NDNR’s floodplain structure counts (see
community-specific counts in Appendix D) because NDNR did not look outside of a
community’s corporate limits and did not count insignificant out buildings.
2.25 Potential Flood Mitigation Measures
Objective 2.1: Determine valuation information for the remaining structures in the vulnerability
assessment in order to have a more complete concept of the County’s true total flood risk.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
Objective 2.2: Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program
Action 2.2.1: Continue to regulate development in floodplain areas
Action 2.2.2: Continue to provide floodplain management technical assistance under the
County’s authority
Objective 2.3: Mitigate Hall County’s repetitive loss properties.
- Action 2.3.1: Make application to one of FEMA’s mitigation programs. Hall County, City
of Grand Island, Central Platte NRD, other source can provide the non-federal match.
-Action 2.3.2 If possible purchase of repetitive loss properties for open space, utility or other
public use with minimal impacts within the flood plain.
Objective 2.4: Undertake flood control projects under the NRD’s authority
- Action 2.4.1: Continue to utilize existing programs for the NRD’s various flood control
programs. Proposed sites will need to go through a rigorous process to determine project
feasibility and benefit before they are constructed.
Objective 2.5: Mitigate losses for floodprone buildings not on FEMA’s repetitive loss list
- Action 2.5.1: Operate as non-federal cost-share partner for FEMA-funded or other
sponsored nonstructural mitigation projects such as buyout/removal and elevation. All
communities and jurisdictions will be considered if there is need; however, higher
priority will be given to structures in an identified floodway.
Action 2.5.2: Regulate building within identified flood plains to minimize the number
and type of structures constructed and the risk to those structures.
GOALS: 3) Increase Public Education
Objective 2.6: Increase awareness of citizens in Hall County about their flood risk and what can
be done to reduce vulnerability to flooding
- Action 2.6.1: Continue to use existing NRD education and outreach programs to educate
and inform the public about natural hazard mitigation options and what the NRD is doing
in this area.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 39 / 124
25
- Action 2.6.2: Explore options of working with the Hall County Emergency Management
Agency to expand non-flood natural disaster educational opportunities.
2.30 TORNADO
2.31 Background
Tornadoes and high winds have been a way of life in Nebraska since the time of pioneers in the
late 1800s. With its location at the frequent convergence area for Canadian, Gulf of Mexico, and
Pacific air masses, Nebraska is located in a part of the United States where tornadoes are a
common occurrence. Nebraska is ranked fifth in the nation for the number of tornadoes, but 23rd
in number of tornado fatalities and 24th in tornado injuries. Nebraska averages 57 tornadoes per
year, with the most recorded tornadoes being 102 in 1999. All 93 counties in Nebraska have had
tornadoes since 1950. The peak month for tornadoes is June, and 78% of all Nebraska tornadoes
have occurred in traditional tornado season of May through July. In terms of timing, 71% of all
Nebraska tornadoes have occurred between 3:00 and 9:00 pm, and 53% of all Nebraska
tornadoes between 4:00 and 8:00 pm.
The “Fujita Scale” was used to classify and compare both the actual tornadoes and the damage
caused by tornadoes and was used from 1971 until 2007. On February 1, 2007, the Enhanced
Fujita Scale, or EF Scale, was implemented as its replacement. The Scale was revised to reflect
better examinations of tornado damage surveys, so as to align wind speeds more closely with
associated storm damage. The rating system is as follows:
EF0: Light damage (29% of all tornadoes). Wind up to 85 mph. Peels surface off some
roofs; some damage to gutters or siding; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees
pushed over.
EF1: Moderate damage (40%). Wind 86 to 110 mph. Roofs severely stripped; mobile
homes overturned or badly damaged; loss of exterior doors; windows and other glass
broken.
EF2: Considerable damage (24%). Wind 111 to 135 mph. Roofs torn off well-
constructed houses; foundations of frame homes shifted; mobile homes completely
destroyed; large trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated; cars lifted off
ground.
EF3: Severe damage (6%). Wind 136 to 165 mph. Entire stories of well-constructed
houses destroyed; severe damage to large buildings such as shopping malls; trains
overturned; trees debarked; heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown; structures with
weak foundations blown away some distance.
EF4: Devastating damage (2%). Wind 166 to 200 mph. Well-constructed houses and
whole frame houses completely leveled; cars thrown and small missiles generated.
EF-5: Incredible damage (less than 1%). Wind above 200 mph. Strong frame houses
leveled off foundations and swept away; automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in
excess of 100 meters; high-rise buildings have significant structural deformation;
incredible phenomena will occur.
Tornadoes are further classified as follows:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 40 / 124
26
EF0 and EF1: Weak EF2 and EF3: Strong EF4 and EF5: Violent
Although EF0 and EF1 tornadoes are classified as “weak,” the 85 mph upper-end rating of an
EF0 tornado would be considered very severe if associated with a severe thunderstorm, and there
is potential for extensive damage.
2.32 Tornado History
The discussion of tornadoes in Hall County starts with the tornado outbreak of June 3, 1980,
which devastated entire sections of Grand Island – especially the City’s northwest and north
central residential areas, and the southern business district. The tornadoes killed five people,
injured more than 400, caused $300 million in damage. The destruction covered more than 150
city blocks, including losses to 357 homes, 33 mobile homes, 85 apartments, and 49 businesses.
This event has been turned into book and a television movie (“Night of the Twisters”), and was
studied by a special team of research scientists, including Professor T. Theodore Fujita himself.
This tornado outbreak captivated scientists because the storm included both cyclonic and
anticyclonic tornadoes.
According to the High Plains Regional Climate Center, Hall County has seen 60 tornadoes from
1953 to 2009, which places the County fifth in the State for number of twisters. However, on a
density basis which factors in the area of county, Hall County has the highest density of
tornadoes at 128.2 tornadoes per 1000 square miles. Second on the list is Thayer County at
97.43. It must be noted that these figures could be dramatically changed if the 1980 tornado
outbreak were considered one event rather than seven separate tornadoes.
3 http://stormhorizon.org/nebraska-county-tornadoes-ranked-density.html (1950-2008)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 41 / 124
27
Tornado Touchdowns, 1950-2012 (Source NWS-Hastings)
According to the National Climatic Data Center, there have been 75 tornadoes in Hall County
since 1950. The table below shows the details for 60 of these tornadoes, having stripped out the
recorded tornadoes (except for 1980) which are most likely duplicate records of the same storm.
Note that community-specific records did not begin until 1993. Also, when a community is
listed in the first column, it usually means that it was the closest community – not that a tornado
hit that community directly.
Location or County Date Time Magnitude Deaths Injured Property
Damage
1 HALL 05/29/1953 2130 F1 0 0 0K
2 HALL 06/20/1954 2300 F1 0 0 3K
3 HALL 07/09/1955 2300 F1 0 0 3K
4 HALL 05/20/1957 1700 F2 0 0 0K
5 HALL 05/04/1959 1500 F1 0 0 3K
7 HALL 05/28/1959 1720 F0 0 0 3K
8 HALL 06/17/1960 2320 F1 0 0 0K
9 HALL 08/23/1960 1500 F1 0 0 25K
10 HALL 05/13/1961 1920 F1 0 0 25K
11 HALL 06/05/1961 1753 F 0 0 0K
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 42 / 124
28
12 HALL 05/23/1964 2000 F1 0 0 3K
13 HALL 06/14/1964 0135 F0 0 0 0K
14 HALL 05/08/1965 1730 F4 0 0 25.0M
15 HALL 05/25/1965 1732 F 0 0 0K
16 HALL 06/13/1967 2000 F1 0 0 0K
17 HALL 05/13/1968 1710 F1 0 0 25K
18 HALL 06/23/1968 2102 F1 0 0 0K
19 HALL 06/04/1971 2015 F0 0 0 25K
20 HALL 06/06/1971 1615 F0 0 0 3K
21 HALL 07/03/1973 2010 F1 0 0 2.5M
22 HALL 09/02/1973 1730 F0 0 0 25K
23 HALL 10/09/1973 1730 F2 0 5 250K
24 HALL 05/16/1977 1930 F 0 0 25K
25 HALL 05/19/1977 1515 F2 0 0 275K
26 HALL 09/01/1977 2045 F 0 0 250K
27 HALL 06/03/1980 1945 F3 1 25 2.5M
28 HALL 06/03/1980 2000 F1 0 5 25K
29 HALL 06/03/1980 2005 F3 1 40 25.0M
30 HALL 06/03/1980 2046 F1 0 0 25K
31 HALL 06/03/1980 2116 F4 3 110 250.0M
32 HALL 06/03/1980 2125 F2 0 18 2.5M
33 HALL 06/03/1980 2200 F1 0 2 2.5M
34 HALL 08/10/1980 2135 F1 0 0 250K
35 HALL 10/16/1980 0130 F1 0 0 2.5M
36 HALL 05/10/1982 1603 F1 0 0 3K
37 HALL 06/24/1982 1605 F1 0 0 3K
38 HALL 06/04/1984 1911 F0 0 0 0K
39 HALL 06/11/1984 2020 F3 0 0 2.5M
40 HALL 08/05/1985 1950 F0 0 0 0K
41 HALL 09/04/1985 2154 F1 0 0 25K
42 HALL 04/13/1986 1635 F1 0 0 25K
43 HALL 07/11/1986 2110 F1 0 0 250K
44 HALL 07/24/1986 1500 F1 0 0 3K
45 HALL 08/17/1987 1910 F1 0 0 2.5M
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 43 / 124
29
46 HALL 03/13/1990 1720 F3 0 0 2.5M
47 HALL 03/13/1990 1744 F3 0 0 2.5M
48 HALL 07/25/1990 1625 F0 0 0 0K
49 HALL 05/29/1991 2142 F0 0 0 0K
50 HALL 06/15/1992 1820 F1 0 0 25K
51 Upland to Wood River 05/07/1993 1752 F2 0 0 5.0M
52 Grand Island 08/05/1995 1422 F0 0 0 2K
53 Grand Island 08/04/1996 07:00 PM F0 0 0 0
54 Cairo 06/11/1997 07:25 PM F1 0 0 750K
55 Doniphan 06/11/1997 07:50 PM F0 0 0 0
56 Wood River 05/02/1999 06:17 PM F1 0 0 100K
57 Wood River 05/07/2005 05:30 PM F0 0 0 0
58 Wood River 05/11/2005 09:05 PM F0 0 0 125K
59 Wood River 05/29/2009 1702 EF0 0 0 25.00K
60 Grand Island 6/17/2009 1938 EF0 0 0 5.00
5 205 $ 360.054
The adjacent figure is taken from a program called
Severe Plot, which is provided by the National
Weather Service. It shows the tracks of tornadoes
across Hall County. The predominant track is from
southwest to northeast, which happens because of
the way that fronts and the summer monsoonal flow
interact across Nebraska during tornado season.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 44 / 124
30
Previous Hall County Tornado Mitigation Actions
In Grand Island, West Park Plaza Trailer Park on West Highway 30 has a tornado shelter.
Additionally, many businesses will welcome people during a tornado if they are open for
business at the time; however these buildings may not be structures built to FEMA-recognized
standards for a tornado shelter.
Tornado preparedness, response, and mitigation are primarily responsibilities of the Hall County
Emergency Management Agency (HCEMA). HCEMA owns and maintains the sirens for all of
Hall County, and is working with the city/county joint board on a system of funding annual
improvements or expansion to the warning system. The following are activities that HCEMA
undertakes for regular education and outreach:
Participates in the annual Severe Weather Awareness Week by hosting local spotter training,
presentations to the public and local radio/TV media, placing articles in the local paper and
airing information on the City’s local government television station
Conducts test warning days by using all of their normal procedures as if there were an actual
event, including setting off the warning sirens
Completes annual education programs to grade schools each year, reaching approximately
500 to 600 kids. At these programs, they discuss severe weather, and where to go and what
to do if there is a tornado warning.
To maintain their StormReady® certification, Grand Island and Cairo are required to
continue their activities related to communication, warning dissemination, and monitoring.
2.33 Probability of Tornado Events
Although they do not necessarily occur every year, history shows that tornadoes in Hall County
are common and should be expected.
2.34 Vulnerability Assessment of the Tornado Hazard
Every structure in Hall County is at risk to tornadoes. According to the Nebraska Department of
Property Assessment and Taxation, this represents a value of $4,258,409,140 Appendix D
includes the structural inventories and vulnerability information for the communities in Hall
County.
2.35 Potential Tornado Mitigation Measures
Unlike floods, tornadoes and high winds do not occur in a defined area – the entire community is
vulnerable. Therefore, instead of mitigation, the primary focus should be on warning,
preparedness, and response. But there are projects that the city and homeowners can undertake
to reduce the damage from these events.
Goal 1: Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events
Goal 2: Increase Public Safety from Tornadoes
The locations of tornado sirens in the communities participating in this plan are given in
Appendix D. On these maps, a series of buffer zones (1/2 mile, 1 mile, 1.5 miles) is provided to
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 45 / 124
31
show different distances from these sirens. A half-mile area is a very conservative estimate for
adequate audible distance. However, tornado sirens are meant for outdoor warning only and are
not designed to wake up people while they are sleeping or to alert motorists or people who are in
noisy environments. In addition, the weather that is necessary for these sirens to function may
have loud wind and thunder noise which may affect how the sirens are heard. The decibel level
of the existing sirens should be identified and a maximum range of the sirens should be
determined to see if there is adequate coverage of the entire city. New sirens should be added as
new development takes place which is outside or on the edge of the existing tornado siren
coverage.
The same is true for tornado shelters. There is usually a concentration of potential public
buildings which could be used as shelters in the downtown area of a community. However, for
homes without basements, mobile homes, and businesses, there is usually no recognized shelter.
Major employers may have designated tornado safe rooms for their workers, but all businesses
and high-density residential concentrations would benefit from designating and publicizing a
shelter or other existing structure which meets tornado safe room specifications. An engineering
consultant may be required to complete this sort of assessment.
Objective 3.1: Increase public safety
- Action 3.1.1: Pursue a federal grant to retrofit public school buildings or other public
facilities with a tornado shelter or with higher-designed windows and doors. These
designs could also be incorporated into new public buildings. FEMA publication #361
should be used for constructing public shelters.
Objective 3.2: Increase safety of the general public in the business district and in parts of
communities with few shelter options
- Action 3.2.1: Identify and designate tornado shelters, publicize the locations of all public
tornado shelters to increase public awareness – perhaps with a sign on the building.
- Action 3.2.2: Construct tornado shelters for mobile home concentrations or in other
locations with vulnerable construction such as slab-on-grade.
- Action 3.2.3: In areas especially prone to damaging high winds, “hurricane straps” and
better-designed windows and doors can be used to attach the roof rafters to the ceiling
supports of the highest floor. This would need to be done as a building retrofit and would
not be expensive. New construction can use this building technique very cheaply.
- Action 3.2.4: Offer information to home owners about tornado safe rooms to be constructed
as a part of their homes.
Objective 3.3: Ensure adequate outdoor warning siren coverage
- Action 3.3.1: Perform assessment of the tornado siren coverage for communities, add sirens
if found to be deficient.
- Action 3.3.2: Codify regulations that require additional tornado sirens as development
occurs outside of current coverage areas.
Objective 3.4: Oversee adequate indoor warning coverage
- Action 3.4.1: Purchase NOAA weather radios for critical facilities (i.e., public schools)
- Action 3.4.2: Purchase or encourage non-public critical facilities (i.e., nursing homes) to
purchase weather radios.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 46 / 124
32
- Action 3.4.3: Educate a community’s businesses about purchasing additional warning
systems, especially in manufacturing facilities where it may not be possible to hear the
outdoor sirens.
Goal 3: Increase Public Education
There is a natural decline in risk perception in communities which have not seen a tornado or
high wind event in recent history. In addition, persons relocating to Hall County may not be
aware of the danger that severe weather and tornadoes presents, and they may not know what to
do in case of a warning. The same three-related objectives in the severe weather section apply
for tornadoes.
Objective 3.5: Help residents know what to do in case of a tornado warning
- Action 3.5.1: Residents should be made aware that tornadoes are possible in their
community. They should know where to go in the event of a tornado (i.e., to a shelter or
internal room/basement in their houses).
- Action 3.5.2: Educate homeowners about how to maintain trees on their property since it is
their liability if a tree on their property damages someone else’s personal property.
- Action 3.5.3: Have available information to educate homeowners about types of desired
trees for planting on private property. Information should include: insect susceptibility,
potential disease problems, blossom or seed characteristics, cold weather hardiness, and
other items.
2.40 DROUGHT
2.41 Background
Figure 4 below is the isohyet map of the State of Nebraska which shows the average rainfall
across the State. In an average year, Hall County will receive approximately 24-25 inches of
precipitation per year. In average years, this represents enough rainfall to prevent drought;
however, it is during successive years of below-average rainfall that droughts do have an impact.
Figure 4 – Nebraska Isohyet Map
(Average Annual Rainfall in Inches – NWS Hastings)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 47 / 124
33
Confounding the discussion of drought is the fact that there are different definitions of drought:
meteorological drought, agricultural drought, and hydrological drought. Meteorological drought
is defined usually on the basis of the degree of dryness (in comparison to some “normal” or
average amount) and the duration of the dry period. A meteorological drought must be
considered as region-specific since the atmospheric conditions that result in deficiencies of
precipitation are highly variable from region to region. For example, some definitions of
meteorological drought identify periods of drought on the basis of the number of days with
precipitation less than some specified threshold.
Hydrological drought is associated with the effects of periods of precipitation (including
snowfall) shortfalls on surface or subsurface water supply (i.e., streamflow, reservoir and lake
levels, ground water). The frequency and severity of hydrological drought is often defined on a
watershed or river basin scale. Although all droughts originate with a deficiency of precipitation,
hydrologists are more concerned with how this deficiency plays out through the hydrologic
system. Hydrological droughts are usually out of phase with or lag the occurrence of
meteorological and agricultural droughts. It takes longer for precipitation deficiencies to show
up in components of the hydrological system such as soil moisture, streamflow, and ground
water and reservoir levels. As a result, these impacts are out of phase with impacts in other
economic sectors.
Agricultural drought links various characteristics of meteorological (or hydrological) drought to
agricultural impacts, focusing on precipitation shortages, differences between actual and
potential evapotranspiration, soil water deficits, reduced ground water or reservoir levels, and so
forth. Plant water demand depends on prevailing weather conditions, biological characteristics
of the specific plant, its stage of growth, and the physical and biological properties of the soil.
Deficient topsoil moisture at planting may hinder germination, leading to low plant populations
per hectare and a reduction of final yield. However, if topsoil moisture is sufficient for early
growth requirements, deficiencies in subsoil moisture at this early stage may not affect final
yield if subsoil moisture is replenished as the growing season progresses or if rainfall meets plant
water needs.
The three different definitions all represent significant things in Nebraska. A meteorological
drought is the easiest to determine based on rainfall data and is an easier drought to monitor from
rain gauges and reports. An agricultural drought represents difficulty for Nebraska’s
agricultural-based economy and is also relatively easy to monitor based on crop viabilities for
different regions. A hydrological drought means that stream and river levels are low, which also
has an impact for surface water and ground water irrigators. In addition, in-stream discharges
that fall below a pre-required level also place the State in a regulatory difficulty with US Fish
and Wildlife and with neighboring states over cross-border flowage rights. Hydrologic drought
is somewhat more difficult to monitor since it requires some field verification of stream levels.
Nebraska is fortunate to have the National Drought Mitigation Center on the campus of the
University of Nebraska in Lincoln. The NDMC provides drought monitoring and technical
assistance to all areas of the world.
NDMC’s website is found at: http://www.drought.unl.edu/.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 48 / 124
34
Specific drought impacts by county are recorded at: http://droughtreporter.unl.edu/.
The impacts of drought can be categorized as economic, environmental, or social. Many
economic impacts occur in agriculture and related sectors, including forestry and fisheries,
because of the reliance of these sectors on surface and subsurface water supplies. In addition to
obvious losses in yields in both crop and livestock production, drought is associated with
increases in insect infestations, plant disease, and wind erosion. Droughts also bring increased
problems with insects and diseases to forests and reduce growth. The incidence of forest and
range fires increases substantially during extended droughts, which in turn places both human
and wildlife populations at higher levels of risk. Income loss is another indicator used in
assessing the impacts of drought because so many sectors are affected.
Although environmental losses are difficult to quantify, growing public awareness and concern
for environmental quality has forced public officials to focus greater attention and resources on
these effects. Environmental losses are the result of damages to plant and animal species,
wildlife habitat, and air and water quality; forest and range fires; degradation of landscape
quality; loss of biodiversity; and soil erosion. Some of the effects are short-term and conditions
quickly return to normal following the end of the drought. Other environmental effects linger for
some time or may even become permanent. Wildlife habitat, for example, may be degraded
through the loss of wetlands, lakes, and vegetation. However, many species will eventually
recover from this temporary aberration. The degradation of landscape quality, including
increased soil erosion, may lead to a more permanent loss of biological productivity of the
landscape.
Social impacts mainly involve public safety, health, conflicts between water users, reduced
quality of life, and inequities in the distribution of impacts and disaster relief. Many of the
impacts specified as economic and environmental have social components as well.
2.42 Drought History
In addition to differing definitions, there is also some debate about whether or not an area has
experienced or is currently experiencing a drought. Certainly, Hall County has experienced
times when certain water usages had to be voluntarily curtailed in order to maintain an adequate
water reserve. However, although these periods may have witnessed below-average rainfall, the
impacts were not felt much further than an inconvenience to homeowners. A significant portion
of Hall County – especially in the Grand Island area – has a high water table, which reduces the
impact of a drought. In certain areas, there can be standing water even if there has been no rain
for weeks. In Hall County, there have been no instances of drought which have caused drastic
impacts to the extent that land use regulations or emergency actions have had to be used.
Going back to 1993, the National Climatic Data Center shows two droughts: in 2000 and 2002.
Drought reporting is completed by regions instead of counties, so it is not possible to break out a
damage estimate for Hall County. For the drought of 2000, Governor Nelson estimated that the
total agricultural effect on the Nebraska economy was around $1 billion with direct agricultural
losses estimated at $240 million. Two regions of the State were particularly hard hit: near the
Kansas border by Superior and from the area north of Grand Island to north of York. In 2002,
The prolonged drought across central and south-central Nebraska was occasionally classified
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 49 / 124
35
into the “Extreme” to “Exceptional” category in the summer and fall. Most dry land crops were
near a total loss and there was some decreased yield with irrigated crops. Total directagricultural
losses was estimated at $480 million.
Update information for 2012 drought.
Previous Hall County Drought Mitigation Actions
Other than monitoring, there is precious little that can be done to mitigate a drought. As a result,
extensive drought monitoring networks have been established. The purpose of monitoring is to
see that a drought is indeed happening so that planners are then able to take appropriate actions
to stem the impacts before they reach crisis level.
The Central Platte NRD participates in programs which help with drought monitoring. The NRD
administers the Nebraska Rainfall Assessment and Information Network (NeRAIN) by supplying
individual cooperators with rain gauges. These volunteers read the amount of rainfall daily and
enter their observations into an internet-based reporting system. This network allows personnel
at all levels of government – primarily local and State – to evaluate emergency operations needs
while and to capture hydrologic data for future use. The data will also provide important daily
decision-making information for agriculture, industry, home water use, utility providers,
insurance companies, resource managers, and educators.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 50 / 124
36
2.43 Probably of Drought Events
It is probable that a drought will impact Hall County in the future.
2.44 Vulnerability Assessment of the Drought Hazard
Due to the nature of a drought and the uncertainty about when it begins and ends, a vulnerability
assessment is equally difficult to ascertain. One of the biggest drought impacts that could
happen would be to a community’s water system intake being rendered useless by declining
water levels in a hydrological drought. The entire population in Hall County is theoretically at
risk for a drought. However, there is an unequal spread of risk between rural and urban areas.
Most urban areas have a water system in place which allows for adequate distribution of water,
even in times when drought conditions prevail. Rural areas are more dependent on single-site
water wells. In addition, since water is the economic lifeblood of agriculture in these areas, there
is a much greater economic vulnerability to these areas. Since relevant drought impacts are more
community-specific than area-based, any drought issues are saved for the community-specific
reports found in Appendix D. There is also a general lack of funding for drought mitigation
projects. Most projects that are completed are based on crisis need, so federal grants with
application periods are not frequently used. Cost would vary greatly depending on scope and
type of project.
2.45 Potential Drought Mitigation Measures
The main drought mitigation measures can be grouped into five main categories:
legislation/public policy, water supply augmentation, demand reduction/water conservation
programs, emergency response programs, and drought contingency plans.
Goal 1: Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events
Goal 2: Increase Public Safety from Drought
Objective 4.1: Reduce drought impacts through legislation/public policy
- Action 4.1.1: Prepare position papers for legislature on public policy issues
- Action 4.1.2: Examine statutes governing water rights for possible modification during
water shortages
- Action 4.1.3: Pass legislation to protect in-stream flows
- Action 4.1.4: Pass legislation providing guaranteed low-interest loans to farmers
- Action 4.1.5: Impose limits on urban development
- Action 4.1.6: Provide incentives to grow drought tolerant crops
- Action 4.1.7: Change crop insurance and incentive payment policies to support more
drought tolerant crops
Objective 4.2: Reduce drought impacts through water supply augmentation
- Action 4.2.1: Issue emergency permits for water use
- Action 4.2.2: Provide pumps and pipes for distribution
- Action 4.2.3: Propose and implemented program to rehabilitate reservoirs to operate at
design capacity
- Action 4.2.4: Undertake water supply vulnerability assessments
- Action 4.2.5: Inventory self-supplied industrial water users for possible use of their supplies
for emergency public water supplies
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 51 / 124
37
- Action 4.2.6: Inventory and reviewed reservoir operation plans
Objective 4.3: Reduce drought impacts through demand reduction/water conservation programs
- Action 4.3.1: Establish stronger economic incentives for private investment in water
conservation
- Action 4.3.2: Encourage voluntary water conservation
- Action 4.3.3: Improve water use and conveyance efficiencies
- Action 4.3.4: Implement water metering and leak detection programs
Objective 4.4: Reduce drought impacts through emergency response programs
- Action 4.4.1: Establish alert procedures for water quality problems
- Action 4.4.2: Stockpile pumps, pipes, water filters, and other equipment
- Action 4.4.3: Establish water hauling programs for livestock
- Action 4.4.4: List livestock watering locations
- Action 4.4.5: Establish hay hotline
- Action 4.4.6: Fund water system improvements, new systems, and new wells
- Action 4.4.7: Fund drought recovery programs
- Action 4.4.8: Lower well intakes on reservoirs for rural water supplies
- Action 4.4.9: Extend boat ramps and docks in recreational areas
- Action 4.4.10: Issue emergency irrigation permits for using state waters for irrigation
- Action 4.4.11: Create low-interest loan and aid programs for agricultural sector
- Action 4.4.12: Create drought property tax credit program for farmers
- Action 4.4.13: Establish a tuition assistance program for farmers to enroll in farm
management classes
Objective 4.5: Reduce drought impacts through drought contingency plans
- Action 4.5.1: Establish statewide contingency plan
- Action 4.5.2: Recommend that water suppliers develop drought plans
- Action 4.5.3: Evaluate worst-case drought scenarios for possible further actions
- Action 4.5.4: Establish natural hazard mitigation council
Goal 3: Increase Public Education
There are no explicit objectives or actions for this goal; however, there is an implicit action
related to this goal for above actions which will require public participation – for example, the
voluntary water conservation.
2.50 DAM FAILURE
2.51 Background
Many of Nebraska’s communities were founded due to their proximity to water resources.
Often, these streams or rivers later needed a dam for flood control or a reservoir for a constant
water release. The Nebraska Department of Natural Resources performs annual inspections on
all high-hazard dams in the State. A high-hazard dam is one where a large discharge and/or
breach of the dam could potentially lead to downstream loss of life. High-hazard dams are
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 52 / 124
38
designed to the Probable Maximum Precipitation event, which is typically three or four times the
rainfall expected from a 500-year event.
In Hall County, the flat topography in combination with the high water table make dams for
flood control largely infeasible. There are only two dams in Hall County, and both are classified
as low-hazard dams. The information of both of the dams in the County are given below.
County Dam Name Stream Classification Closest Year
Community Completed
Hall Benton & Still Dam Dry Creek Low Abbott – 10 miles 1952
Hall Prairie Creek #4 Prairie Creek Low Abbott – 15 miles 1977
Abbott, Nebraska, is an unincorporated area a half-mile north of Highway 2 between Cairo and
Grand Island.
The only way that Hall County will be impacted by a dam failure would be from a failure of
Kingsley Dam, which holds back Lake McConaughy in Keith County. The dam is on the North
Platte River, which meets the South Platte River immediately east of the City of North Platte.
According to the Emergency Action Plan for Kingsley Dam, the only community which would
be impacted by a failure of Kingsley Dam would be the southern portion of Grand Island. Flow
released from a Kingsley Dam failure would travel the approximately 190 river miles to the
Highway 34 & 281 bridge in slightly more than 48 hours.
2.52 Dam Failure History
In the development of this mitigation plan, no record could be found of a dam failure in Hall
County in the last 40 years.
Previous Hall County Dam Failure Mitigation Actions
Since there are only two low-hazard dams in Hall County, there has been no dam failure
mitigation actions undertaken to date. Both dams are regularly inspected and are kept properly
maintained.
2.53 Probability of Dam Failures
The likelihood of a Kingsley Dam failure is exceedingly small. Both of the dams in Hall County
are regularly inspected. In addition, since both dams are classified as low-hazard, even if an
intense rain event were to breach them, there would be little to no damage downstream.
2.54 Vulnerability Assessment of the Dam Failure Hazard
Dam breach-routing inundation paper maps have been completed for the Emergency Action Plan
required for Kingsley Dam. The maps are kept on-file at the Dam Safety Division of the
Nebraska Department of Natural Resources. For security reasons, these maps are not made
readily available to the public; however, a general description of the impacts of a dam failure can
be provided here.
According to the Emergency Action Plan, the maximum depth of flooding would be 8.1 feet at
the Highway 34 & 281 bridge. The maximum depth is for the area closest to the Platte River.
Everything south of a general line from Highway 30 & Plum Street on the east to Highway 281
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 53 / 124
39
& Webb Road on the west side of town would be inundated to a certain extent. Properties closer
to the Platte River would be inundated to a deeper level.
2.55 Potential Dam Failure Mitigation Measures
Given the lack of risk and the routine inspections and maintenance requirements for existing
dams, it is believed that all mitigation measures are being performed that can be performed.
2.60 LEVEE FAILURE
2.61 Background
Following the levee-related devastation in New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina, the nation
has increased the scrutiny of levees, and especially on development behind them. With routine
maintenance, most levees will not offer a problem. However, even if a levee is perfectly
maintained, the development behind a levee is subject to flooding – and in some cases high
velocity flows – if a levee is breached or overtopped by a flood exceeding the levee’s design.
In Hall County there is only one levee, and that is associated with the Wood River Diversion
project completed by the Corps of Engineers in 2005. As designed, the Diversion is essentially a
two-sided levee which alters the flow of a 100-year flood to take it around south Grand Island.
A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) was completed for this project on October 19, 2004, and
extensive areas of ponding flooding mapped floodplain were removed across flood map panels
0010, 0015, and 0020 (they are too extensive to put in this report). An additional LOMR was
published on September 28, 2007, for the western part of the Diversion project between Highway
281 and the actual diversion point.
2.62 Levee Failure History
Since its completion in 2005, the Wood River Diversion has not failed over been overtopped.
On the contrary – in a major flood event in May of 2005, the Diversion performed as designed,
saving southern Grand Island from a repeat of the 1967 flood. The Corps of Engineers estimated
that the completed project essentially paid for itself from this event.
2.63 Probability of Levee Failures
It is extremely unlikely that the Wood River Diversion will fail. The more likely scenario would
be an overtopping from a major rainfall event in excess of the project design. The Corps of
Engineers, Central Platte NRD, and the City of Grand Island will ensure that the Diversion
project is maintained.
2.64 Vulnerability Assessment of the Levee Failure Hazard
According to the structural inventory completed by the Corps of Engineers, 209 structures are
protected by the Wood River Diversion project. This represents 0.9% of the total structures in
Grand Island. The Corps of Engineers has determined the valuation of structures protected by
the Diversion as $40,860,840, or 2.2% of the City’s valuation.
2.65 Potential Levee Failure Mitigation Measures
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 54 / 124
40
Given the lack of risk and the routine inspections and maintenance requirements for existing
dams, it is believed that all mitigation measures are being performed that can be performed.
2.70 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND HAZARD VULNERABILITY
Future development is a matter better reserved for the specific communities, as given in
Appendix D.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 55 / 124
41
Chapter 3 – Public Participation on Plan Revision
The Hall County Emergency Management is lead agency in the planning issues. All of the
meetings were open to the public and properly noticed according to the Open Meetings Act of
the State of Nebraska (NEB. REV. STAT. §§ 84-1407 TO 84-1414).
Present at the initial public meeting on June 5, 2013, were representatives from the Hall County
Emergency Management Agency, Regional Planning Commission, community elected officials,
school districts and citizens. See the sign-in sheet and newspaper article in Appendix C for
documentation.
In place of a second public meeting, this plan used the public input system available at the local
level through the public hearing process. The Hall County Regional Planning Commission heard
discussion of the plan’s findings and recommended that the mitigation plan be adopted. Local
governments were notified by letter from NDNR of the projects identified by their community
representatives in the initial public meeting. A letter was also sent to the Hall County
Emergency Management Agency for additional review. In the letter, communities and reviewers
were asked if the projects listed were still an adequate representation of their hazard mitigation
goals. In addition, local governments were also requested to prioritize their projects. The
adoption by each participating community took place after the respective city councils or village
boards had worked through the public hearing process.
To fulfill the adjacent jurisdictions review requirement, the initial draft of the Hall County plan
was sent to the Central Platte Natural Resources District for comments. Hall County is
surrounded by counties in the same NRD.
Jon Rosenlund, Director of Emergency Management for the City of Grand Island and Hall
County, revised this plan following its development by the NDNR in 2007. The plan was
originally adopted by the various Hall County jurisdictions through 2008.
Prior to submitting the final draft of the plan for comments, NDNR submitted the draft to FEMA
for a “Conditional Approval Pending Adoption” determination. Once received, this plan revision
was adopted by the Hall County Regional Planning Commission [insert date]. Documentation
showing the adoption at the County level is given as the first page of this report. Local
community adoption of their sections of the plan took place after NDNR received and made the
comments requested from each community. The local adoptions took place on different dates.
Local adoption resolutions are given as the last page for each community in the community-
specific portion of the plan in Appendix D.
Subsequent evaluations and updating of the plan will involve public display advertisements in
the local newspaper or other public notices. The plan will be reviewed and revised as necessary
every five years or after a Federally-declared disaster.
Plans and Other Information Used in the Development of this Plan
City of Grand Island Comprehensive Plan
Information: Future development areas
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 56 / 124
42
City of Grand Island Flood Insurance Study, FEMA. September 2, 1982.
Information: Flood history, boundary, and statistics
City of Wood River Flood Insurance Study, FEMA. June 3, 1986.
Information: Flood history, boundary, and statistics
High Plains Regional Climate Center: http://www.hprcc.unl.edu
National Arbor Day Foundation – Tree City USA website located at:
http://www.arborday.org/programs/treeCityUSA.cfm
Information: Tree City USA information
National Climate Data Center searchable severe weather database located at:
http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent~storms
Information: All-hazard statistics
Nebraska Department of Property and Taxation: http://pat.nol.org
Nebraska flood data, Nebraska Department of Natural Resources spreadsheet.
Information: Historic flood events in Nebraska
Our Town Nebraska ----- “Nebraska…Our Towns” Taylor Publishing, Dallas, TX. 1990.
Also: http://casde.unl.edu/history/
Information: Historic community information
Population statistics from:
http://factfinder.census.gov
http://www.dnr.state.ne.us/databank/census/Ne00-90Villagerank.pdf
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 57 / 124
43
Chapter 4 – Implementation
Hall County will implement this plan by the methods outlined in this chapter. In addition to a
positive benefit-cost ratio, projects will be prioritized and selected for implementation based on
community goals, planning objectives, funding availability, environmental concerns, and public
support. Projects sponsored for implementation by the County or by a participating community
will follow a public process.
Determining which projects should be submitted for funding will be based on a FEMA-approved
cost-benefit method. This means that proposed projects would need to be reviewed for cost
effectiveness with the assistance of state emergency management or floodplain management
personnel. In addition to a positive cost-benefit ratio, projects will be prioritized and selected for
implementation based on community goals, planning objectives, funding availability,
environmental concerns, and public support.
At its discretion, the County may choose to not implement any of the proposed mitigation
projects at this time with the realization that future events may change this stance as well as the
prioritization of projects.
The Hall County Regional Planning Commission reviewed the following projects for a
recommendation on which projects should receive the highest priority. The County is
responsible for making the final decision on which projects are submitted to the appropriate
funding agency/program for funding. Unless otherwise decided for specific projects, the County
will be the agency responsible for project administration. These projects are those which the
County would like to undertake if funding becomes available. Community-specific projects are
separate (but which may have the County as a sponsor) and are listed in their specific-
community sections in Appendix D.
In the plan, several potential mitigation projects are identified. This plan is not designed to have
an all-inclusive list of projects, so the plan should be revised and updated as new projects are
identified and prioritized by the County or its participating communities. During the planning
process, the County heard the range of potential mitigation options available to them, and
identified and prioritized the projects listed below. All mitigation options were considered and
no options were thrown out – instead, they were ranked into three groups: a higher-priority,
medium-priority, and lower-priority. The public had the opportunity to comment on priorities in
the public hearing in September 3, 2008. Within each category, the projects are not further
prioritized from highest-to-lowest priority because it was believed that all projects within each
category were equally important.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 58 / 124
44
Recommendations & Project Update
HIGHER PRIORITY PROJECTS
Emergency Backup Power Inventory for Critical Facilities
Many of the critical facilities in Hall County have emergency backup power capability.
However, an inventory is needed to determine which emergency shelters, emergency responder
facilities, vulnerable populations, and other critical facilities are in need of emergency backup
capability.
Potential funding sources: Hall County Emergency Management Agency – staff time.
PROJECT UPDATE – COMPLETE: A detailed list of critical facilities in Hall County has been
assembled which includes information regarding emergency backup power for each facility.
Emergency Backup Power
As witnessed in the major ice storm disaster of December, 2006, entire communities can be left
without power for weeks. When a severe winter storm knocks out power, this is also a time
when people – especially vulnerable populations – need access to heat and when critical facilities
like hospitals need to be able to meet any critical care needs. Large emergency generators can be
used to supply power directly to a community’s electric grid until outside power can be restored.
Also, critical facilities should have emergency backup power capability of their own, not only to
be ensure they are able to operate as intended, but also to function as emergency warming
centers in extreme cases.
Potential funding sources: The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) is a post-disaster
funding program from FEMA. Projects must be identified in this mitigation plan, and these
funds will supply up to 75% of the total project cost.
PROJECT UPDATE – IN PROGRESS: A number of critical facilities have installed or upgraded
emergency backup power. Progress will be determined by the availability of funds both at the
local level and through grant resources.
Drainage Improvements
Stormwater problems are common in the flat portions of Hall County, especially in the
developed areas of Grand Island. The City and Central Platte NRD have been working to reduce
the stormwater problems by constructing detention basins west of the City. The flooding
dynamics will continue to change as additional construction occurs around the fringes of existing
development.
Potential funding sources:
1. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds are available through the Nebraska
Department of Economic Development for planning. Drainage studies and
improvements are eligible for funding as long as the City meets low-to-moderate income
requirements. Applications are always open, but there are two funding cycles each year.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 59 / 124
45
2. The Central Platte Natural Resources District has funded drainage improvements in the
County.
3. The Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program and Pre-Disaster Mitigation program
through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives annual
allocations for projects. The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) is a post-
disaster funding program, also from FEMA. For all of these programs, projects must be
identified in this mitigation plan, and these funds will supply up to 75% of the total
project cost.
PROJECT UPDATE – IN PROGRESS: Talk to Nabity, Sekutera and CPNRD.
Floodplain Management
Although not commonly viewed as mitigation, effective floodplain management is the most
powerful tool in preventing unwise development in floodprone areas. Every community in Hall
County – including Hall County – already participates in the National Flood Insurance Program.
These communities will continue to participate and will be able to turn to the Nebraska
Department of Natural Resources for technical assistance with specific problems and issues. The
main responsibility for the administration of the local floodplain management ordinance has to
do with the various aspects of reviewing and issuing floodplain development permits. If there is
no or very little floodplain area in a community’s jurisdiction or if there is no or very little
growth, a community’s administration responsibilities in the NFIP will be extremely easy.
Also in the floodplain management category, downstream zoning of dams is idea whose time has
come. As a result of the Safety of Dams and Reservoirs Act passed by the Nebraska Unicameral
in 2005, zoning of areas downstream of low and significant hazards dams is now possible. The
intent is to allow development to be regulated and restricted in these areas since population
moving in below a low hazard dam will cause it to be reclassified as a high hazard dam. When
this happens, the dam owner would be responsible to undertake costly construction actions to
raise the height of the dam, improve the dam to high-hazard specifications, and to ensure regular
maintenance and inspections.
Potential funding sources: There is no expense to communities to participate in the NFIP
program other than personnel time to administer the program at the local level. Communities are
also encouraged to pass zoning regulations for areas downstream of low-hazard and significant-
hazard dams.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: Hall County and all its municipalities continue to
participate in the NFIP through the Regional Planning Department.
Flood Control
Flood control and flood damage reduction is one of the primary responsibilities of the Central
Platte NRD. Since the NRD was created in 1972, it has constructed numerous flood damage
reduction projects in the Hall County. As the population of the County – especially in and
around Grand Island – continues to increase and the area of development expands, the need for
flood damage reduction measures also increases. The Wood River Diversion project is an
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 60 / 124
46
example of a completed flood control project and the Prairie/Moores/Silver Creek project is one
currently being worked on.
Potential funding sources: Corps of Engineers, Central Platte Natural Resources District, Natural
Resources Development Fund through the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.
PROJECT UPDATE – IN PROGRESS: Prairie/Moore/Silver update
Reverse 9-1-1 or New Technology for Warning Dissemination
Reverse 9-1-1 is a system which allows a central location like the 9-1-1 call center or Emergency
Operations Center to automatically dial a pre-set list of telephone numbers and issue a recorded
warning message. In addition, new technologies are being developed which allow this type of
reverse warning system to be put in place with cellular telephones customers, targeted personnel,
and geographically targeted populations. These types of warning systems have being
implemented on many university and college campuses in light of shootings. In these reverse
warning situations, students were informed not to come to the campus or to stay where they were
until the situation had been resolved. Essentially, these warning systems would be used when
there is an immediate need for a warning when there is not enough time for people to get to a
television or radio.
Potential funding sources: US Department of Homeland Security, Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program set-aside funds, Hall County Emergency Management Agency, private through
telephone companies.
PROJECT UPDATE – COMPLETED: The Emergency Management Department has contracted
with the Nebraska OCIO for emergency telephone notification. The GI-Hall Alert system
provides voice, text and email notifications using a combination of public sign ups (cellular
phones/emails) and the 911 landline database. The system has been used on several occasions to
warn and inform the public with positive results.
Purchase NOAA Weather Radio for Critical Facilities
Weather radios are inexpensive enough that communities could purchase them for public critical
facilities, such as schools and hospitals. Communities can encourage local businesses to
purchase radios, especially elderly care facilities and noisy manufacturing plants which either
need to be sure to receive warnings or may not be able to hear outdoor warning sirens.
Potential funding sources: A brief online search of sites which offer NOAA Weather Radios for
sale show several options with the average price being about $30-50. Depending on how many
radios communities would need for critical public facilities, they might be able to purchase them.
Some of Nebraska’s emergency management agencies have acquired weather radios at a
discounted cost and have distributed them in interested communities. The Hall County
Emergency Management Agency could perform a similar service. They are also eligible for
FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program set-aside funds if they are purchased for critical
facilities.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 61 / 124
47
PROJECT UPDATE – COMPLETED: The Emergency Management Department has purchased
and installed NOAA radios in City and County buildings and ensured their proper operation
during installation. Maintenance of these NOAA radios is the responsibility of each specific
department.
NOAA Weather Radio Public Education
The public may not be aware that weather warnings are available to them by purchasing an
inexpensive weather radio. The cost for new radios is about $30 and they have the capability to
weed out warnings for unneeded counties. The Hall County Emergency Management Agency
can educate the public about these radios in their educational/outreach programs. Grand Island
was a Project Impact community in the late 1990s, and they used those grant funds to purchase
and hand out several thousand weather radios.
Potential funding sources: Hall County Emergency Management, no cost for education.
Homeowners.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: The Emergency Management Department provides
information and educational material regarding NOAA weather radios through pamphlets,
handouts, online resources, local media releases and interviews, and at various public events.
Public Tornado Shelters
Given Hall County’s history with tornadoes, public tornado shelters should be considered. They
are fundable under FEMA’s non-flood mitigation programs, and most states in FEMA Region
VII (Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas) have successfully implemented them. However,
Nebraska currently has only funded one public tornado shelter: a community building in
Cortland after the devastating Hallam Tornado of 2004. Shelters can be built in as new
construction or as a retrofit – retrofits are more expensive. The most popular public shelters
have been public schools and in areas of large concentrations of population in the summer
months such as fairgrounds and parks.
Potential funding sources: The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster
Mitigation (PDM) programs from FEMA. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
program can also be used to assist with the funding of public tornado shelters if the community
meets certain federal income guidelines.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING:
Information about Tornado Safe Rooms
Tornado safe rooms are areas built into existing or new construction which offer safety from
severe weather events. The information about these safe rooms exists and is available, so it
would be a matter of educating the availability of this information and encouraging property
owners and construction firms to consider building or retrofitting a safe room in their
developments.
Potential funding sources: Federal Emergency Management Agency (publications), Hall County
Emergency Management Agency, property owners – no cost for education.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 62 / 124
48
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: The Emergency Management Department provides
information and educational material regarding Tornado Saferooms through pamphlets,
handouts, online resources, local media releases and interviews, and at various public events. A
full-scale model of a tornado saferoom was constructed by members of the Hall County LEPC
and has been demonstrated at various public events.
Tornado Shelter Assessment
Identify and designate tornado shelters. Any shelters that are identified should be entered into a
GIS coverage for spatial analysis of shelter distribution and needs. Publicize the locations of all
public tornado shelters to increase public awareness – perhaps with a sign on the building. The
Hall County Emergency Management Agency should be the project leader for this activity.
Potential funding sources: Hall County Emergency Management Agency, consultants
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: The County does not maintain public tornado shelters.
However, each business and home is instructed on proper techniques to selecting shelter in a
tornado or other high wind event. This information is provided in a variety of media.
Requiring Power Line Burial
Communities can require new developments to bury power lines. Most communities already
currently have this as standard building code.
Potential funding sources: No cost to implement, but staff training and enforcement
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: Get comments by Utilities.
Power Line Burial Projects
For stretches of exposed transmission, distribution, and service lines which routinely experience
problems – whether by ice, wind, or other natural hazard – line burial is an option. Burying
power line is more expensive up-front, but essentially eliminates the potential for future line
outages.
Potential funding sources: FEMA’s non-flood mitigation programs, Southern Public Power
District, City of Grand Island, homeowners
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: Get comments by Utilities.
Warning Siren for New Development
As development takes place, it can be easy to forget about the need for warning siren coverage.
Communities should explore options available to them to increase warning siren coverage as
they expand.
Potential funding sources: Hall County Emergency Management Agency, communities, Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program set-aside funds.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 63 / 124
49
PROJECT UPDATE – IN PROGRESS: Using HMGP grants and local funds, the Emergency
Management Department has replaced or extended emergency outdoor warnings sirens in 10
locations throughout the county. New sirens feature a 70dB radius of 6200 feet, nearly double
the previous siren models.
Urban Tree Management Plan
For all communities in Hall County, it would be beneficial to develop a comprehensive urban
forest management plan, especially for public areas and in areas of communities which
experience tree-related problems. Smaller communities should request a tree inventory from the
Nebraska Forest Service which would give recommended actions to local tree boards. A
common misconception is that a tree management plan will mean that the community is liable
for damages if they do not take action based on the inventory’s findings. In reality, each
community is already liable for tree-related damages on public property. An inventory can be
completed which stipulates that only trees in public areas will be assessed. Outside of an
inventory or urban forest plan, homeowners should also know how to maintain trees on their
property since they are responsible for them.
Potential funding sources: Instead of assessing the need for financial assistance, interested
communities should send a letter to the Nebraska Forest Service, requesting a community tree
inventory. Tree inventories are a free service from the NFS and are beneficial in determining
tree-related activities which should be taken immediately or in the near future. Even in
communities that have had a tree inventory completed in the last ten years, an updated inventory
would be beneficial for local tree boards or other tree-related groups to assess required actions to
reduce vulnerability.
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: Get comments by Utilities.
Severe Weather Awareness Education
For awareness, severe weather safety tips could be made public by newspaper or other media
outlets. Such a campaign should include practical tips like staying indoors when lightning is
around and could be combined with awareness campaigns from other disasters, and could take
place during Severe Weather Awareness week every March.
Potential funding sources: This is another activity which would not need to require financial
resources other than staff time. Severe weather awareness campaigns can be done through
various media, in cooperation with the National Weather Service, Hall County Emergency
Management Agency, Central Platte Natural Resources District, Nebraska Emergency
Management Agency, Nebraska Department of Natural Resources, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and other agencies at all levels.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: The Emergency Management Department provides
severe weather awareness education through a variety of methods, including partnerships with
the NWS Hastings for annual Storm Spotter courses, public news releases during events such as
Severe Weather Awareness Week, Winter Weather Awareness Day, etc. The County
participates in the annual Tornado Test Drill and uses social media to collect feedback from the
community regarding the activation of local warning systems. Severe weather education has
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 64 / 124
50
been delivered to the public directly through lectures, volunteer training, public events, media
interviews, online through the Department website, social media, and presentations to
community and youth groups.
Flood Awareness Education
A flood awareness program would require the commitment of staff time from each interested
community. Agencies such as the Central Platte NRD, Nebraska Department of Natural
Resources, Nebraska Emergency Management Agency, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, and US Army Corps of Engineers could provide assistance and educational materials.
An on-going flood awareness education program might attract interested members of the public
to assist as volunteers.
Potential funding sources:
Most education and outreach programs would not require funding. The only commitment would
be staff time, time and money spent advertising meetings, and the cost of printing materials.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: Similar to Severe Weather Awareness Education, the
Emergency Management Department provides flood awareness education through a variety of
methods, including partnerships with the NWS Hastings for annual Storm Spotter courses, public
news releases during events such as Severe Weather Awareness Week. Flood education and
information has been delivered to the public directly through lectures, volunteer training, public
events, media interviews, online through the Department website, social media, and
presentations to community and youth groups.
MEDIUM PRIORITY PROJECTS
Since these projects are not of a high priority, potential funding sources are not as important to
identify at this stage.
Provide Tree Planting/Selection Information to Citizens
This information is already available from multiple sources. It would be a question of having
communities receive the informational brochures and to have the information available in an
accessible location.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: Get comments by Extension Office
Water Supply Augmentation
The Village of Alda and Village of Wood River both have water supply issues which could make
their citizens more vulnerable to drought than communities which have an adequate water
supply. The State has some revolving loan programs which could be tapped to expand their
water supply.
PROJECT UPDATE – IN PROGRESS?: Get comments by Utilities
Local Demand Reduction/Conservation Programs
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 65 / 124
51
When communities face a water shortage, it is important to reduce the demand on the limited
water supply. These programs could be as simple as restricting lawn watering or could get more
drastic depending on need. No matter what, a pipeline for disseminating the restrictions is
needed.
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: Get comments by Utilities
LOWER PRIORITY PROJECTS
Since these projects are not of a high priority, potential funding sources are not as important to
identify at this stage.
Acquisition and Demolition of Floodprone Structures
Some natural resources districts in Nebraska have existing floodway acquisition programs. The
Central Platte NRD could initiate a similar program. One of the benefits of a countywide hazard
mitigation plan is that all properties in the County will be eligible for FEMA funding from its
annually-funded mitigation programs. The City of Grand Island would be an excellent sponsor
for the repetitive loss property within its jurisdiction. This alternative was put in the “Lower”
category due to the low number of targetable buyout candidates in Hall County.
Specific areas targeted for acquisition projects are:
Repetitive loss properties listed for Grand Island and Hall County
All floodprone areas in the County will be considered for buyouts, as requested
Emergency Backup Power for Critical Facilities
This was rated in the Lower category not because it is not needed, but because an inventory
should first be completed to know where there a need.
Become a Tree City USA
Grand Island and Doniphan are already Tree City USA communities. Other communities in Hall
County can receive the benefits of becoming a Tree City USA.
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: Get comments by Parks
Hail Education
Some of the most damaging natural hazards events in Hall County have been severe hail storms.
There is not a lot that can be done to prevent hail damage to existing homes, but there are things
that can be done to reduce future damage to new homes and to vehicles. For new homes,
building options would be metal roofs instead of wood shake or traditional asphalt shingles.
Another building improvement would be metal siding instead of vinyl or wood, which can be
destroyed by hail strikes. Improved warning times would allow owners to move their vehicles to
a protected location.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: Similar to Severe Weather Awareness Education, the
Emergency Management Department provides hail awareness education through a variety of
methods, including partnerships with the NWS Hastings for annual Storm Spotter courses, public
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 66 / 124
52
news releases during events such as Severe Weather Awareness Week. Hail education and
information has been delivered to the public directly through lectures, volunteer training, public
events, media interviews, online through the Department website, social media, and
presentations to community and youth groups.
Secure At-Risk Development like Manufactured Homes
Mobile home tie-downs are an easy way to prevent them from rolling during high winds.
However, implementing a mitigation project for these types of buildings is problematic since
they are often rented and the owners lack the financial capability to install them. Under the
Project Impact program in the late 1990s, Grand Island offered these tie-downs as a project and
received no takers.
PROJECT UPDATE – MINOR: Get comments
Flood Insurance Education for Homeowners
Information on how to obtain flood insurance should be provided to private property owners – it
would be at their discretion to actually purchase the insurance coverage. Since the passage of the
National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, lenders have been required to determine if the
property to be insured is in a floodplain. If it is, lenders will require flood insurance as a
condition of protecting their loan. This is only for loans which are federally-backed such as
mortgages or home improvements. For this potential project, “education” could mean something
as easy as having FEMA flood insurance brochures available at city/village halls and public
libraries to inform the public.
PROJECT UPDATE – CONTINUING: Recent changes in the program due to the Biggert-
Waters Act is creating a number of concerns among home owners. The primary concern is the
increased cost of flood insurance for pre-FIRM structures. It appears that these increased costs
are resulting in more people attempting to have their property amended out of the flood plain
using the LOMA process or people paying off mortgages to avoid the increased cost of
insurance. If they are removed from the flood plain this does not create any major concerns as
their known risk is minimized and validated. If they pay off their loan to avoid the higher
premiums this represents an increased risk the economic vitality of the region. Not only are we
still at risk for flooding, we are at risk for the increased economic loss that results from the
combination of a hazard and an uninsured property. Self-insuring places value of the entire asset
at risk. The end result of the passage of Biggert-Waters in its current form may not achieve the
desired results.
Emergency Snow Route Development and Signage
The City of Grand Island already has this in place, which is the highest priority based on
population concentration, and the State takes care of clearing highways. Other communities
have a general snow removal plan, but do not have a route identified.
PROJECT UPDATE – COMPLETE:
Water Supply Emergency Response Programs/Drought Contingency Plans
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 67 / 124
53
Develop contingency plans, including worst case scenarios, in case of an emergency water
supply shortfall which cannot be met by voluntary restrictions to reduce demand.
PROJECT UPDATE – ???: ???
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 68 / 124
54
Plan Evaluation
Future plan monitoring, evaluating, and updating will follow this process:
1. Unless otherwise designated by the Hall County Board, Hall County Regional Planning
Commission (HCRPC) staff will oversee the plan evaluation and revision process. Alternate
staff could be from the Hall County Emergency Management Agency.
2. To assist with the monitoring of the plan, as a recommended project is completed, a detailed
timeline of how that project was completed will be written and attached to the plan in a
format selected by HCRPC staff. Items to be included will be: timelines, agencies involved,
area(s) benefited, total funding (if complete), etc.
3. At the discretion of the HCRPC, a local task force may be used to review the original draft of
the mitigation plan and to recommend changes.
4. The persons overseeing the evaluation process will review the goals and objectives of the
previous plan and evaluate them to see that they are still pertinent and current. Among other
questions, they may want to ask themselves:
Do the goals and objective address current and expected conditions?
If any of the recommended projects have been completed, did they have the desired
impact on the goal for which they were identified? If not, what was the reason it was
not successful (lack of funds/resources, lack of political/popular support,
underestimation of the amount of time needed, etc.)?
Have the nature, magnitude, and/or type of risks changed?
Have there been implementation problems?
Are current resources appropriate to implement the plan?
Were the outcomes as expected?
Are there other agencies which should be included in the revision process?
5. Any projects that have been completed since the previous plan will be noted in a “Previous
Mitigation Projects” section and removed from further consideration for new projects.
6. If no further action has been made on the recommended projects of the previous version of
the plan, HCRPC staff will document this fact.
7. Before incorporating the changes to the plan that are identified as necessary as a part of the
monitoring and evaluating portions, the public will be invited to comment through the same
process used in the development of the original plan: public notification through newspaper
article/public notice, public meetings, and by letter of invitation to relevant stakeholders.
8. At its discretion, the HCRPC may opt to use the plan evaluation, update, and revision
worksheets given in this plan in Appendix B.
For future reviews, the following minimum procedures must be followed:
Task A: Evaluate the effectiveness of the planning process.
1. Reconvene a Planning Team
2. Review your Planning Process
Items to Discuss:
a. Building the Planning Team
b. Engaging the Public
c. Data Gathering and Analysis
d. Coordinating with other Agencies
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 69 / 124
55
Task B: Evaluate the effectiveness of your actions.
1. What were the results of the implemented action? Did the results achieve the
goals/objectives outlined in the plan? Did the actions have the intended results?
2. Were the actions cost-effective? Did (or would) the project result in the reduction of
potential losses?
3. Document actions that were slow to get started or not implemented
Task C: Determine why the actions worked (or did not work)
1. Lack of available resources
2. The political or popular support for or against the action
3. The availability of funds
4. The workloads of the responsible parties
5. The actual time necessary to implement the actions
Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms
There is a lack of regional planning documents into which this countywide plan could be
incorporated. At the discretion of the participating communities, this plan could be incorporated
into the comprehensive plans of these communities. This would ensure that the mitigation
component of the comprehensive plan would be consistently revisited and reviewed. However,
care must taken so that this mitigation plan is reviewed and updated every five years.
Upon the local adoption of the mitigation plan, each participating community will make sure that
it adopts, and is enforcing, the minimum standards established in the building code used in the
State of Nebraska in the manner required by the State of Nebraska. This is to ensure that
life/safety criteria are met for new construction.
Any capital improvement planning that occurs in the future will also contribute to the goals in
this hazard mitigation plan. This is another item which may be administered at the local level
and is not necessarily overseen by the County. However, the County may be able to work with
capital improvement planners to secure high-hazard areas for low risk uses.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 70 / 124
56
Appendix A
Corps of Engineers Structural Inventory
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 71 / 124
57
APPENDIX B – SAMPLE PLAN UPDATE WORKSHEETS
Worksheet # 1: Progress Report
Progress Report Period: to
(Date) (Date)
Project Title: Project ID#:
Responsible Agency:
Address:
City/County:
Contact Person: Title:
Phone #(s): e-mail address:
List Supporting Agencies and Contacts:
Total Project Cost: $ Anticipated Cost Overrun/Under run:
Date of Project Approval: Start date of the project:
Anticipated completion date:
Description of the Project (include a description of each phase, if applicable, and the time frame for
completing each phase).
Milestones Complete Projected Date of Completion
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 72 / 124
58
Plan Goal(s)/Objective(s) Addressed:
Goal:
Objective:
Indicator of Success (e.g., losses avoided as a result of the acquisition program):
In most cases, you will list losses avoided as the indicator. In cases where it is difficult to quantify the
benefits in dollar amounts, you will use other indicators, such as the number of people who now know
about mitigation or who are taking mitigation actions to reduce their vulnerability to hazards.
Status (Please checks pertinent information and provide explanations for items with an asterisk. For
completed or canceled projects, see Worksheet #2 — to complete a project evaluation):
Project Status Project Cost Status
(1) Project on schedule (1) Cost unchanged
(2) Project completed (2) Cost overrun*
*explain:
(3) Project delayed* (3) Cost under run*
*explain: *explain:
(4) Project canceled
Summary of progress on project for this report:
A. What was accomplished during this reporting period?
B. What obstacles, problems, or delays did you encounter, if any?
C. How was each problem resolved?
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 73 / 124
59
Next Steps: What is/are the next step(s) to be accomplished over the next reporting period?
Other comments:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 74 / 124
60
Worksheet #2: Evaluating Your Planning Team
When gearing up for the plan evaluation, the planning team should reassess its
composition and ask the following questions:
YES NO
Have there been local staffing changes that would warrant inviting different members to the
planning team?
Comments/Proposed Action:
Are there organizations that have been invaluable to the planning process or to project
implementation that should be represented on the planning team?
Comments/Proposed Action:
Are there any representatives of essential organizations who have not fully participated in the
planning and implementation of actions? If so, can someone else from this organization commit to
the planning team?
Comments/Proposed Action:
Are there procedures (e.g., signing of MOAs, commenting on submitted progress reports,
distributing meeting minutes, etc.) that can be done more efficiently?
Comments/Proposed Action:
Are there ways to gain more diverse and widespread cooperation?
Comments/Proposed Action:
Are there different or additional resources (financial, technical, and human) that are now available
for mitigation planning?
Comments/Proposed Action:
If the planning team determines the answer to any of these questions is “yes,” some changes
may be necessary.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 75 / 124
61
Worksheet #3: Evaluate Your Project Results
Project Name and
Number:
Insert location map
include before and after photos
if appropriate
Project Budget:
Project Description:
Associated Goal and
Objective (s):
Indicator of Success
(e.g., losses avoided):
Was the action implemented?
IF YES
IF NO
What were the results of
the implemented action?
Why not?
Was there political support for the action? YES NO
Were enough funds available? YES NO
Were workloads equitably or realistically distributed? YES NO
Was new information discovered about the risks or community that made
implementation difficult or no longer sensible?
YES NO
Was the estimated time of implementation reasonable? YES NO
Were sufficient resources (for example staff and technical assistance) available? YES NO
Were the outcomes as expected?
If No, please explain:
YES
NO Additional comments or other outcomes:
Did the results achieve the goal and
objective (s)?
Explain how:
YES NO
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 76 / 124
62
Was the action cost-effective?
Explain how or how not:
YES NO
What were the losses avoided after having completed the
project?
If it was a structural project, how did it change the hazard
profile?
Date
Prepared by:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 77 / 124
63
Worksheet #4: Revisit Your Risk Assessment
If you answered “Yes” to any of the above questions, review your data and update your risk
assessment information accordingly.
Risk Assessment
Steps
Questions YES NO COMMENTS
Identify
hazards
Are there new hazards that can affect your
community?
Profile hazard
events
Are new historical records available?
Are additional maps or new hazard studies
available?
Have chances of future events (along with their
magnitude, extent, etc.) changed?
Have recent and future development in the
community been checked for their effect on
hazard areas?
Inventory assets Have inventories of existing structures in hazard
areas been updated?
Are future developments foreseen and accounted
for in the inventories?
Are there any new special high-risk populations?
Estimate losses Have loss estimates been updated to account for
recent changes?
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 78 / 124
64
Worksheet #5: Revise the Plan
Prepare to update the plan.
When preparing to update the plan: Check the box when addressed
1. Gather information, including project evaluation worksheets, progress reports, studies, related plans, etc.
Comments:
2. Reconvene the planning team, making changes to the team composition as necessary (see results from
Worksheet #2).
Comments:
Consider the results of the evaluation and new strategies for the future.
When examining the community consider: Check the box when addressed
1. The results of the planning and outreach efforts.
Comments:
2. The results of the mitigation efforts.
Comments:
3. Shifts in development trends.
Comments:
4. Areas affected by recent disasters.
Comments:
5. The recent magnitude, location, and type of the most recent hazard or disaster.
Comments:
6. New studies or technologies.
Comments:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 79 / 124
65
7. Changes in local, state, or federal laws, policies, plans, priorities, or funding.
8. Changes in the socioeconomic fabric of the community.
Comments:
9. Other changing conditions.
Comments:
Incorporate your findings into the plan.
When examining the plan: Check the box when addressed
1. Revisit the risk assessment.
Comments:
2. Update your goals and strategies.
Comments:
3. Recalculate benefit-cost analyses of projects to prioritize action items.
Comments:
Use the following criteria to evaluate the plan:
Criteria YES NO Solution
Are the goals still applicable?
Have any changes in the state or community
made the goals obsolete or irrelevant?
Do existing actions need to be reprioritized for
implementation?
Do the plan’s priorities correspond with state
priorities?
Can actions be implemented with available
resources?
Comments:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 80 / 124
66
APPENDIX C
Compendium of Public Meeting
Documentation
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 81 / 124
67
APPENDIX D
Community-Specific Mitigation
Planning Information
This section contains mitigation planning information specific to each participating community.
Communities are listed in alphabetical order. More detailed information for each community,
including: disaster history for each hazard type, structural inventory, and desired mitigation
alternatives – listed in order of highest priority to lowest. Local adoption documentation is
provided in Appendix E.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 82 / 124
68
Alda
Alda
2013
Dam
Failure
Earth-
quake Drought Flood
Summer
Storm
Land
slide
Winter
Storm
Tornado/
Wind Wildfire
Crime/
Terror Hazmat
Probability Unlikely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely
Risk Low Low Low Low Med Low Med High Med Med Low
Impact 0 0 2 1 4 0 4 5 1 2 1
Probability: Based on history, what is the likelihood this type of event will happen again?
- None, Low, Medium, or High
Extent – If this event were to happen, how extensive could the damage be?
- Zero, Limited, Severe, Full, or Unknown
Previous Occurrence: Is there an historic record of this type of hazard in the community?
The above table shows the input provided at the initial public meeting. Due to the geographical
proximity, the following hazard types were not considered due to there being no likelihood of
occurring in Nebraska: volcanic eruptions, avalanches, hurricanes, tidal surges, and tsunamis.
In the following sections, only the hazard types which have a significant likelihood of occurring
or have a reason to potentially occur are listed. These types are: severe weather (summer and
winter), tornado, flood, and drought. Although there is a small risk for earthquakes, wildfires,
and landslides, the threat and associated risk for these hazards is not high enough and there are
no realistic or feasible mitigation action which can be taken to reduce the level of risk. The only
dam failure which has any potential of impacting Alda is Kingsley Dam, which holds back Lake
McConaughy in western Nebraska. The breach route inundation maps for Kingsley Dam show
that Alda would not be inundated in the unlikely event that this dam fails; therefore, dam failure
is not further considered for Alda. The National Climatic Data Center lists no records of wildfire
for Hall County. Additionally, the citizens did not rank these hazards high enough to warrant
detailed discussion in this plan. This may change in future updates.
Disaster History
Because of its proximity between the larger communities of Wood River and Grand Island, the
Village of Alda is often lost in the details of hazard events reporting. Since natural hazards are
where people and weather interact, it should be expected that the larger communities will have
more events recorded. This means that even if there are damaging hazard events, if damage
occurred in the larger communities, it will be reported as happening there while there may be no
reports for Alda.
Flood
The National Weather Service’s Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service gives the following
flood categories for Wood River at the Alda gage and their impacts:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 83 / 124
69
Major Flood Stage 12.2 feet Record flooding, Highway 30 upstream of gage site acts as a
constriction to flood crests
Moderate Flood Stage 11 feet The left bank (north side) overflows, water floods lowlands
and county roads
Flood Stage 10 feet Minor lowland flooding occurs in pastures and farmlands
Action Stage 9 feet
Torrential rainfall of 5 to 11 inches on May 11 and 12, 2005, led to widespread flash flooding
throughout Hall County. This event was declared a federal disaster area by President Bush.
Wood River near Alda, which had been dry for three years, tied a record with a crest of 12.2 feet
early on the 12th. Records also indicate that Wood River flooded in 1967, 1968, and 1969,
although no damage estimates are available – if there was any. Flood crest data indicates that the
June 1968 flood was 11.7 feet and the March 1969 event was 12 feet. The National Climatic
Data Center reported a flood event for Alda on February 20, 2007. No additional information
was available – including no description of the event or damage estimate.
Severe Weather
On July 29, 1996, 1¾-inch diameter hail caused $2,000 in property damage and $20,000 in crop
damage around town. On June 15, 1997, golf ball-sized up to tennis ball-sized hail propelled by
60 mph winds severely damaged wide areas of western Hall County. Crop and tree damage was
extensive. In Alda, the magnitude of the hail was one inch, property damage was estimated at
$150,000, and area crop damage was set at $1 million. On May 21, 1998, 2-inch hail caused
$15,000 in property damage and an estimated $250,000 in crop damage. On May 21, 2004, 1¾-
inch caused $25,000 in property damage. On June 16, 2006, thunderstorm winds of 57 mph
caused property and crop damage two miles north of Alda.
On the severe winter weather side, Alda was without power as a result of the New Years Ice
Storm, which hit in late December, 2006.
Tornado
There are no records which indicate that Alda has been directly impacted by a tornado in its
history.
Drought
NCDC reports three drought events since 1950 for Hall County: in 2000, 2002 and 2012. Both
of these droughts appear to have been agricultural droughts with the most impact to growing
crops. Although Alda is situated in an area which has been directly impacted by a drought, there
are no indications that the Village has ever been materially impacted by a drought.
Likelihood of Future Hazard Events
It is certain that Alda will continue to be impacted by severe weather – perhaps as often as each
year. In these events, it should be expected to witness large hail, high winds, and intense rain in
the summer, and large snowfalls, ice, and bitter windchills in the winter. It is less likely – but
still possible – that Alda will be impacted by flooding from Wood River or by intense warm
season rain events. It is also less likely, but possible, that Alda will be impacted by a tornado.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 84 / 124
70
Past Hazard Mitigation Efforts
The Village of Alda participates and is in good standing in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP). The initial identification for Alda’s floodplain map was completed on June 25,
1976 with the Village participation in the NFIP becoming effective on June 20, 1978. The
floodplain map was rescinded on August 4, 1987, which means that it was later determined that
the low level of flood risk did not warrant the administrative cost to maintain the maps by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood mapping for insurance rating purposes has
been completed by FEMA and included with the package of maps available for Hall County
(Map Number 31079C) effective September 26, 2008. Alda continues to participate as is in good
standing in the National Flood Insurance Program.
As defined by FEMA’s repetitive loss list, there are no repetitive flood loss properties in Alda.
Vulnerability Assessment
According to an assessment completed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources in
March of 2013, there are 303 total structures in Alda. Figure 1 shows the structures broken out
by type, and the count is:
259 residences
26 businesses
14 (at least) out buildings large enough to be seen on aerial photographs
3 publicly-owned structures: the municipal building and school
1 church/non-profit buildings
According to the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and Taxation, the total assessed
taxable value for Alda in 2013 was $23,179,164. Broken out by significant property types, this
is:
Residential real property: $ 13,376,114 (57.7%)
Commercial real property: $ 3,732,122 (16.1%)
Agricultural Land and homes/outbuildings: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Commercial/Industrial personal property: $ 1,194,596 ( 5.2%)
Public service corporation real and personal: $ 101,336 ( 0.4%)
Railroad real and personal property: $ 1,217,490 ( 5.3%)
Industrial real property: $ 3,557,506 (15.3%)
Agricultural personal property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Recreational real property: $ -0- ( .00%)
The entire structure stock is vulnerable to the severe weather, tornado, and drought hazard. This
means that, as of 2013, there is $23,179,164 in at-risk assets for these hazard types.
In the structural inventory completed by the Corps of Engineers, seven properties were found to
be located in a regulated floodplain in Alda’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. NDNR’s
inventory in the corporate limits found no properties in a regulated floodplain. The valuation of
the seven floodplain properties found by the Corps of Engineers is $579,479, or 2.5% of the total
valuation of Alda and its zoning jurisdiction.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 85 / 124
71
Figure 2 shows the critical facilities, as identified by the Village and supplemented with various
federal databases. Critical facilities are those structures which will be essential for returning the
Village functions to normal after a disaster (“Civic”) and are vital for disaster response and
sheltering (“Shelter”). Critical facilities can also be economic (“Financial”) because the loss of a
major employer or the loss of the Village’s main source(s) of revenue will greatly hinder
recovery. The critical facilities identified are:
Civic: Village Hall/Community Center, fire hall
Sheltering: Alda Public School, United Methodist Church
Critical facilities in a floodplain: None
Figure 3 shows the potential ranges of the tornado warning sirens in Alda, with the yellow
shading being a half-mile from the siren and red one mile from the siren. As shown by the
figure, the entire development in the Alda corporate limits is in the yellow shaded area. It must
be recognized, however, that these are outdoor warning sirens which are designed to alert
residents who are outside and in close proximity to the sirens. They are not designed to warn
persons indoors at-distance, traveling in vehicles, or in noisy environments. In addition, a
warning system works best if there are operational redundancies – meaning that it is always safer
to have additional sirens in a network in case a siren malfunctions or is destroyed. An additional
consideration is that periods during which warning sirens are needed are often noisy in
themselves with high wind, intense rain, and hail which all act to reduce peoples’ ability to hear
the sirens. It is easier to hear a warning for people who are downwind of the siren.
Figure 4 shows the areas of new development which is most likely to occur in the next five to
ten years. No new development area is shown because the Village is currently landlocked by
agricultural uses with no foreseeable plans for this to change. The vulnerability of all
development for severe winter storms, severe summer storms, and tornadoes is the same now and
will be the same in the future. The only hazard which is able to be modified by human behavior
or activity is flooding. Since Alda is situated outside of a regulated floodplain, it is unlikely that
new development will take place in a floodplain area. However, since Alda is in good standing
in the National Flood Insurance Program, future development which does take place in a
regulated floodplain will be completed in compliance with the Village’s floodplain management
ordinance.
Mitigation Alternatives
Alda’s planning goals are the same as the goals for the county portion of the plan.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
To address these goals, mitigation alternatives were suggested in the public meeting and
prioritized by the Alda Village Board.
Prioritization
Alda prioritized the mitigation alternatives according to the “STAPLE(E)” procedure (Social
acceptability, Technical feasibility, Administrative capability of local government, Political
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 86 / 124
72
acceptability, Legal authority to implement, Economic justification, and Environmental
acceptability). In addition, alternatives were prioritized based on the community’s goals and
planning objectives.
At its discretion, Alda officials may choose to not implement any of the proposed mitigation
projects at this time with the realization that future events may change this stance as well as the
prioritization of projects. Projects sponsored for implementation will follow a public process.
1) Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program
Objective 1: Continue to regulate development in floodplain areas.
Funding sources and potential cost: No funding needed, no cost.
2) Reduce impacts of stormwater problems
Objective 2: Complete a drainage study
- Action 2.1: Given the extremely flat topography in the area, drainage will always be a
problem – especially for intense warm weather rainfall events. A drainage study is needed
in Alda to help the Village make wise land use decisions, to identify where existing
drainage infrastructure is weak, and to identify ways to address these weaknesses. A
drainage study has the potential to also identify good flood mitigation projects which could
be funded using FEMA’s mitigation programs.
Funding sources and potential cost: Central Platte NRD, Community Development Block
Grant, Village – cost varies widely on scope and community size
3) Increase public safety for tornadoes
Objective 3: Provide emergency shelter(s) to which local residents would evacuate in the
event of a tornado warning, especially those who live in vulnerable housing
- Action 3.1: Perform an assessment of existing structures to determine their capability to be
used as tornado shelters
- Action 3.2: Create public shelters by retrofitting or new construction. FEMA has
retrofitted schools and constructed all-new shelters in several places in the Midwest.
However, most tornadoes occur in late-afternoon to early evening when a school might be
closed for the day. Furthermore, it has been reported that public tornado shelters that are
left open to the public are not used properly, with problems of vandalism and use by
vagrants. At-risk structure types include mobile homes and slab-on-grade residential
construction which has no basement.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation program or Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program – cost uncertain and highly variable by scope
4) Increase public safety by having emergency backup power capacity
Objective 4: The New Years Ice Storm of December 2006 demonstrated that the
redundancy in Nebraska’s public power system is not adequate for major ice storm events.
As a result of this event, several communities in central Nebraska were without power for
over a week. When it became clear that getting power restored to these communities
would take longer than expected, emergency power generators were brought in. Situations
like this represent obvious public safety concerns from the inability to heat structures and
critical facilities, inconvenience for residents, and the loss of property and contents from
the spoiling of food, for example. Emergency generators could also be used in the
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 87 / 124
73
aftermath of other disasters to power the critical facilities being used to guide post-disaster
operations.
- Action 4.1: Purchase emergency backup generators
Funding sources and potential cost: Generators are eligible under Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program 5% set-aside funds. Under the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program, generators are
not an eligible project unless they are a part of a tornado shelter or another part of the
eligible activity.
5) Prevent the potential injury or loss of life in manufactured homes from high winds
Objective 5: Use tie downs to secure manufactured homes to a stable foundation, preventing
the potential for rolling.
- Action 5.1: The Village could pass an ordinance requiring all manufactured homes or all
new manufactured homes to be securely anchored to their foundations
- Action 5.2: A non-regulatory option would be to have the Village educate the owners of
these properties on the availability of techniques to make their dwelling safer.
6) Reduce the need for snow clearing in Village boundary streets
Objective 6: By installing snow fences along the corporate limits on the north and west sides
of the Village, some of the wind-driven snow will be trapped and will not need to be
plowed away. The less snow in town, the quicker all Village residents will be able to have
access to emergency treatment. Since the corporate limit boundary may be the rear of
residential property, the Village would need to obtain approval from property owners. An
alternative would be to acquire an easement between the corporate limits and adjacent
agricultural land.
- Action 6.1: Purchase and install a snow fence.
- Action 6.2: Acquire easement on which to build a snow fence or to plant a ‘living fence’ of
pine trees or other shelterbelt-type of tree.
Goal: 3) Increase Public Education
There are no explicit objectives or actions for this goal; however, there is an implicit action
related to this goal for above actions which will require public participation. Activities for this
goal are found in the County portion of this document since the likely lead or assisting agency
will be the Hall County Emergency Management Agency.
Implementation
To start implementation, determining which projects should be submitted for funding will be
based on a FEMA-approved cost-benefit method. This means that proposed projects would need
to be reviewed for cost effectiveness with the assistance of state emergency management or
floodplain management personnel. Unless otherwise delegated, the Village Clerk will be the
person responsible for project administration of any project selected for implementation. FEMA
has the authority to approve or deny mitigation projects applied for under their agency’s
mitigation programs.
Evaluation
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 88 / 124
74
In this plan, several potential mitigation projects are identified; however, it is not designed to
have an all-inclusive list of projects. It is designed to be a living document which can be adapted
to the landscape as conditions change. This means that this plan should be revised and updated
as new projects are identified and prioritized and participating communities. There is a
requirement to review and update this plan every five years. To do this, communities will follow
the same procedure that Hall County will utilize in its mitigation plan updates, which is detailed
starting on page 46 of the County portion of this report. There are also evaluation, update, and
revision worksheets which have been included in this plan as Appendix B to assist with this
process.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 89 / 124
75
Cairo
Cairo
2013
Dam
Failure
Earth-
quake Drought Flood
Summer
Storm
Land
slide
Winter
Storm
Tornado/
Wind Wildfire
Crime/
Terror Hazmat
Probability Unlikely Unlikely Likely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely
Risk Low Low Low Med High Low Med High Med Low Low
Impact 0 0 2 1 5 0 5 5 2 1 1
Probability: Based on history, what is the likelihood this type of event will happen again?
- None, Low, Medium, or High
Extent – If this event were to happen, how extensive could the damage be?
- Zero, Limited, Severe, Full, or Unknown
Previous Occurrence: Is there an historic record of this type of hazard in the community?
The above table shows the input provided at the initial public meeting. Due to the geographical
proximity, the following hazard types were not considered due to there being no likelihood of
occurring in Nebraska: volcanic eruptions, avalanches, hurricanes, tidal surges, and tsunamis.
Although there is a small risk for earthquakes, wildfires, and landslides, the threat and associated
risk for these hazards is not high enough and there are no realistic or feasible mitigation action
which can be taken to reduce the level of risk. According to the database of dams maintained by
the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources, there are no dams upstream of Cairo; therefore,
dam failure is not considered further for Cairo. The National Climatic Data Center lists no
records of wildfire for Hall County. Additionally, the citizens did not rank these hazards high
enough to warrant detailed discussion in this plan. This may change in future updates.
Disaster History
Severe Weather
July 22, 1995: 1¾-inch hail caused $50,000 in property damage and $2.2 million in crop damage
in and east of Cairo.
July 7, 1996: 92 mph (80 knots, as recorded) wind gusts in and around Cairo caused $40,000 in
property damage and $1 million in crop damage.
June 15, 1997: 70 mph winds caused $30,000 in property damage and $150,000 crop damage in
and around Cairo. The same event contained large hail (¾-inch), and propelled by the high
winds caused $100,000 in property damage and $1 million in crop damage in, south, and
west of Cairo.
June 20, 1997: 75 mph winds caused $40,000 in property damage in town, especially related to
falling trees and limbs.
May 26, 2002: Very strong winds developed northwest of Grand Island and roared at nearly 80
mph through the Village of Cairo. Windows were blown out of several cars and roofs were
blown off a couple of businesses. Property damage was placed at $150,000 with an
additional $100,000 in surrounding crop damage.
June 19, 2002: 12 to 15 large trees were pushed over by winds of about 60 mph.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 90 / 124
76
May 4, 2003: 2¾-inch hail blown by strong winds caused and estimate $200,000 in property
damage in Cairo. Severe damage was noted at the golf course and to nearby houses and
vehicles.
May 10, 2005: 1¾-inch hail propelled by wind gusts over 60 mph was reported north of Cairo.
Baseball sized hail was reported near Centura High School. Property damage was estimated
at $100,000.
Tornado
On June 11, 1997, severe thunderstorms developed in central Nebraska and moved south. These
storms dropped hail up to the size of tennis balls and produced winds up to 80 mph. Damage to
crops and property extended from near Ord to near Doniphan. Brief weak tornadoes were
reported near Rockville and near Doniphan. A stronger F1 tornado set down near Cairo and
moved southeast. A farmhouse was severely damaged. All told, property damage for these
tornadoes was placed at $750,000 with an additional $100,000 in crop damage.
Flood
The Nebraska Department of Natural Resources maintains a record of historic flood events. The
only flood record which lists Cairo occurred on June 25, 1968. In this event, the only available
information is that Prairie Creek crested at 9.7 feet at Highway 2 east of Cairo. The current
floodplain map for Cairo also shows the Village’s only regulated floodplain for Dry Creek north
of Highway 2 and north of Kansas Street.
As defined by FEMA’s repetitive loss list, there are no repetitive flood loss properties in Cairo.
Drought
NCDC reports three drought events since 1950 for Hall County: in 2000, 2002 and 2012. Both
of these droughts appear to have been agricultural droughts with the most impact to growing
crops. Although Alda is situated in an area which has been directly impacted by a drought, there
are no indications that the Village has ever been materially impacted by a drought.
Likelihood of Future Hazard Events
It is certain that Cairo will continue to be impacted by severe weather – perhaps as often as each
year. In these events, it should be expected to witness large hail, high winds, and intense rain in
the summer, and large snowfalls, ice, and bitter windchills in the winter. Although it is certainly
possible, it is less likely that Cairo will be impacted by a tornado. Given the lack of floodplain
for the main population center of the town, flood damage is less likely; however, intense warm
season rainfall events can cause stormwater-related problems due to the flat topography of the
area.
Past Hazard Mitigation Efforts
The Village of Cairo participates and is in good standing in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP). The initial identification for Cairo’s floodplain map was completed on May 24,
1974. The Village became eligible for the Emergency Phase of the NFIP on July 24, 1975 and
received its first map on December 12, 1975. The Village entered the Regular Phase of the NFIP
on June 20, 1978. Revised flood mapping for insurance rating purposes has been completed by
FEMA and included with the package of maps available for Hall County (Map Number 31079C)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 91 / 124
77
effective September 26, 2008. A new outdoor warning siren was installed in downtown Cairo in
2010.
Vulnerability Assessment
According to an assessment completed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources in
March of 2013, there are 375 total structures in Cairo. Figure 1 shows the structures broken out
by type, and the count is:
322 residences
30 businesses
14 (at least) out buildings large enough to be seen on aerial photographs
5 publicly-owned structures: the municipal building and school
4 church/non-profit building
According to the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and Taxation, the total assessed
taxable value for Cairo in 2013 was $33,650,698. Broken out by significant property types, this
is:
Residential real property: $ 27,301,936 (81.1%)
Commercial real property: $ 3,629,543 (10.8%)
Agricultural Land and homes/outbuildings: $ 35,499 ( 0.1%)
Commercial/Industrial personal property: $ 412,093 ( 1.2%)
Public service corporation real and personal: $ 217,178 ( 0.7%)
Railroad real and personal property: $ 2,054,449 ( 6.1%)
Industrial real property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Agricultural personal property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Recreational real property: $ -0- ( .00%)
The entire structure stock is vulnerable to the severe weather, tornado, and drought hazard. This
means that, as of 2013, there is $33,650,698 in at-risk assets for these hazard types.
In the structural inventory completed by the Corps of Engineers, 13 properties were found to be
located in a regulated floodplain in Cairo’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. NDNR’s
inventory in the corporate limits found five properties in a regulated floodplain. The valuation of
the 13 floodplain properties found by the Corps of Engineers is $706,665, or 2.1% of the total
valuation of Cairo and its zoning jurisdiction.
Figure 2 shows the floodplain of Dry Creek, as shown on the current effective floodplain maps.
Using the structural inventory from Figure 1, it can be demonstrated that there are four out
buildings and one business (Centura Hills Golf Course club house). Using an average valuation
for the different structure types, it is estimated that the total assets vulnerable to flooding in Cairo
is:
Average Approximate
Per structure Number Value Damage Value
Commercial: $ 113,000 1 $ 113,000 $ 29,380
Out buildings: $ 30,000 4 $ 120,000 $ 124,800
TOTAL $ 220,000 $ 154,180
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 92 / 124
78
For the out buildings estimate, an average value was determined based on the quality of structure
and size. For the residential and apartment estimate, the City assessed value average per-
structure was used. Commercial valuation is an approximation based on the size and quality of
the structure. After the total at-risk value of the structures was determined, the estimated damage
value was determined by taking that value and multiplying it by 20%. Then a 30% damage to
contents value was added to each figure. Both percentages are taken from the National Flood
Insurance Program depth-damage curves for two-foot depth of flooding, which would be the
maximum depth of flooding expected for most structures in the floodplain.
Figure 3 shows the critical facilities, as identified by the Village and supplemented with various
federal databases. Critical facilities are those structures which will be essential for returning the
Village functions to normal after a disaster (“Civic”), are vital for disaster response and
sheltering (“Shelter”), and are essential for public health and safety (“Lifeline Utility”). Critical
facilities can also be economic (“Financial”) because the loss of a major employer or the loss of
the Village’s main source(s) of revenue will greatly hinder recovery. The critical facilities
identified are:
Civic: Fire & Rescue/Village Hall building
Sheltering: Christ Lutheran Church, First Baptist Church, Cairo Community Center, Centura
Public School (Howard County).
Financial: Pump & Pantry, Pathway Bank
Lifeline Utility: Water tower
Critical facilities in a floodplain: None
Figure 4 shows the potential ranges of the tornado warning sirens in Cairo, with the yellow
shading being a half-mile from the siren and red one mile from the siren. As shown by the
figure, the main town of Cairo is in the yellow shaded area. The development north of the golf
course is approximately ¾ mile in a directly line from the siren. It must be recognized that these
are outdoor warning sirens which are designed to alert residents who are outside and in close
proximity to the sirens. They are not designed to warn persons indoors at-distance, traveling in
vehicles, or in noisy environments. In addition, a warning system works best if there are
operational redundancies – meaning that it is always safer to have additional sirens in a network
in case a siren malfunctions or is destroyed. An additional consideration is that periods during
which warning sirens are needed are often noisy in themselves with high wind, intense rain, and
hail which all act to reduce peoples’ ability to hear the sirens. It is easier to hear a warning for
people who are downwind of the siren.
Figure 5 shows the areas of new development which is most likely to occur in the next five to
ten years. The vulnerability of all development for severe winter storms, severe summer storms,
and tornadoes is the same now and will be the same in the future. The only hazard which is able
to be modified by human behavior or activity is flooding. Since the majority of Cairo is situated
outside of a regulated floodplain, it is unlikely that new development will take place in a
floodplain area. However, since Cairo is in good standing in the Regular Phase of the National
Flood Insurance Program, future development which does take place in a regulated floodplain
will be completed in compliance with the Village’s floodplain management ordinance.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 93 / 124
79
Mitigation Alternatives
Cairo’s planning goals are the same as the goals for the county portion of the plan.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
To address these goals, mitigation alternatives were suggested in the public meeting and
prioritized by the Cairo Village Board.
Prioritization
Cairo prioritized the mitigation alternatives according to the “STAPLE(E)” procedure (Social
acceptability, Technical feasibility, Administrative capability of local government, Political
acceptability, Legal authority to implement, Economic justification, and Environmental
acceptability). In addition, alternatives were prioritized based on the community’s goals and
planning objectives.
At its discretion, Cairo may choose to not implement any of the proposed mitigation projects at
this time with the realization that future events may change this stance as well as the
prioritization of projects. Projects sponsored for implementation will follow a public process.
1) Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program
Objective 1: Continue to regulate development in floodplain areas and adopt the Hall County
floodplain maps when they become effective.
Funding sources and potential cost: No funding needed, no cost.
2) Reduce impacts of stormwater problems
Objective 2: Complete a drainage study
- Action 2.1: Given the flat topography in the area, drainage will always be a problem –
especially for intense warm weather rainfall events. A drainage study is needed in Alda to
help the Village make wise land use decisions, to identify where existing drainage
infrastructure is weak, and to identify ways to address these weaknesses. A drainage study
has the potential to also identify good flood mitigation projects which could be funded
using FEMA’s mitigation programs.
Funding sources and potential cost: Central Platte NRD, Community Development Block
Grant, Village – cost varies widely on scope and community size
3) Reduce damages caused by downed tree limbs
Objective 3: Reduce the duration or eliminate power outages from severe weather. Overhead
power lines are vulnerable to collapse from icing in the cold weather months and from high
winds or tree limbs falling on power lines in warm weather months.
- Action 3.1: Initiate a power line burying project.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program could provide up to 75% of the project cost. The
remaining cost might be shared with the Public Power District, Village, or property owners.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 94 / 124
80
- Action 3.2: Write to the Nebraska Forest Service and request a tree inventory. An
inventory is especially helpful in mitigation planning for communities which experience
regular tree-related damages. An inventory can identify problem trees and recommend
changes to the way a community administer a local tree management program (i.e., through
a Tree Board or Park Board). Problematic areas of tree limbs with power lines could be
addressed as a priority.
Funding sources and potential cost: Free
- Action 3.3: The Village Board could create a regulation requiring underground utilities for
all new development.
Funding sources and potential cost: No funding needed, no cost.
4) Ensure adequate severe weather notifications to critical facilities
Objective 4: Purchasing or education of a weather radio
- Action 4.1: For Village-owned critical facilities, the Village should consider purchasing a
weather radio to be used in each facility for the rapid dissemination of a severe weather
warning.
- Action 4.2: If the Village has noisy manufacturing facilities which may not hear tornado
sirens, the Village could inform the owners of these facilities of the option that they could
purchase a weather radio.
Funding sources and potential cost: Village of Cairo, local businesses. Approximate cost
about $30 per radio.
Goal: 3) Increase Public Education
There are no explicit objectives or actions for this goal; however, there is an implicit action
related to this goal for above actions which will require public participation. Activities for this
goal are found in the County portion of this document since the likely lead or assisting agency
will be the Hall County Emergency Management Agency.
Implementation
To start implementation, determining which projects should be submitted for funding will be
based on a FEMA-approved cost-benefit method. This means that proposed projects would need
to be reviewed for cost effectiveness with the assistance of state emergency management or
floodplain management personnel. Unless otherwise delegated, the Village Clerk will be the
person responsible for project administration of any project selected for implementation. FEMA
has the authority to approve or deny mitigation projects applied for under their agency’s
mitigation programs.
Evaluation
In this plan, several potential mitigation projects are identified; however, it is not designed to
have an all-inclusive list of projects. It is designed to be a living document which can be adapted
to the landscape as conditions change. This means that this plan should be revised and updated
as new projects are identified and prioritized and participating communities. There is a
requirement to review and update this plan every five years. To do this, communities will follow
the same procedure that Hall County will utilize in its mitigation plan updates, which is detailed
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 95 / 124
81
starting on page 46 of the County portion of this report. There are also evaluation, update, and
revision worksheets which have been included in this plan as Appendix B to assist with this
process.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 96 / 124
82
Doniphan
Doniphan
2013
Dam
Failure
Earth-
quake Drought Flood
Summer
Storm
Land
slide
Winter
Storm
Tornado/
Wind Wildfire
Crime/
Terror Hazmat
Probability Unlikely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely
Risk Low Low Low Low High Low Med High Low Low Low
Impact 0 0 2 1 5 0 5 5 2 3 0
Probability: Based on history, what is the likelihood this type of event will happen again?
- None, Low, Medium, or High
Extent – If this event were to happen, how extensive could the damage be?
- Zero, Limited, Severe, Full, or Unknown
Previous Occurrence: Is there an historic record of this type of hazard in the community?
The above table shows the input provided at the initial public meeting. Due to the geographical
proximity, the following hazard types were not considered due to there being no likelihood of
occurring in Nebraska: volcanic eruptions, avalanches, hurricanes, tidal surges, and tsunamis.
In the following sections, only the hazard types which have a significant likelihood of occurring
or have a reason to potentially occur are listed. These types are: severe weather (summer and
winter), tornado, flood, and drought. Doniphan is situated at the drainage divide for the Platte
River and Blue River systems; therefore, there are no upstream dams which could fail and impact
the Village. Although there is a small risk for earthquakes, wildfires, and landslides, the threat
and associated risk for these hazards is not high enough and there are no realistic or feasible
mitigation action which can be taken to reduce the level of risk. The National Climatic Data
Center lists no records of wildfire for Hall County. Additionally, the citizens did not rank these
hazards high enough to warrant detailed discussion in this plan. This may change in future
updates.
Disaster History
Flood
There is no floodplain in Doniphan given its location on a drainage divide between major
Nebraska river systems. The only concerns for flooding would be from stormwater problems
caused by intense rain events.
As defined by FEMA’s repetitive loss list, there are no repetitive flood loss properties in
Doniphan.
Severe Weather
May 16, 1996: Winds of 55 mph caused $1000 in undisclosed property damage.
June 21, 1996: Hail of ¾ inch diameter caused $5000 in property damage in Doniphan.
August 17, 1999: Severe thunderstorms packing high winds and some hail ripped across Hall
County. Most of the region received 2-3 inches of rain in less than one hour. Intense
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 97 / 124
83
straight-line winds over 65 mph damaged homes five miles west of Doniphan, tossing grain
bins and out buildings like toys.
May 7, 2000: Walnut sized hail (1½ inch) fell near Doniphan.
May 5, 2002: Severe thunderstorms produced large hail of up to 2¾ inch diameter, causing
significant and widespread damage from Doniphan to east of Grand Island. Dozens of roofs
and windows were heavily damaged just west of Doniphan as tennis ball sized hail lasted ten
minutes. Total property damage from this event was estimated at $1 million.
March 30, 2006: Walnut sized hail blown by 75 mph wind gusts was reported northeast of
Doniphan.
April 6, 2006: Hail of up to 1 inch diameter was blown by 65 mph winds northeast of Doniphan
May 23, 2006: 1-inch hail fell in Doniphan, and the same storm brought 80 mph winds
December 30, 2006: The “New Years Ice Storm” left thousands without power. As a result of
this event, the Village hooked up a generator to the Village’s Maintenance Shop and offered
people without electricity a place to congregate, stay warm, and eat.
Tornado
No tornadoes have been found to have directly-impacted Doniphan; however, tornadoes are
common in Hall County, and they have been seen near Doniphan.
June 11, 1997: An outbreak of weak F0 tornadoes in Hall County caused $50,000 in crop
damage from Ord to near Doniphan. The closest one to Doniphan was 4 miles north of town.
October 29, 2000: A funnel cloud spotted one mile north of Doniphan was a part of a system
which spawned an F3 tornado that destroyed farmsteads in Merrick and Nance County.
Drought
NCDC reports three drought events since 1950 for Hall County: in 2000, 2002 and 2012. Both
of these droughts appear to have been agricultural droughts with the most impact to growing
crops. Although Doniphan is situated in an area which has been directly impacted by a drought,
there are no indications that the Village has ever been materially impacted by a drought.
Likelihood of Future Hazard Events
It is certain that Doniphan will be impacted by severe weather – perhaps as often as each year.
In these events, it should be expected to witness large hail, high winds, and intense rain in the
summer, and large snowfalls, ice, and bitter windchills in the winter. Although it is certainly
possible, it is less likely that Doniphan will be directly impacted by a tornado.
Past Hazard Mitigation Efforts
The Village of Doniphan participates and is in good standing in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP). The initial floodplain map for Doniphan went effective on January 24, 1975
and the Village joined the Emergency Phase of the NFIP on January 14, 1976. Participation in
the Regular Phase of the NFIP occurred on August 8, 1978. Doniphan’s floodplain map was
rescinded on August 4, 1987, which means that it was later determined that the low level of flood
risk did warrant the administrative cost to maintain the maps by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Flood mapping for insurance rating purposes has been completed by
FEMA and included with the package of maps available for Hall County (Map Number 31079C)
effective September 26, 2008. Doniphan continues to participate as is in good standing in the
National Flood Insurance Program. These maps show an area of floodplain which enters town
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 98 / 124
84
from the southwest at Pine Street and Highway 281, then turns north to flow just west of 6th
Street, then north between the Caterpillar plant and the residential development before
continuing north to the Platte River.
Doniphan has also been a Tree City USA community since 1995.
Vulnerability Assessment
According to an assessment completed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources in
March of 2013, there are 348 total structures in Doniphan. Figure 1 shows the structures broken
out by type, and the count is:
294 residences
34 businesses
9 (at least) out buildings large enough to be seen on aerial photographs
8 publicly-owned structures, including the municipal building, school, library
3 church or non-profit buildings
According to the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and Taxation, the total assessed
taxable value for Doniphan in 2013 was $39,237,524. Broken out by significant property types,
this is:
Residential real property: $ 28,490,948 (72.6%)
Commercial real property: $ 6,551,223 (16.7%)
Agricultural Land and homes/outbuildings: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Commercial/Industrial personal property: $ 1,821,936 ( 4.6%)
Public service corporation real and personal: $ 504,660 ( 1.3%)
Railroad real and personal property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Industrial real property: $ 1,868,757 ( 4.8%)
Agricultural personal property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Recreational real property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
The entire structure stock is vulnerable to the severe weather, tornado, and drought hazard. This
means that, as of 2013, there is $39,237,524in at-risk assets for these hazard types.
In the structural inventory completed by the Corps of Engineers, zero properties were found to be
located in a regulated floodplain in Doniphan’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. NDNR’s
inventory in the corporate limits found no properties in a regulated floodplain.
Figure 2 shows the critical facilities, as identified by the Village and supplemented with various
federal databases. Critical facilities are those structures which will be essential for returning the
Village functions to normal after a disaster (“Civic”), are vital for disaster response and
sheltering (“Shelter”), and are essential for public health and safety (“Lifeline Utility”). Critical
facilities can also be economic (“Financial”) because the loss of a major employer or the loss of
the Village’s main source(s) of revenue will greatly hinder recovery. The critical facilities
identified are:
Civic: Fire & Rescue, Village Hall building, Village Maintenance Shop
Sheltering: Doniphan-Trumbull Public School, St. Ann’s Catholic Church, United Methodist
Church, St. Paul Lutheran Church
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 99 / 124
85
Financial: Prairie Winds Assisted Living Center, Nebraska Machinery
Lifeline Utility: water tower
Figure 3 shows the potential ranges of the tornado warning sirens in Doniphan, with the yellow
shading being a half-mile from each siren and red one mile from each siren. As shown by the
figure, the majority of current development within the Doniphan corporate limits is in the yellow
shaded area. It must be recognized, however, that these are outdoor warning sirens which are
designed to alert residents who are outside and in close proximity to the sirens. They are not
designed to warn persons indoors at-distance, traveling in vehicles, or in noisy environments. In
addition, a warning system works best if there are operational redundancies – meaning that it is
always safer to have additional sirens in a network in case a siren malfunctions or is destroyed.
An additional consideration is that periods during which warning sirens are needed are often
noisy in themselves with high wind, intense rain, and hail which all act to reduce peoples’ ability
to hear the sirens. It is easier to hear a warning for people who are downwind of the siren.
Figure 4 shows the areas of new development which is most likely to occur in the next five to
ten years. New residential development is already taking place in the blue highlighted area with
road and sewer infrastructure in place. The two commercial areas in red are 80 acres (north) and
70 acres (west). The vulnerability of all development – existing or future – is the same now and
will be the same in the future for severe winter storms, severe summer storms, and tornadoes.
The only hazard which is able to be modified by human behavior or activity is flooding.
However, since there is very little developable area in or near Doniphan which is in a floodplain
and since Doniphan is in good standing in the Regular Phase of the National Flood Insurance
Program, any future floodplain development will be completed in compliance with the Village’s
floodplain management ordinance.
Mitigation Alternatives
Doniphan’s planning goals are the same as the goals for the county portion of the plan.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
To address these goals, mitigation alternatives were suggested in the public meeting and
prioritized by the Doniphan Village Board.
Prioritization
Doniphan prioritized the mitigation alternatives according to the “STAPLE(E)” procedure
(Social acceptability, Technical feasibility, Administrative capability of local government,
Political acceptability, Legal authority to implement, Economic justification, and Environmental
acceptability). In addition, alternatives were prioritized based on the community’s goals and
planning objectives.
At its discretion, Doniphan officials may choose to not implement any of the proposed mitigation
projects at this time with the realization that future events may change this stance as well as the
prioritization of projects. Projects sponsored for implementation will follow a public process.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 100 / 124
86
1) Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program
Objective 1: Continue to regulate development in floodplain areas and adopt the Hall County
floodplain maps when they become effective.
Funding sources and potential cost: No funding needed, no cost.
2) Identify and designate additional tornado shelters, publicize the locations of all public
tornado shelters to increase public awareness – perhaps with a sign on the building.
Objective 2: Provide emergency shelter(s) to which students or local residents would evacuate
in the event of a tornado warning, especially those who live in vulnerable housing
- Action 2.1: Create public shelters by retrofitting or new construction. FEMA has
retrofitted schools and constructed all-new shelters in several places in the Midwest.
However, most tornadoes occur in late-afternoon to early evening when a school might be
closed for the day. Furthermore, it has been reported that public tornado shelters that are
left open to the public are not used properly, with vandalism and use by vagrants as
problems. At-risk structure types include mobile homes and slab-on-grade construction
which has no basement.
- Action 2.2: Consider constructing tornado shelters for vulnerable construction like
manufactured home concentrations.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation program or Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program for construction only– cost varies widely based on scope and
design
3) Reduce damages caused by downed tree limbs
Objective 3: Reduce the duration or eliminate power outages from severe weather. Overhead
power lines are vulnerable to collapse from icing in the cold weather months and from high
winds or tree limbs falling on power lines in warm weather months.
- Action 3.1: Initiate a power line burying project.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program could provide up to 75% of the project cost. The
remaining cost might be shared with the Public Power District, City, or property owners.
- Action 3.2: Write to the Nebraska Forest Service and request a tree inventory. An
inventory is especially helpful in mitigation planning for communities which experience
regular tree-related damages. An inventory can identify problem trees and recommend
changes to the way a community administer a local tree management program (i.e., through
a Tree Board or Park Board). Problematic areas of tree limbs with power lines could be
addressed as a priority.
Funding sources and potential cost: Free
4) Ensure adequate severe weather notifications to critical facilities
Objective 4: Purchasing or education of a weather radio
- Action 4.1: For public critical facilities, the Village should consider purchasing a weather
radio to be used in each facility for the rapid dissemination of a severe weather warning.
- Action 4.2: If the Village has noisy manufacturing facilities which may not hear tornado
sirens, the Village could inform the owners of these facilities of the option that they could
purchase a weather radio.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 101 / 124
87
Funding sources and potential cost: Village of Doniphan, local businesses. Approximate cost
about $30 per radio.
Goal: 3) Increase Public Education
There are no explicit objectives or actions for this goal; however, there is an implicit action
related to this goal for above actions which will require public participation. Activities for this
goal are found in the County portion of this document since the likely lead or assisting agency
will be the Hall County Emergency Management Agency.
Implementation
To start implementation, determining which projects should be submitted for funding will be
based on a FEMA-approved cost-benefit method. This means that proposed projects would need
to be reviewed for cost effectiveness with the assistance of state emergency management or
floodplain management personnel. Unless otherwise delegated, the Village Clerk will be the
person responsible for project administration of any project selected for implementation. FEMA
has the authority to approve or deny mitigation projects applied for under their agency’s
mitigation programs.
Evaluation
In this plan, several potential mitigation projects are identified; however, it is not designed to
have an all-inclusive list of projects. It is designed to be a living document which can be adapted
to the landscape as conditions change. This means that this plan should be revised and updated
as new projects are identified and prioritized and participating communities. There is a
requirement to review and update this plan every five years. To do this, communities will follow
the same procedure that Hall County will utilize in its mitigation plan updates, which is detailed
starting on page 46 of the County portion of this report. There are also evaluation, update, and
revision worksheets which have been included in this plan as Appendix B to assist with this
process.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 102 / 124
88
Grand Island
Grand
Island
2013
Dam
Failure
Earth-
quake Drought Flood
Summer
Storm
Land
slide
Winter
Storm
Tornado/
Wind Wildfire
Crime/
Terror Hazmat
Probability Unlikely Unlikely Likely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely
Risk Low Low Low Med High Low High High Med Low Med
Impact 2 0 2 3 4 0 4 5 2 3 2
Probability: Based on history, what is the likelihood this type of event will happen again?
- None, Low, Medium, or High
Extent – If this event were to happen, how extensive could the damage be?
- Zero, Limited, Severe, Full, or Unknown
Previous Occurrence: Is there an historic record of this type of hazard in the community?
The above table shows the input provided at the initial public meeting. Due to the geographical
proximity, the following hazard types were not considered due to there being no likelihood of
occurring in Nebraska: volcanic eruptions, avalanches, hurricanes, tidal surges, and tsunamis.
In the following sections, only the hazard types which have a significant likelihood of occurring
or have a reason to potentially occur are listed. These types are: severe weather (summer and
winter), tornado, flood, and drought. Although there is a small risk for earthquakes, wildfires,
and landslides, the threat and associated risk for these hazards is not high enough and there are
no realistic or feasible mitigation action which can be taken to reduce the level of risk. The
National Climatic Data Center lists no records of wildfire for Hall County. Additionally, the
citizens did not rank these hazards high enough to warrant detailed discussion in this plan. This
may change in future updates.
Disaster History
Flood
On June 20, 1947, Wood River came up and flooded Stolley State Park. Water was over
Highway 2 for one mile. Damage was estimated at $5,000.
On June 10, 1949, $219,000 was caused by Wood River flooding. Woodland and Riverside golf
courses recorded significant damage.
The most extensive flood event to impact Hall County, resulting from a long period of excessive
rainfall in May and June of 1967. From June 7 to 15, more than 10 inches fell, but the main
culprit for the flooding was the 3.2 inches which fell on June 13th. The Wood River crested at
six feet (3.5 foot flood stage) and was flowing at 25,000 cubic feet per second. Three people
were killed, 1800 buildings were flooded, and 11,000 of the City’s 28,600 residents were directly
impacted. Prairie Creek, Silver Creek, and Moores Creek flooded 62 residences and 7
businesses on the north side of the City. Total damage in Grand Island was set at $6.25 million
($38.2 million in 2006 dollars). This flood event was a part of the larger Platte River valley
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 103 / 124
89
flood, which saw total damage at $49,309,015 – of which $40.8 million was private damage ($23
million agricultural damage, $12 million transportation damage, and $5 million classified as
“urban” damage), and $8.5 million was public damage.
On May 11 and 12, 2005, 7.21 inches of rain fell in a 24-hour period with 7.16 inches of the total
falling from 4pm on the 11th to 4am on the 12th. These rainfall totals eclipsed the previous 25-
hour rainfall record of 5.88 inches and the previous 12-hour rainfall record of 5.65 inches.
Officials from the High Plains Regional Climate Center claimed that this intense rain event was
equal to a 100-year storm. An incredible 6.38 inches of rain fell in the six-hour period from 7pm
to 1 am. Thirty-six homes were evacuated in Grand Island as flooding was rampant over the
west and north part of the city. The city's sewer system handled about 75 million gallons of
water, or about 6 times the normal amount during the storm. Many parts of the business and
residential districts sustained flood damage as the Prairie, Silver, and Moores Creeks flooded.
On the southern end of town, the newly-completed Wood River Diversion project prevented the
vast majority of the damage. Without the project, it was estimated that the extent of the 2005
flood would have equaled the 1967 flood.
On July 10, 2006, afternoon and evening thunderstorms produced heavy rains, which caused
urban flooding. Property damage was estimated at $20,000.
On July 29, 2007, thunderstorms 5.07 inches of rain on Grand Island. This caused flooding in
the northwest part of Grand Island with total property damage set at $75,000.
On August 22, 2007, flooding on the south side of town washed a car off the road into a ditch. In
addition to the heavy rain, 80 mph wind gusts, hail, and brief small tornadoes occurred in south
central Nebraska. Damage estimate for Grand Island was placed at $50,000.
June 2008 Flood from above
As defined by FEMA’s repetitive loss list, there are two repetitive flood loss properties with
Grand Island addresses although one of those addresses does not appear to be a valid Grand
Island address.
Severe Weather
There have been so many instances of severe weather events impacting Grand Island that only
the ones with significant damage or unusual weather phenomena are listed below.
August 5, 1995: 80 mph winds caused $100,000 in undisclosed property damage. Hail of 2
inches in diameter also caused more than $1.5 million in property damage.
June 20, 1997: A thunderstorm developed north of Kearney and moved east through Grand
Island. Strong winds, over 75 mph, caused property damage in the area set at $40,000.
July 7, 1997: 1-inch hail along with very heavy rain and high winds caused $150,000 in damage.
August 21, 1997: 1-inch hail broke windows and damage numerous cars. Damage: $100,000.
August 15, 1999: Severe thunderstorms early in the evening left a narrow path of wind damage
from south of Kearney to the Grand Island area. Wind gusts of 60 to 80 mph damaged
buildings, trees and downed several power lines. In Grand Island, a couple of garages were
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 104 / 124
90
damaged, trees uprooted and about 5,000 people were left without electricity for a short time.
Total property damage was estimated at $50,000.
April 22, 2001: a microburst near the mall in Grand Island damaged several trees, signs and
knocked over one light post. Damage was estimated at $10,000.
May 5, 2002: 3-inch hail devastated an area from Doniphan to east of Grand Island. Total
property damage was established as $2 million; however, it is unclear how much of that
damage occurred in Grand Island.
June 19, 2002: 70 mph winds tore the roof off the gymnasium at the R-1 school five miles north
of Grand Island. Damage estimate: $16,000.
May 4, 2003: Golf ball sized hail in Grand Island caused $250,000 in property damage.
May 13, 2003: Severe thunderstorms formed northwest of Grand Island during the afternoon and
evening hours. A sign was destroyed, minor tree damage was reported, and some small
sheds were damaged. Damage estimate: $100,000.
April 18, 2004: 60 mph winds broke a light pole at an auto dealership and damaged four vehicles
as it fell to the ground. Damage to the vehicles along was estimated at $14,000.
May 16, 2004: 70 mph winds caused $30,000 to trees and power infrastructure.
May 21, 2004: Golf ball sized hail in Grand Island caused $25,000 damage.
May 10, 2005: 70 mph winds near the airport destroyed a construction trailer. Minor damage
was reported southeast of town. Damage: $25,000. 1¾ inch hail caused an additional
$100,000 in property damage.
May 11/12, 2005: In addition to the intense rain and flooding, the severe storms also brought
large hail driven by high winds. Officials estimated that 2800 homes and businesses had
damage in Grand Island.
June 15, 2006: There were numerous reports of trees down blocking roads and knocking out
power. Some of the trees fell on homes. Damage: $20,000.
June 24, 2006: Penny to golf ball sized hail fell in and around Grand Island, causing $30,000 in
property damage.
Tornado
Grand Island has the unfortunate distinction of having been hit with one of Nebraska’s worst
tornado outbreaks. The outbreak took place on June 3, 1980, and the twisters devastated entire
sections of Grand Island – especially the City’s northwest and north central residential areas, as
well as the southern business district. Depending on the accounts, between 5 and 15 tornadoes
between 7:45pm on the 3rd to 1:30am on the 4th. The National Climatic Data Center reports 13
tornadoes with four of them rated as F1, three as F2, three as F3, and three as F4. The tornadoes
killed five people, injured more than 400, and caused $300 million in damage. The destruction
covered more than 150 city blocks, including losses to 357 homes, 33 mobile homes, 85
apartments, and 49 businesses. This event has been turned into book and a television movie
(“Night of the Twisters”), and was studied by a special team of research scientists, including
Professor T. Theodore Fujita himself. This tornado outbreak captivated scientists because the
storm included both cyclonic and anticyclonic tornadoes.
On August 5, 1995, an F0 tornado came within five miles west of Grand Island.
On August 4, 1996, a severe thunderstorm produced a brief tornado touchdown southwest of
Grand Island. Funnel clouds were also observed just south and east of town.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 105 / 124
91
On May 13, 2003, funnel clouds were reported in the Grand Island area, but no tornado was
confirmed.
Drought
NCDC reports three drought events since 1950 for Hall County: in 2000, 2002 and 2012. Both
of these droughts appear to have been agricultural droughts with the most impact to growing
crops. Although Grand Island is situated in an area which has been directly impacted by a
drought, there are no indications that the City has ever been materially impacted by a drought.
Drought 2012 Information from above
Likelihood of Future Hazard Events
It is certain that Grand Island will be impacted by severe weather – perhaps as often as each year.
In these events, it should be expected to witness large hail, high winds, and intense rain in the
summer, and large snowfalls, ice, and bitter windchills in the winter. Although it is certainly
possible, it is less likely that Grand Island will be directly impacted by a tornado.
Past Hazard Mitigation Efforts
National Flood Insurance Program
The City of Grand Island participates and is in good standing in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP). The initial identification for the floodplain map for Grand Island was
completed on April 5, 1974 and the City became eligible for the Emergency Phase of the NFIP
on March 14, 1975. Flood Hazard Boundary Map revisions were incorporated onto the map
dated September 3, 1976. The boundary map was converted to a Flood Insurance Rate Map on
March 2, 1983, which was also the date that Grand Island became eligible for the Regular Phase
of the NFIIP. Revised flood mapping for insurance rating purposes has been completed by
FEMA and included with the package of maps available for Hall County (Map Number 31079C)
effective September 26, 2008 this package contains all of the updates due to the Wood River
Diversion Project. Wood River Diversion
The Wood River Flood Control Project was dedicated in spring of 2004. The 300-foot wide
diversion channel diverts excess water from the Wood River and Warm Slough to the east and
into the Platte River. This project provides flood control protection for 1500 homes and
businesses. The project was tested by the May 11 and 12, 2005, flood event, when 7.21 inches
of rain fell in a 24-hour period. From a hydrological standpoint, this event would have resulted
in a flood similar to the devastating 1967 flood; however, the Project functioned as designed, and
flood damages were minimal for the protected area. The Central Platte Natural Resources
District estimated that the $17 million project paid for itself in this event, less than one year after
dedication. The project was sponsored by CPNRD and was funded 42.5% by CPNRD, 35% by
City of Grand Island, 11.25% Hall County, and 11.25% Merrick County. The project was
constructed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, and the Natural Resources Development Fund
(administered by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources) provided the 60% of the non-
federal share of the planning.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 106 / 124
92
Prairie/Silver/Moores Creek Flood Control Project
In May of 2000, the CPNRD and City of Grand Island contracted out to perform a detailed
hydrologic analysis of northern and western Grand Island. The analysis also included an
evaluation of options for reducing flood damages and to present a preferred alternative. An
engineering firm was selected in September of 2005 to provide engineering services for the
design and oversight of the flood control project. The flood control project is designed in three
phases, expecting to be completed in 2017. Construction of Phase 1 began in January of 2007.
The phases are:
Phase 1 – Silver Creek Low Land Stormwater Detention Cells
The first phase of the project is the construction of four large floodwater detention cells along
the Silver Creek channel with a total excavation near 4.5 million cubic yards of earth. The
cell design includes the lowering and re-grading of Silver Creek for more then two miles.
The detention cells will detain stormwater runoff in excess of the 2-year storm. A 3’ x 3’
concrete box culvert will be used as the outlet and will release the water from the cells at a
rate equal to the 2-year storm. A second 3’ x 6’ gated box culvert will be used for rapid draw
down of the cells. A berm is being placed around the cells, approximately 2 foot above
existing ground, to provide sufficient capacity to detain runoff from the 100-year storm with
a 1-foot freeboard.
Phase 2 – Basin Divide and Silver/Moores Creek Diversion Channel
A diversion channel that will connect Silver Creek to Moores Creek and a levee that will
prevent flood water from flowing from one basin the adjacent basin. The stormwater
released from the cells when combined with runoff excess, flows from the Prairie Creek and
will cause flooding within the city of Grand Island. This levee will be designed to meet the
requirements set forth by FEMA. A diversion channel will be constructed to divert water
from Silver Creek to the Moores Creek floodway.
Phase 3 – Upland Dams and Prairie/Silver Creek Channel
A series of upland detention dams and an overflow channel from Prairie Creek to Silver
Creek. The exact locations of the detention sites will be finalized in the final design phase of
this project. Several sites are available and will be evaluated after geological investigations
have been completed. The channel between Prairie and Silver Creek will serve to carry
excess flows from Prairie Creek to Silver Creek.
Floodplain Buyouts
The City of Grand Island has acquired and demolished two floodprone properties near the Platte
Generating Station.
Prairie Creek Clearing
Although the Prairie Creek Flood Control Project had a local effect, damages could be reduced
on Prairie Creek by keeping the channel clear. Projects have been completed from the mouth of
Prairie Creek in Merrick County to the Hall-Buffalo county line. Annual maintenance cost to
CPNRD is $10,000.
Moores Creek Flood Control Project
Project sponsors of the feasibility study for the flood control on Moores Creek include CPNRD,
the City of Grand Island, Merrick County and Hall County. The three-phase project consisted of
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 107 / 124
93
channel improvements, construction of three detention/retention and wildlife habitat
enhancement cells, and construction of waterways and bridges to enable storm runoff. Annual
maintenance cost is estimated at $20,000.
Emergency Snow Route
Grand Island has instituted emergency snow routes, which allows the City to remove the snow
more quickly and efficiently following a significant snow event. This improves public safety
since access to medical care is often needed more frequently as a result of the snowfall. The
snow removal plan and maps are available in the local telephone book and online at the City’s
website.
Tree City USA
Grand Island has been a Tree City USA community since 1987. Being a Tree City USA allows a
community to reduce its exposure to falling trees and limbs from high wind, tornado, and ice
events. Grand Island also offers a cost sharing program for homeowners who purchase the best
types of trees for their boulevard areas and yards.
Vulnerability Assessment
According to the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and Taxation, the total assessed
taxable value for Grand Island in 2013 was $2,574,553,789. Broken out by significant property
types, this is:
Residential real property: $ 1,486,879,074 (57.8%)
Commercial real property: $ 801,297,653 (31.1%)
Agricultural Land and homes/outbuildings: $ 7,358,151 ( 0.3%)
Commercial/Industrial personal property: $ 159,349,367 ( 6.2%)
Public service corporation real and personal: $ 21,885,061 ( 0.8%)
Railroad real and personal property: $ 36,874,651 ( 1.4%)
Industrial real property: $ 60,760,979 ( 2.4%)
Agricultural personal property: $ 148,853 ( 0.0%)
Recreational real property: $ 0 ( .00%)
The entire structure stock is vulnerable to the severe weather, tornado, and drought hazard. This
means that, as of 2007 there is $2,574,553,789 in at-risk assets for these hazard types.
For the flood assessment, a software program called HAZUS-MH® was used. HAZUS-MH
stands for “Hazards U.S. – Multi-Hazard”, and uses default census information to estimate the
amount of damage from a flood. In so doing, it generates a basic estimation of the number of
structures in the study area and the amount of potential damage. The printout result of the flood
model is included at the end of the Grand Island report. There are important disclaimers for
using this information as it is generated by computer using data that is not improved from the
basic census information – these concerns are outlined below after the flood model summary.
As shown in the report, HAZUS calculates:
Number of Buildings in Grand Island: 20,396
Residential Buildings 18,808
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 108 / 124
94
Non-Residential Buildings 1,588
General Building Stock Damage
HAZUS estimates that about 140 buildings will be at least moderately damaged by a flood of a
magnitude which inundates the modeled floodplain – this is 6.8% of the total number of
buildings in the case study. Of the 140 buildings, 13 will be completely destroyed. More
detailed damage figures by occupancy and by building type are given in Table 3 and Table 4 in
the HAZUS report at the end of the Grand Island section.
Essential facility damage
HAZUS estimates that there are five fire stations, two hospitals, two police stations, and 25
schools in the study region. Of these 34 essential facilities, four schools are estimated to receive
at least moderate damage – with two of these schools losing function.
Debris Generation
HAZUS estimates that 4,337 tons of debris will be generated by a flood. Of this amount,
“Finishes” (defined as dry wall, insulation, etc) comprised 81% of the total while “Structural”
(wood, brick, etc) comprised 6% of the total. If the debris tonnage is converted into an estimated
number of truckloads, it will require 173 truckloads (at 25 tons/truck) to remove the debris
generated by the flood.
Shelter Requirements
HAZUS estimates that 2,359 households will be displaced by the flood. Of these, 6,158 people
will seek temporary shelter in public shelters.
Economic Loss
The total economic loss for the flood is $76.61 million, which represents 8.72% of the total
replacement value of the buildings in the scenario. The building losses are broken into direct
building losses and business interruption losses. HAZUS calculates that direct building losses to
be $73.25 million while the remaining $3.36 million is for business interruption. Of the $73.25
million on direct building losses, $20.24 million is for residential and $44.10 million is for
commercial as the two largest categories (see Table 6 of printout).
Corps of Engineers Structural Inventory
In the structural inventory completed by the Corps of Engineers, 1045 properties were found to
be located in a regulated floodplain in Grand Island’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. Of
these, 88 were in a Zone A, 42 in a floodway, and 915 in Zone AE. The valuation of these 1045
floodplain properties found by the Corps of Engineers is $133,876,797, or 5.2% of the total
valuation of Grand Island and its zoning jurisdiction.
Figure 1 shows the Grand Island census tracts in Hall County which were used in the flood
assessment. Figure 2 shows the floodplain which HAZUS automatically models as a part of its
assessment – the darker the shade of blue, the deeper the modeled floodplain.
HAZUS report disclaimers: As shown on HAZUS Figure 2, the Wood River Diversion is not
shown as eliminating the floodplain on the south end of town. The above analysis was
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 109 / 124
95
completed using default data, which uses statistical averages for variables across census tracts.
Also, there are uncertainties inherent in any loss estimation technique. Therefore, there may be a
significant difference between modeled results contained in this report and the actual social and
economic losses following a flood. More precise results could be completed by inputting user-
defined values for the census tracts or the analysis could be run by census blocks, which would
reduce – but not eliminate – the estimates used in the model.
Figure 3 shows the critical facilities, as identified by the City. Critical facilities are those
structures which will be essential for returning the Village functions to normal after a disaster
(“Civic”), are vital for disaster response and sheltering (“Shelter”), and are essential for public
health and safety (“Lifeline Utility”). In Grand Island, the 90 critical facilities identified are:
52 emergency shelters
24 schools
5 fire stations
2 police stations
2 medical facilities
1 hospital
1 power plant
1 treatment plant
1 airport
1 bus terminal
The Corps of Engineers structural inventory found the following critical facilities in the
floodplain:
Cedar Hollow Public School
Veterans Administration Medical Center
Berean Bible Church
Grand Island Wastewater Treatment Plant
Grand Island Senior High School
Seventh Day Adventist Church
First United Methodist Church
Community Bible Church
Church of Christ
Platte Generation Station
Figure 4 shows the potential ranges of the tornado warning sirens in Grand Island, with the
yellow shading being a half-mile from each siren and red one mile from each siren. As shown
by the figure, the majority of current development within the Grand Island corporate limits is in
the yellow shaded area. It must be recognized, however, that these are outdoor warning sirens
which are designed to alert residents who are outside and in close proximity to the sirens. They
are not designed to warn persons indoors at-distance, traveling in vehicles, or in noisy
environments. In addition, a warning system works best if there are operational redundancies –
meaning that it is always safer to have additional sirens in a network in case a siren malfunctions
or is destroyed. An additional consideration is that periods during which warning sirens are
needed are often noisy in themselves with high wind, intense rain, and hail which all act to
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 110 / 124
96
reduce peoples’ ability to hear the sirens. It is easier to hear a warning for people who are
downwind of the siren.
Figure 5 is an aerial photography of the Grand Island area meant to show the community. New
development areas are currently in-filling currently undeveloped areas, especially in the red box
residential development currently taking place in the northwest portion of the city. The
vulnerability of all development – existing or future – is the same now and will be the same in
the future for severe winter storms, severe summer storms, and tornadoes. The only hazard
which is able to be modified by human behavior or activity is flooding. However, since there
Grand Island is in good standing in the Regular Phase of the National Flood Insurance Program,
any future floodplain development will be completed in compliance with the City’s floodplain
management ordinance.
Mitigation Alternatives
Grand Island’s planning goals are the same as the goals for the county portion of the plan.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
To address these goals, mitigation alternatives were suggested in the public meeting and
prioritized by the Grand Island City Council.
Prioritization
Grand Island prioritized the mitigation alternatives according to the “STAPLE(E)” procedure
(Social acceptability, Technical feasibility, Administrative capability of local government,
Political acceptability, Legal authority to implement, Economic justification, and Environmental
acceptability). In addition, alternatives were prioritized based on the community’s goals and
planning objectives.
At its discretion, Grand Island officials may choose to not implement any of the proposed
mitigation projects at this time with the realization that future events may change this stance as
well as the prioritization of projects. Projects sponsored for implementation will follow a public
process.
1) Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program
Objective 1: Continue to regulate development in floodplain areas and adopt the Hall County
floodplain maps when they become effective.
Funding sources and potential cost: No funding needed, no cost.
2) Mitigate repetitive loss properties
Objective 2: Reduce future flood insurance payments and reduce flood losses by
mitigating repetitive loss properties through acquisition, elevation, or other techniques.
Acquisition should be first priority.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s mitigation programs – cost will vary by
structure and by mitigation technique used.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 111 / 124
97
3) Reduce flood damages
Objective 3: Reduce impacts of flood and stormwater problems
- Action 3.1: Complete a drainage study. Given the extremely flat topography in the area,
drainage will always be a problem – especially for intense warm weather rainfall events. A
drainage study is needed in Grand Island to help the City make wise land use decisions, to
identify where existing drainage infrastructure is weak, and to identify ways to address
these weaknesses. A drainage study has the potential to also identify good flood mitigation
projects which could be funded using FEMA’s mitigation programs.
Funding sources and potential cost: Central Platte NRD, Community Development Block
Grant, City – average cost varies widely on scope and community size
- Action 3.2: The City Council should consider passing a stormwater management
ordinance. Such an ordinance would be designed to hold back stormwater on-site from
large developments and to reduce erosion. The City of Lincoln has passed a stormwater
management ordinance which could be used as a model or guide.
Funding sources and potential cost: Could be implemented using existing City resources.
- Action 3.3: Upgrade culverts which are found to restrict flows from rain events. A
drainage study can show which culverts and bridges are undersized and need to be replaced
with larger openings. However, a drainage study is not necessary to know there is a
problem. A drainageway which drains properly will not have flow impediments which
back up water on to adjacent property. However, flow impediments can be placed in the
flow path on purpose to direct the flow of water toward a specific area designed to retain
excess water during periods of high flows. It must be noted that culvert upgrades may not
have a lasting impact if upstream stormwater is not somehow managed.
Funding sources and potential cost: City, NRD, Natural Resources Development Fund. Cost
varies greatly by design and scope.
- Action 3.4: Clear ditches to improve channel conveyance capacity to allow flows to move
unimpeded to the Platte River.
Funding sources and potential cost: City, CPNRD
- Action 3.5: Create a maintenance plan for the drainage system. If improvements are made
to Grand Island’s drainage system, it will be important to protect the “current condition” of
the drainage so that it does not revert back to problem areas.
Funding sources and potential cost: City. Cost to create a maintenance plan would be none
to little; however, the City may need to devote financial resources toward it.
- Action 3.6: Floodproof any critical facility which is prone to flooding.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s mitigation programs, cost would vary by scope
and design. 25% non-federal match requirement would be needed – most likely from City.
4) Identify and designate tornado shelters, publicize the locations of all public tornado shelters to
increase public awareness with a sign on the building.
Objective 4: Provide emergency shelter(s) to which students or local residents would evacuate
in the event of a tornado warning, especially those who live in vulnerable housing.
- Action 4.1: Study existing public buildings to see if they offer adequate tornado shelter. If
buildings are found, they should be identified with proper signage so that citizens know
where they can go during a tornado warning.
Funding sources: Unknown
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 112 / 124
98
- Action 4.2: Create public shelters by retrofitting or new construction. FEMA has
retrofitted schools and constructed all-new shelters in several places in the Midwest.
However, most tornadoes occur in late-afternoon to early evening when a school might be
closed for the day. Furthermore, it has been reported that public tornado shelters that are
left open to the public are not used properly, with vandalism and use by vagrants as
problems. At-risk structure types include mobile homes and slab-on-grade construction
which has no basement.
- Action 4.3: Consider constructing tornado shelters for vulnerable construction like
manufactured home concentrations.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation program or Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program for construction only– cost varies widely based on scope and
design
5) Ensure adequate outdoor severe weather warning coverage
Objective 5: Replace the existing tornado sirens which are outdated.
In Hall County, the warning sirens are owned by the communities. There is no funding
assistance available from the County for new sirens; however, if the community purchases a
warning siren, Hall County Emergency Management can help coordinate the warning system
through the central siren warning system located in Grand Island.
There have been significant advances in warning siren technology since the time that many
sirens were erected as a result of the Cold War scare in the 1950s and 60s. The old style of
warning siren is manual and operates using at least 110 volts – possibly as much as 220 or 240
volts. In addition, these sirens also have no battery backup since it is not economically
feasible to purchase backup systems for manual sirens. In the event that severe weather is
approaching, a power outage – which is common in severe weather – means that no warning
will be sounded. As a result, there could be higher loss of life since a warning would have
alerted people within earshot to seek shelter. Newer sirens operate using 12 volts, which
makes battery backup possible – in fact, these sirens typically have a backup system already
built in. This means that the only option for having a tornado siren with battery backup is the
actual purchase of a new siren.
- Action 5.1: Purchase new tornado sirens to replace the older models.
Funding sources and potential cost: City. Estimated cost: $25,000 to $50,000 .
6) Reduce damages caused by downed tree limbs
Objective 6: Reduce the duration or eliminate power outages from severe weather. Overhead
power lines are vulnerable to collapse from icing in the cold weather months and from high
winds or tree limbs falling on power lines in warm weather months.
- Action 6.1: Initiate a power line burying project.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program could provide up to 75% of the project cost. The
remaining cost might be shared with the Public Power District, City, or property owners.
- Action 6.2: Write to the Nebraska Forest Service and request a tree inventory. An
inventory is especially helpful in mitigation planning for communities which experience
regular tree-related damages. An inventory can identify problem trees and recommend
changes to the way a community administer a local tree management program (i.e., through
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 113 / 124
99
a Tree Board or Park Board). Problematic areas of tree limbs with power lines could be
addressed as a priority.
Funding sources and potential cost: Free
7) Ensure adequate severe weather notifications to citizens and critical facilities
Objective 7: Purchasing or education of a weather radio
- Action 7.1: Work with the local cable television company to create a cable television
interrupt warning system. Such a system would remove the concern over which television
or radio station to turn to for weather information and would be a way to inform the
majority of the public of impending severe weather.
- Action 7.2: For public critical facilities, the City should consider purchasing a weather
radio to be used in each facility for the rapid dissemination of a severe weather warning.
- Action 7.3: In noisy manufacturing facilities which may not hear tornado sirens, the City
could inform the owners of these facilities of the option that they could purchase a weather
radio.
- Action 7.4: Encourage critical facilities like senior care facilities and hospitals to develop
and practice their own emergency sheltering plans.
Funding sources and potential cost: City of Grand Island, local businesses. Approximate cost
about $30 per radio. Plan development would carry no cost other than staff time.
8) Improve the City’s capability to communicate in a post-disaster scenario
Objective 8: Acquire a comprehensive communication system. The current system of cellular
telephones depends on having a cell tower network and being able to connect with other
emergency responders when cellular traffic will be very high.
- Action 8.1: Assess the types of communication systems that are available, being used by
other counties or communities, and which would fit into the budget. Options might include
something like a satellite telephone network with handheld units.
- Action 8.2: The City and County could have a Ham radio network on standby in case of
communication failure.
Funding sources and potential cost: The most likely funding source for this objective would
be Hazard Mitigation Grant Program “set-aside” funds made available to states after a
federally-declared disaster. Other funding sources are unknown. Potential cost would vary
widely based on system needs, and is therefore also unknown at this time.
9) Prevent or reduce the duration of power outages
Objective 9: Increase the capability for the City’s electric infrastructure to withstand severe
weather. Whether for public safety or public welfare, having a function electric system has
clear benefits in a post-disaster scenario. These actions would be more effective for more
rural transmission and distribution lines which have a longer space between poles than in
urban areas.
- Action 9.1: Install “T2” line, which prevents ice buildup
- Action 9.2: Periodically in a segment of power line, strengthen a power pole. This will
prevent any “cascading” effect of pole failures, which will reduce the time necessary for
repairs.
- Action 9.3: Instead of T2 line, automatic disconnects could be installed on the lines at the
poles to prevent the weight of the line from pulling down the poles.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 114 / 124
100
Funding sources and potential cost: The most likely funding source for this objective would
be Hazard Mitigation Grant Program “set-aside” funds made available to states after a
federally-declared disaster. Other funding sources are unknown. Potential cost would vary
widely based on system needs, and is therefore also unknown at this time.
GOAL: 3) Increase Public Education
10) Educate the public about natural hazards, preparedness, and mitigation
Objective 10: Initiate or continue natural hazard awareness and education programs
- Action 10.1: Hall County Emergency Management Agency (HCEMA) will continue its
current educational programs. HCEMA also completes annual education programs to
grade schools each year, reaching approximately 500 to 600 kids. They discuss severe
weather and where to go and what to do if there is a tornado warning.
- Action 10.2: HCEMA also participates in the annual Severe Weather Awareness Week by
placing articles in the local paper and airing information on the City’s local government
television station. Educational outreach programs could be expanded to include all hazards
and a severe winter weather preparedness program for the fall.
- Action 10.3: HCEMA also participates during the test warning day by using all of our
normal procedures as if there were an actual event, including setting off the warning sirens.
- Action 10.4: The City and HCEMA can make educational materials available to the public
in the public library and website. Education would include, but not be limited to, how to
protect yourself and your property from tornadoes and severe weather, their potential risks
to different disaster types, preparedness procedures for their home, more wind-resistant
construction design, and hardier types of trees to plant in areas close to homes, power lines,
and streets. Free brochures are available through the National Weather Service and
American Red Cross.
Funding sources and potential cost: Funding sources are not applicable, cost is free except
for work time.
Implementation
To start implementation, determining which projects should be submitted for funding will be
based on a FEMA-approved cost-benefit method. This means that proposed projects would need
to be reviewed for cost effectiveness with the assistance of state emergency management or
floodplain management personnel. Unless otherwise delegated, the Hall County Regional
Planning Director will be the person responsible for project administration of any project
selected for implementation. FEMA has the authority to approve or deny mitigation projects
applied for under their agency’s mitigation programs.
Evaluation
In this plan, several potential mitigation projects are identified; however, it is not designed to
have an all-inclusive list of projects. It is designed to be a living document which can be adapted
to the landscape as conditions change. This means that this plan should be revised and updated
as new projects are identified and prioritized and participating communities. There is a
requirement to review and update this plan every five years. To do this, communities will follow
the same procedure that Hall County will utilize in its mitigation plan updates, which is detailed
starting on page 46 of the County portion of this report. There are also evaluation, update, and
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 115 / 124
101
revision worksheets which have been included in this plan as Appendix B to assist with this
process.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 116 / 124
102
Wood River
Wood River
2013
Dam
Failure
Earth-
quake Drought Flood
Summer
Storm
Land
slide
Winter
Storm
Tornado/
Wind Wildfire
Crime/
Terror Hazmat
Probability Unlikely Unlikely Likely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Likely Likely Likely Likely
Risk Low Low Low Med High Low Med Med Med Low High
Impact 2 2 2 4 5 0 5 5 3 2 5
Probability: Based on history, what is the likelihood this type of event will happen again?
- None, Low, Medium, or High
Extent – If this event were to happen, how extensive could the damage be?
- Zero, Limited, Severe, Full, or Unknown
Previous Occurrence: Is there an historic record of this type of hazard in the community?
The above table shows the input provided at the initial public meeting. Due to the geographical
proximity, the following hazard types were not considered due to there being no likelihood of
occurring in Nebraska: volcanic eruptions, avalanches, hurricanes, tidal surges, and tsunamis.
In the following sections, only the hazard types which have a significant likelihood of occurring
or have a reason to potentially occur are listed. These types are: severe weather (summer and
winter), tornado, flood, and drought. According to the database of dams maintained by the
Nebraska Department of Natural Resources, there are no dams upstream of Wood River;
therefore, dam failure is not considered further for Wood River. Although there is a small risk
for earthquakes, wildfires, and landslides, the threat and associated risk for these hazards is not
high enough and there are no realistic or feasible mitigation action which can be taken to reduce
the level of risk. The National Climatic Data Center lists no records of wildfire for Hall County.
Additionally, the citizens did not rank these hazards high enough to warrant detailed discussion
in this plan. This may change in future updates.
Disaster History
Flood
At the town of Wood River, the Wood River has a “nested channel,” which means that the banks
are higher than the surrounding floodplain. This prevents rainfall from naturally draining
overland directly into the river. This means that rain which falls between the river and Highway
30 through town cannot naturally drain to the river, which presents some stormwater concerns.
Similarly, in a very large flood event, water which escapes from Wood River and is unable to get
back into the channel after the water recedes. Instead, water flows east until it can join enter the
Wood River about three miles northeast of town. In the process, it is possible that the business
district of Wood River along Highway 30 will be flooded. According to the current floodplain
map, water from Wood River cannot inundate development in the city unless it is a 500-year
flood event. However, a flood of this magnitude would inundate all development north of the
Union Pacific Railroad tracks, including Highway 30 (see Figure 2). Wood River High School
is situated on the high ground closer to the river, with the building footprint out of the floodplain.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 117 / 124
103
As defined by FEMA’s repetitive loss list, there are no repetitive flood loss properties in Wood
River.
On May 11 and 12, 2005: 12 people were evacuated due to rising water. The Wood River
crested at 9 feet, flooding most streets in town. The river tied a record crest of 12.2 feet at Alda
after it had been dry for three years prior to the storm.
Severe Weather
June 4, 1995: 1¾ inch hail caused $10,000 in undisclosed property damage.
May 11 and 12, 2005: Thunderstorms ravaged a large part of south-central Nebraska starting the
night of the 11th and continuing through the day on the 12th. Wood River recorded over 11
inches of rain in this timeframe, which is well in excess of the 100-year storm. It was
estimated every structure in Wood River sustained some sort of storm damage as wave after
wave of severe thunderstorms pounded the town with high winds and hail up to 1¾ inches in
diameter. Twelve homes sustained severe damage. Hall County was declared a federal
disaster area as the storm caused significant damage in most Hall County communities.
May 23, 2006: Severe thunderstorms brought 80 mph winds, causing damage across 16 counties.
Property damage in Wood River was only $5,000.
June 16, 2006: A severe thunderstorm came in from the west, producing 60 mph wind gusts in
and golf ball sized hail in Wood River. Total property damage was set at $10,000.
September 15, 2006: Severe thunderstorms developed across south-central Nebraska, bringing
baseball-sized hail and strong winds to the region. Wood River did not report as much
property damage as Grand Island, Hastings, and Holdrege; however, $10,000 in property
damage was recorded.
Tornado
May 7, 1993: A F2 tornado touched down four miles southwest of Upland, moved northeast
across Kearney County, crossed the Platte River east of Kearney, and was last seen 1½ miles
east of Wood River. Total property damage from this long tornado was set at $5 million.
May 2, 1999: A short-lived F1 tornado was observed just northwest of Wood River. The tornado
damaged grain bins, a grain dryer, and a house nearby. Total damage was set at $100,000.
May 7, 2005: The first major outbreak of severe weather for the year brought several tornadoes
to central Nebraska. One of these tornadoes was a brief F0 tornado which was spotted five
miles north of Wood River, but caused no damage.
May 11, 2005: Just four days later, a F0 tornado clipped the south side of Wood River as a part
of extremely severe weather which hit the area, bringing high wind, hail, intense rain, and
flooding. Total property damage from this tornado was set at $125,000.
Drought
NCDC reports three drought events since 1950 for Hall County: in 2000, 2002 and 2012. Both
of these droughts appear to have been agricultural droughts with the most impact to growing
crops. Although Wood River is situated in an area which has been directly impacted by a
drought, there are no indications that the City has ever been materially impacted by a drought.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 118 / 124
104
Likelihood of Future Hazard Events
It is certain that Wood River will be impacted by severe weather – perhaps as often as each year.
In these events, it should be expected to witness large hail, high winds, and intense rain in the
summer, and large snowfalls, ice, and bitter windchills in the winter. Although it is certainly
possible, it is less likely that Wood River will be directly impacted by a tornado.
Past Hazard Mitigation Efforts
The City of Wood River participates and is in good standing in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP). The initial identification for the Wood River’s floodplain map took place on
May 31, 1974, and the City joined the Emergency Phase of the NFIP on September 6th of that
year. Participation in the Regular Phase of the NFIP occurred on December 1, 1978. A Flood
Insurance Study and new detailed mapping was adopted by Wood River with an effective date of
June 3, 1986. . Flood mapping for insurance rating purposes has been completed by FEMA and
included with the package of maps available for Hall County (Map Number 31079C) effective
September 26, 2008. Wood River continues to participate as is in good standing in the National
Flood Insurance Program. A new outdoor warning siren was installed in downtown Wood River
in 2011.
Vulnerability Assessment
According to an assessment completed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources in
March of 2007, there are 536 total structures in Wood River. Figure 1 shows the structures
broken out by type, and the count is:
478 residences
29 businesses
17 (at least) out buildings large enough to be seen on aerial photographs
8 publicly-owned structures, including the municipal building, school, library
4 church or non-profit buildings
According to the Nebraska Department of Property Assessment and Taxation, the total assessed
taxable value for Wood River in 2013 was $63,180,401. Broken out by significant property
types, this is:
Residential real property: $ 35,168,425 (55.7%)
Commercial real property: $ 7,363,346 (11.6%)
Agricultural Land and homes/outbuildings: $ 70,486 ( 0.1%)
Commercial/Industrial personal property: $ 17,731,387 ( 28.1%)
Public service corporation real and personal: $ 539,934 ( 0.9%)
Railroad real and personal property: $ 2,306,823 ( 3.6%)
Industrial real property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Agricultural personal property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
Recreational real property: $ -0- ( 0.0%)
The entire structure stock is vulnerable to the severe weather, tornado, and drought hazard. This
means that, as of 2013, there is $63,180,401in at-risk assets for these hazard types.
In the structural inventory completed by the Corps of Engineers, five properties were found to be
located in a regulated floodplain in Wood River’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. Of these, 1
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 119 / 124
105
is in a Zone A and 4 are in a floodway. The valuation of these five floodplain properties found
by the Corps of Engineers is $126,361, or 0.2% of the total valuation of Wood River and its
zoning jurisdiction.
Figure 2 shows the current effective floodplain overlay with the structure count. The 100-year,
or regulated, floodplain is shown in light blue while the 500-year floodplain is shown in orange.
451 of the 536 tagged structures (84%) are in the 500-year floodplain. Assuming an equitable
valuation between structures in that floodplain with those not in the floodplain, this represents a
total valuation of $ 35,482,174 in the 500-year floodplain in Wood River.
Figure 3 shows the critical facilities, as identified by the City and supplemented with various
federal databases. Critical facilities are those structures which will be essential for returning the
Village functions to normal after a disaster (“Civic”), are vital for disaster response and
sheltering (“Shelter”), and are essential for public health and safety (“Lifeline Utility”). Critical
facilities can also be economic because the loss of a major employer or the loss of the City’s
main source(s) of revenue will greatly hinder recovery. In Wood River, the critical facilities
identified are:
Civic/Response: City Hall, Fire & Rescue Building, Police Department
Sheltering: Wood River Elementary School, Wood River Rural High School, St. Mary’s
Catholic Church, United Methodist, Grace Lutheran Church, First Presbyterian Church
Vulnerable population: Good Samaritan Center
Financial: Cargill/Wood River ethanol plant
Lifeline Utility: Water tower
Figure 4 shows the potential ranges of the tornado warning sirens in Wood River, with the
yellow shading being a half-mile the siren, with red the one mile distance. As shown by the
figure, the majority of current development within the Wood River corporate limits is in the
yellow shaded area. It must be recognized, however, that these are outdoor warning sirens which
are designed to alert residents who are outside and in close proximity to the sirens. They are not
designed to warn persons indoors at-distance, traveling in vehicles, or in noisy environments. In
addition, a warning system works best if there are operational redundancies – meaning that it is
always safer to have additional sirens in a network in case a siren malfunctions or is destroyed.
An additional consideration is that periods during which warning sirens are needed are often
noisy in themselves with high wind, intense rain, and hail which all act to reduce peoples’ ability
to hear the sirens. It is easier to hear a warning for people who are downwind of the siren.
Figure 5 shows the areas of new development which is most likely to occur in the next five to
ten years. The vulnerability of all development – existing or future – is the same now and will be
the same in the future for severe winter storms, severe summer storms, and tornadoes. The only
hazard which is able to be modified by human behavior or activity is flooding. However, since
there is very little developable area in Wood River which is in a regulated floodplain and since
Wood River is in good standing in the Regular Phase of the National Flood Insurance Program,
any future floodplain development will be completed in compliance with the City’s floodplain
management ordinance.
Mitigation Alternatives
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 120 / 124
106
Wood River’s planning goals are the same as the goals for the county portion of the plan.
GOALS: 1) Reduce or prevent future damage from natural hazard events,
2) Increase public safety
To address these goals, mitigation alternatives were suggested in the public meeting and
prioritized by the Wood River City Council.
Prioritization
Wood River prioritized the mitigation alternatives according to the “STAPLE(E)” procedure
(Social acceptability, Technical feasibility, Administrative capability of local government,
Political acceptability, Legal authority to implement, Economic justification, and Environmental
acceptability). In addition, alternatives were prioritized based on the community’s goals and
planning objectives.
At its discretion, Wood River officials may choose to not implement any of the proposed
mitigation projects at this time with the realization that future events may change this stance as
well as the prioritization of projects. Projects sponsored for implementation will follow a public
process.
1) Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program
Objective 1: Continue to regulate development in floodplain areas and adopt the Hall County
floodplain maps when they become effective.
Funding sources and potential cost: No funding needed, no cost.
2) Identify and designate tornado shelters, publicize the locations of all public tornado shelters to
increase public awareness – perhaps with a sign on the building.
Objective 2: Provide emergency shelter(s) to which students or local residents would evacuate
in the event of a tornado warning, especially those who live in vulnerable housing
- Action 2.1: Create public shelters by retrofitting or new construction. FEMA has
retrofitted schools and constructed all-new shelters in several places in the Midwest.
However, most tornadoes occur in late-afternoon to early evening when a school might be
closed for the day. Furthermore, it has been reported that public tornado shelters that are
left open to the public are not used properly, with vandalism and use by vagrants as
problems. At-risk structure types include mobile homes and slab-on-grade construction
which has no basement.
- Action 2.2: Consider constructing tornado shelters for vulnerable construction like
manufactured home concentrations.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation program or Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program for construction only– cost varies widely based on scope and
design
3) Reduce damages caused by downed tree limbs
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 121 / 124
107
Objective 3: Reduce the duration or eliminate power outages from severe weather. Overhead
power lines are vulnerable to collapse from icing in the cold weather months and from high
winds or tree limbs falling on power lines in warm weather months.
- Action 3.1: Initiate a power line burying project.
Funding sources and potential cost: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program could provide up to 75% of the project cost. The
remaining cost might be shared with the Public Power District, City, or property owners.
- Action 3.2: Write to the Nebraska Forest Service and request a tree inventory. An
inventory is especially helpful in mitigation planning for communities which experience
regular tree-related damages. An inventory can identify problem trees and recommend
changes to the way a community administer a local tree management program (i.e., through
a Tree Board or Park Board). Problematic areas of tree limbs with power lines could be
addressed as a priority.
Funding sources and potential cost: Free
4) Ensure adequate severe weather notifications to critical facilities
Objective 4: Purchasing or education of a weather radio
- Action 4.1: For public critical facilities, the City should consider purchasing a weather
radio to be used in each facility for the rapid dissemination of a severe weather warning.
- Action 4.2: If the City has noisy manufacturing facilities which may not hear tornado sirens,
the City could inform the owners of these facilities of the option that they could purchase a
weather radio.
Funding sources and potential cost: City of Wood River, local businesses. Approximate cost
about $30 per radio.
5) Ensure adequate water supply for health and safety
Objective 5: Determine ways to secure Wood River’s water supply during drought
- Action 5.1: Work with the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services to secure
revolving loan funding for supplementing Wood River’s water supply with an additional
source.
- Action 5.2: Determine a method to have citizens from Wood River voluntarily reduce
demand for water during times of drought. This may involve instituting a moratorium on
unnecessary water usage and implementing a fine/penalty system for those found in
violation.
Goal: 3) Increase Public Education
There are no explicit objectives or actions for this goal; however, there is an implicit action
related to this goal for above actions which will require public participation. Activities for this
goal are found in the County portion of this document since the likely lead or assisting agency
will be the Hall County Emergency Management Agency.
Implementation
To start implementation, determining which projects should be submitted for funding will be
based on a FEMA-approved cost-benefit method. This means that proposed projects would need
to be reviewed for cost effectiveness with the assistance of state emergency management or
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 122 / 124
108
floodplain management personnel. Unless otherwise delegated, the City Clerk will be the person
responsible for project administration of any project selected for implementation. FEMA has the
authority to approve or deny mitigation projects applied for under their agency’s mitigation
programs.
Evaluation
In this plan, several potential mitigation projects are identified; however, it is not designed to
have an all-inclusive list of projects. It is designed to be a living document which can be adapted
to the landscape as conditions change. This means that this plan should be revised and updated
as new projects are identified and prioritized and participating communities. There is a
requirement to review and update this plan every five years. To do this, communities will follow
the same procedure that Hall County will utilize in its mitigation plan updates, which is detailed
starting on page 46 of the County portion of this report. There are also evaluation, update, and
revision worksheets which have been included in this plan as Appendix B to assist with this
process.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 123 / 124
109
APPENDIX E
Adoption Documentation
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 1/8/2014 Page 124 / 124