LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY MULTI-HAZARD … · LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY...

LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY MULTI-HAZARD

PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN 2011 UPDATE

Prepared By:

Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee

As Directed By:

Lincoln County Emergency Management 128 N. Main Street

Canton, SD 57013-1703

Minnehaha County Emergency Management 608 Sigler Ave.

Sioux Falls, SD 57104

Contact: Lincoln County EM Harold Timmerman (605) 764-5746,

[email protected]

Minnehaha County EM Lynn DeYoung (605) 367-4290, [email protected]

Prepared With The Technical Assistance Of:

South Eastern Council of Governments 500 N Western Ave., Suite 100

Sioux Falls, SD 57104

Contact: Seth Hyberger, Planner (605) 367-5390, [email protected]

Submitted to:

mailto:[email protected]



http://dps.sd.gov/default.aspx

Table of Contents

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011 Update

i

Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………. i

Introduction and Purpose…………………………………………………………1

Purpose…………………………………………………………………...… 1

Background………………………………………………………………… 1

Jurisdictions………………………………………………………………... 2

Organizations………………………………………………………………. 2

Chapter I Perquisites and Community Profile

1.1 Adoption by Local Governing Body………………………………………….. 4

1.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Adoptions…………………………………………... 4

1.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Participation…………………………………… 5

Jurisdictions……………………………………………………………….. 5

Organizations……………………………………………………………… 5

1.4 Community Profile……………………………………………………………. 6

Population………………………………………………………………….. 6

Physical Description……………………………………………………….. 7

Social and Economic Description………………………………………….. 8

Transportation and Utility Infrastructure………………………………….. 11

Medical and Emergency Services………………………………………….. 11

Chapter II Planning Process

2.1 Documentation of the Planning Process……………………………………….. 13

2.2 Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Planning Committee………………………………………………... 14

Local Collaboration………………………………………………………... 15

State and Federal Collaboration…………………………………………… 17

Public Participation………………………………………………………… 17

Drafting the Plan…………………………………………………………… 17

Chapter III Hazard Assessment

3.1 Hazard Identification…………………………………………………………... 18

3.2 Profiling Hazards & Assessing Vulnerability………………………………….. 24

3.3 Hazard Assessment…………………………………………………………….. 28

3.3.1 Severe Summer Storms (including excess rain, lightning and hail)…………. 29

Probability of Occurrence………………………………………………….. 29

Vulnerability and Loss Potential…………………………………………… 30

Vulnerability Summary…………………………………………………….. 33

Existing Capabilities……………………………………………………..… 33

Future Development……………………………………………………….. 33

History………………………………………………………………………34

Table of Contents


ii

3.3.2 Severe Winter Storms (including freezing and extreme cold)……………….. 34




Existing Capabilities……………………………………………………….. 38


History…………………………………………………………………....... 39

3.3.3 Tornados and High Winds…………………………………………………… 39






History……………………………………………………………………... 44

3.3.4 Flooding……………………………………………………………………… 45






History………………………………………………………………………55

3.4 National Flood Insurance Program Participation………………………………. 55

3.5 Population Density & Building Exposure Vulnerability to All Hazards………. 57

3.6 Lincoln County and Communities Future Growth and Development………… 59

3.7 Minnehaha County and Communities Future Growth and Development...…… 61

Chapter IV Hazard Mitigation Strategy

4.1 Hazard Mitigation Goals and Objectives………………………………………. 63

Background………………………………………………………………… 63

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Hazard Mitigation Plan 2011 Update - Problem Statements………………. 64

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Hazard Mitigation Plan 2011 Update - Goals and Objectives………..……. 65

4.2 Hazard Mitigation Actions…………………………….………………………. 66

4.3 Lincoln County and Minnehaha County HMGP Project Applications 2011…...71

Chapter V Plan Maintenance

5.1 Plan Maintenance Process………………………………………………………72

5.2 Plan Monitoring, Evaluation, and Updating………………………………….. 72

5.3 Plan Integration……………………………………………………………….. 74

Figures:

Figure 1-1: Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Infrastructure……………..… 10

Table of Contents


iii

Figure 3-1: South Dakota Seismic Hazard Map………………………………….... 21

Figure 3-2: Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Expansive Soils…………….. 22

Figure 3-3: South Dakota Land Slide Incidence and Susceptibility……………… 23

Figure 3-4: Wind Zones in the United States……………………………………… 39

Figure 3-5: Vulnerability in Flood Prone Areas - Lincoln County……………..…. 52

Figure 3-6: Vulnerability in Flood Prone Areas - Minnehaha County………..…… 53

Tables:

Table 1-1: Lincoln County Population Characteristics…………………………….. 6

Table 1-2: Minnehaha County Population Characteristics………………………… 7

Table 1-3: Monthly Climatic Conditions in Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties

Region…………………………………………………………………... 8

Table 1-4: Income, Job Earnings, and Poverty - Lincoln County………………… 9

Table 1-5: Income, Job Earnings, and Poverty - Minnehaha County……………… 9

Table 2-1: Participation in Plan Development (2011 Update) and

Meeting Attendance…………………………………………………..… 14

Table 2-2: Summary of the Planning Process……………………………………… 15

Table 3-1: Presidential Disaster Declarations in Lincoln County…………………. 26

Table 3-2: Presidential Disaster Declarations in Minnehaha County……………… 27

Table 3-3: Hazard Risk Assessment Matrix……………………………………….. 28

Table 3-4: Impact of Severe Summer Storms - Lincoln County…………………. 30

Table 3-5: Impact of Severe Summer Storms - Minnehaha County……………… 30

Table 3-6: Crop Loss Due to Severe Summer Storms (2000-2009) -

Lincoln County…………………………………………………………. 32

Table 3-7: Crop Loss Due to Summer Storms (2000-2009) -

Minnehaha County……………………………………………………… 32

Table 3-8: Impact of Severe Winter Storms - Lincoln County…………………..... 35

Table 3-9: Impact of Severe Winter Storms - Minnehaha County……………….... 35

Table 3-10: Crop Loss Due to Winter Weather - Lincoln County……………..….. 36

Table 3-11: Crop Loss Due to Winter Weather - Minnehaha County……………. 37

Table 3-12: Impact of Tornados and High Wind - Lincoln County………………. 41

Table 3-13: Impact of Tornados and High Winds - Minnehaha County…………. 41

Table 3-14: Crop Loss Due to High Winds (2000-2009) - Lincoln County……… 42

Table 3-15: Crop Loss Due to High Winds (2000-2009) - Minnehaha County….... 42

Table 3-16: Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Dams Inventory……………. 47

Table 3-17: Impact of Flooding - Lincoln County……………..………………….. 48

Table 3-18: Impact of Flooding - Minnehaha County……………………...……… 49 Table 3-19: HAZUS-MH Base Flood (1 Percent Chance) Loss Estimation Results:

Impacts on Lincoln County and Minnehaha County………………………… 50 Table 3-20: Crop Loss Due to Flooding (2000-2009) - Lincoln County…………... 50

Table 3-21: Crop Loss Due to Flooding (2000-2009) - Minnehaha County………. 51

Table 3-22: National Flood Insurance Program Participation - Lincoln County….. 56

Table 3-23: National Flood Insurance Program Participation - Minnehaha County. 56

Table 3-24: Building Exposure……………………………………………………. 57

Table 3-25: Population Density…………………………………………………… 58

Table 3-26: Lincoln County Total Property Evaluation & Population Density…… 58

Table of Contents


iv

Table 3-27: Minnehaha County Total Property Evaluation & Population Density... 59

Table 3-28: Lincoln County and Communities Future Growth and

Development Trends………………………………………………….. 60

Table 3-29: Minnehaha County and Communities Future Growth and

Development Trends………………………………………………….. 61

Table 4-1: Status of Mitigation Projects included in the revised 2005

“Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan - Serving the

Jurisdictions and Communities of Minnehaha and Lincoln

Counties and City of Sioux Falls”……………………………………. 66

Table 4-2: Status of Mitigation Projects included in the revised 2005

“Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan - Serving the

Jurisdictions and Communities of Minnehaha and Lincoln

Counties and City of Sioux Falls”……………………………………. 68

Table 4-3: Lincoln and Minnehaha County HMGP Project

Applications 2011……………………………………………………… 71

Table 5-1: Plan Monitoring, Evaluation, and Updating Schedule 2011-2016……. 73

Appendix A: County and Community Adoption Resolutions, and FEMA

Acceptance Letter

Appendix B: Meeting Sign-In Sheets, Agendas, and Minutes

Appendix B-1: Meeting 1, August 31, 2010, Sign-In Sheet 1……………………... B-1

Appendix B-2: Meeting 1, August 31, 2010, Sign-In Sheet 2…………………….. B-2

Appendix B-3: Meeting 1, August 31, 2010, Agenda……………………………... B-3

Appendix B-4: Meeting 1, August 31, 2010, Minutes……………………………... B-4

Appendix B-5: Meeting 2, November 16, 2010, Sign-In Sheet…………………….B-6

Appendix B-6: Meeting 2, November 16, 2010 Agenda…………………………. B-7

Appendix B-7: Meeting 2, November 16, 2010, Minutes…………………………. B-8

Appendix B-8: Meeting 3, January 25, 2011, Sign-In Sheet………………………. B-10

Appendix B-9: Meeting 3, January 25, 2011, Agenda…………………….………. B-11

Appendix B-10: Meeting 3, January 25, 2011, Minutes……………………..…….. B-12

Appendix B-11: Meeting 4, March 15, 2011, Sign-In Sheet………………………. B-14

Appendix B-12: Meeting 4, March 15, 2011, Agenda…………………………….. B-15

Appendix B-13: Meeting 4, March 15, 2011, Minutes…………………………..… B-17

Appendix B-14: Meeting 5, August 31, 2011, Sign-In Sheet………………………B-19

Appendix B-15: Meeting 5, August 31, 2011, Agenda……………………………. B-20

Appendix B-16: Meeting 5, August 31, 2011, Minutes……………………………. B-21

Appendix B-17: Public Forum Lincoln County, September 27, 2011,

Sign-In Sheet……..………………………………………………………………… B-23

Appendix B-18: Public Forum Lincoln County, September 27, 2011, Agenda…… B-24

Appendix B-19: Public Forum Minnehaha County, September 28, 2011,

Sign-In Sheet……..………………………………………………………………… B-25

Appendix B-20: Public Forum Minnehaha County, September 28, 2011, Agenda.. B-26

Table of Contents


v

Appendix C: Press Releases and Public Notices

C-1: Press Release 1, Meeting 2, November 16, 2011…………………………….. C-1

C-2: Press Release 2, Meeting 3, January 25, 2011………………………………... C-3

C-3: Press Release 3, Meeting 4, March 15, 2011…………………………………. C-4

C-4: Press Release 4, Public Forums Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties, September 12, 2011…………………………………………………….. C-5

C-5: Public Notice, The Hartford Area News, Meeting 4, March 15, 2011……….. C-6

C-6: Public Notice, Beresford Republic, Meeting 4, March 15, 2011…………….. C-7

C-7: Public Notice, The Sioux Valley News, Meeting 4, March 15, 2011…….….. C-8

C-8: Public Notice, Argus Leader, Meeting 4, March 15, 2011……………..…….. C-9

C-9: Public Notice, Argus Leader Media, Meeting 4, March 15, 2011…………… C-10

C-10: Public Notice, Argus Leader, Public Forums, September 27 and 28, 2011… C-11

C-11: Public Notice, Argus Leader Media, Public Forums,

September 27 and 28, 2011………………………………………………………… C-12

C-12: Public Notice, Lennox Independent, Public Forums,

September 27 and 28, 2011………………………………………………………… C-13

C-13: Public Notice, Tea Weekly, Public Forums,

September 27 and 28, 2011………………………………………………………… C-14

Appendix D: History of Significant Weather Events in Lincoln County

D-1: History of Significant Weather Events in Lincoln County…………………....D-1

Appendix E: History of Significant Weather Events in Minnehaha County

E-1: History of Significant Weather Events in Minnehaha County……………..… E-1

Appendix F: Community Critical Facilities Listings

F-1: City of Baltic Critical Facilities…………………………………………….… F-1

F-2: City of Beresford Critical Facilities………………………………………...… F-2

F-3: City of Brandon Critical Facilities………………………………………….… F-3

F-4: City of Canton Critical Facilities……………………………………………... F-4

F-5: City of Colton Critical Facilities……………………………………………… F-5

F-6: City of Crooks Critical Facilities………………………………………….….. F-6

F-7: City of Dell Rapids Critical Facilities………………………………………… F-7

F-8: Town of Fairview Critical Facilities………………………………………….. F-8

F-9: City of Garretson Critical Facilities………………………………………….. F-9

F-10: City of Harrisburg Critical Facilities………………………………………… F-10

F-11: City of Hartford Critical Facilities………………………………………...… F-11

F-12: City of Hudson Critical Facilities…………………………………………… F-12

F-13: City of Humboldt Critical Facilities………………………………………… F-13

F-14: City of Lennox Critical Facilities…………………………………………… F-14

F-15: City of Sioux Falls Clinics………………………………………………….. F-15

F-16: City of Sioux Falls City Hall and Courthouses……………………………... F-16

F-17: City of Sioux Falls Emergency Response Services…………………………. F-17

F-18: City of Sioux Falls Hospitals………………………………………………... F-18

F-19: City of Sioux Falls Nursing Homes………………………………………… F-19

F-20: City of Sioux Falls Schools…………………………………………………. F-20

Table of Contents


vi

F-21: Town of Sherman Critical Facilities………………………………………… F-21

F-22: City of Tea Critical Facilities……………………………………………….. F-22

F-23: City of Valley Springs Critical Facilities……………………………………. F-23

F-24: City of Worthing Critical Facilities………………………………………..… F-24

Appendix G: Community Flood Zones Maps

G-1: City of Baltic Flood Zones Map…………………………………………….... G-1

G-2: City of Beresford Flood Zones Map………………………………………… G-2

G-3: City of Brandon Flood Zones Map………………………………………….. G-3

G-4: City of Canton Flood Zones Map……………………………………………. G-4

G-5: City of Colton Flood Zones Map……………………………………………. G-5

G-6: City of Crooks Flood Zones Map…………………………………………… G-6

G-7: City of Dell Rapids Flood Zones Map………………………………………. G-7

G-8: Town of Fairview Flood Zones Map………………………………………… G-8

G-9: City of Garretson Flood Zones Map………………………………………… G-9

G-10: City of Harrisburg Flood Zones Map……………………………………….. G-10

G-11: City of Hartford Flood Zones Map………………………………………….. G-11

G-12: Town of Hudson Flood Zones Map………………………….……………… G-12

G-13: City of Humboldt Flood Zones Map…………………………...…………… G-13

G-14: City of Lennox Flood Zones Map…………………………………………... G-14

G-15: Town of Sherman Flood Zones Map……………………………………….. G-15

G-16: City of Sioux Falls Flood Zones Map……………………………………… G-16

G-17: City of Tea Flood Zones Map………………………………………………. G-17

G-18: City of Valley Springs Flood Zones Map………………………...…………. G-18

G-19: City of Worthing Flood Zones Map………………………………………… G-19

Appendix H: Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and its Communities

Proposed Mitigation Actions……………………………………... H-1

Appendix I: Bibliography……………………………………………………...… I-1


1

Introduction

Purpose

The purpose of the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Plan 2011 Update is:

1) To guide Lincoln County and Minnehaha County’s mitigation programs to

reduce the impacts of or remove the effects of significant hazards from these

jurisdictions e.g., threats to life and property.

2) To serve as a public and private sector reference document and management

tool for mitigation activities throughout Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties.

3) To meet the local planning requirements of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended by Public Law 106-390,

October 30, 2000 UNITED STATES CODE Title 42. THE PUBLIC

HEALTH AND WELFARE CHAPTER 68. DISASTER RELIEF [As

amended by Pub. L. 103-181, Pub. L. 103-337, and Pub. L. 106- 390] (Pub.

L. 106-390, October 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 15521575) hereafter referred to as

the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000).

FEMA published an Interim Final Rule (44 CFR Part 201) in the Federal Register on February

26, 2002, to implement the DMA 2000 planning requirements. This Lincoln County and

Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011 Update includes the

requirements set forth by this rule.

Background

The “Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan - Serving the Jurisdictions and Communities of

Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties and the City of Sioux Falls” was completed and approved by

FEMA on January 21, 2004. The plan was forged to prevent and minimize the costs incurred by

businesses, property owners, private non-profits, and governmental entities due to past hazard

events. The plan identified hazards and assessed the risks historically faced by Lincoln and

Minnehaha Counties and incorporated a mitigation strategy that encompassed a set of goals,

objectives, and action steps to help mitigate against and minimize damages imposed by those

hazards. The 2004 plan was later updated and improved upon in April of 2005 to account for the

severe flash floods and rainfall that occurred during the summer months of 2004. The storm

damages inflicted upon the counties of Lincoln and Minnehaha resulted in a presidential

declaration (FEMA-DR-1531-SD).

The Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011

Update is a multi-jurisdictional plan. The following jurisdictions and organizations participated

in the plan’s development by attending at least one planning meeting, sharing information, and

by offering its time and support during the planning process. East Dakota Water Development

District, Lincoln County Rural Water System, Minnehaha Community Water Corporation, and


2

the South Lincoln Rural Water System participated in the planning process, but did not formally

adopt the plan.

Jurisdictions

City of Baltic

City of Beresford

City of Brandon

City of Canton

City of Colton

City of Crooks

City of Dell Rapids

City of Garretson

City of Harrisburg

City of Hartford

City of Humboldt

City of Lennox

City of Sherman

City of Sioux Falls

City of Tea

City of Worthing

Lincoln County

Minnehaha County

Organizations

East Dakota Water Development District

Lincoln County Rural Water System

Minnehaha Community Water Corporation

Sioux Valley Energy

South Eastern Electric Cooperative

South Lincoln Rural Water System

This plan illustrates Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and its communities/jurisdictions’

current and future mitigation actions and strategies in accordance with the guidance materials

provided by FEMA and the State of South Dakota’s Office of Emergency Management. The

reviewer will note that the section headings and subheadings follow the organization of the Local

Mitigation Plan Review Crosswalk. Several appendices accompany this plan. They contain

technical data and other supporting documents to meet 44 CFR Part 201 local multi-hazard

planning requirements.

Chapter 1 demonstrates the legal authority of the Lincoln County and

Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011 Update

through the adoption of the plan by the legislative body of each participating

jurisdiction.


3

Chapter 2 documents the planning process for developing this plan.

Chapter 3 outlines the identified hazards, profiles vulnerabilities, and assesses

the risk for each hazard for Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and its

participating jurisdictions.

Chapter 4 details the mitigation strategy for Lincoln County, Minnehaha

County, and its participating jurisdictions based on the local vulnerability

analyses and risk assessments.

Chapter 5 outlines the plan maintenance process.


4

Chapter I

Prerequisites and Community Profile

1.1 Adoption by the Local Governing Body


Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties and the City of Sioux Falls” was completed and approved by

FEMA on January 21, 2004.

On May 16, 2012 the Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties Hazard Mitigation Planning committee,

led by the Minnehaha County Emergency Manager Lynn DeYoung and Lincoln County

Emergency Manager Harold Timmerman recommended that this 2011 revised and updated

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan be adopted

by the Minnehaha County Commission on June 12, 2012 and the Lincoln County Commission

on June 7, 2012. The Minnehaha County Commission adopted the revised and updated plan by

resolution on June 12, 2012 and the Lincoln County Commission adopted the revised and

updated plan by resolution on June 7, 2012. The resolutions to adopt the plan can be found in

Appendix A.

1.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Adoptions

In accordance with 44 CFR Part §201.6(c) (5), the City of Baltic, the City of Beresford, the City

of Brandon, the City of Canton, the City of Colton, the City of Crooks, the City of Dell Rapids,

the City of Garretson, the City of Harrisburg, the City of Hartford, the City of Humboldt, the

City of Lennox, the Town of Sherman, the City of Sioux Falls, the City of Tea, and the City of

Worthing have adopted the 2011 revised and updated Lincoln County and Minnehaha County

Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. The following two organizations adopted the revised

and updated 2011 plan; Sioux Valley Energy, and South Eastern Electric Cooperative. These

aforementioned community and organization resolutions to adopt the revised and updated 2011

plan can be found in Appendix A.

The following aforementioned communities and organizations are adopting the Lincoln County

and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2011 in order

to comply with 44 CFR §20.6(d) (3) that requires each jurisdiction to review, revise, and

resubmit their plan to their State Office of Emergency Management and the Federal Emergency

44 CFR Part §201.6(c) (5): Requirement

[The local hazard mitigation plan shall include] documentation that the plan has been

formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the

plan (e.g., City Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council).


For multi-jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must

document that it has been formally adopted.


5

Management Agency for approval once every five years in order to continue to remain eligible

for federal mitigation project funding (Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Grant Program, Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, and the Severe Repetitive Loss

Program).

1.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Participation

The following jurisdictions and organizations participated in the planning process. East Dakota

Water Development District, Lincoln County Rural Water System, Minnehaha Community

Water Corporation, and the South Lincoln Rural Water System participated in the planning

process, but did not formally adopt the plan. The non-incorporated communities or areas were

represented by Lincoln County and Minnehaha County.

Jurisdictions

City of Baltic

City of Beresford

City of Brandon

City of Canton

City of Colton

City of Crooks

City of Dell Rapids

City of Garretson

City of Harrisburg

City of Hartford

City of Humboldt

City of Lennox

City of Sherman

City of Sioux Falls

City of Tea

City of Worthing

Lincoln County

Minnehaha County

Organizations

East Dakota Water Development District

Lincoln County Rural Water System

Minnehaha Community Water Corporation

Sioux Valley Energy

South Eastern Electric Cooperative

South Lincoln Rural Water System

44 CFR Part §201.6(a) (3): Requirement

Multi-jurisdictional plans (e.g., watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as

long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process…Statewide plans will not be

accepted as multi-jurisdictional plans.


6

1.4 Community Profile

Population

Lincoln County is located in southeastern South Dakota. The county covers approximately 579

square miles and has a population of 44,828 according to the US Census 2010. Canton is the

county seat, and the County’s most populous city is Sioux Falls (Lincoln County) with a

population of 21,095.1 Lincoln County has nearly doubled in size from 24,131 in 2000 to 44,828

in 2010. All indicators are the population will continue to grow and expand in the coming years.

Table 1.1: Lincoln County Population Characteristics

Jurisdiction Population

1990

Population

2000

Population

2010

Median Age

2000

Minority %

2000

Lincoln County 15,427 24,131 44,828 34 2.45%

Beresford 349 427 359 39.1 1.1%

Canton 2,787 3,110 3,057 36.2 2.8%

Fairview 73 94 60 31 3.2%

Harrisburg 727 958 4,089 30.1 1.4%

Hudson 332 402 296 37.3 2%

Lennox 1,767 2,037 2,111 37.7 1.3%

Sioux Falls City

(Lincoln County)

1,409 6,618 21,095 N/A N/A

Tea 786 1,742 3,806 28.2 3.3%

Worthing 371 585 877 29 1%

Minnehaha County is located in southeastern South Dakota. The county covers approximately

810 square miles and is South Dakota’s most populous county with a population of 169,4681

according to the US Census 2010. Sioux Falls is the county seat and the state’s most populous

city with a population of 153,888.2 Minnehaha County and its communities have experienced

significant population growth over the last 20 years. Some communities within the Sioux Falls

Metropolitan Area have experienced population increases of 50% or more from 2000 to 2010.

All indicators are that the population will continue to grow and expand over the next twenty

years.

1 US Census 2010, www.census.gov

2 US Census 2010, www.census.gov


7

Table 1.2: Minnehaha County Population Characteristics

Jurisdiction Population

1990

Population

2000

Population

2010

Median

Age 2000

Minority %

2000

Minnehaha County 123,809 148,281 169,468 34 6.97%

Baltic 666 811 1,089 30 1.11%

Brandon 3,545 5,693 8,785 31 1.77%

Colton 657 662 687 37 .91%

Crooks 671 859 1,269 30 1.86%

Dell Rapids 2,484 2,980 3,633 36 1.31%

Garretson 924 1,165 1,166 37 2.4%

Hartford 1,262 1,844 2,534 32 2.44%

Humboldt 468 521 589 32 3.26%

Sherman 66 87 78 28 2.3%

Sioux Falls 99,405 117,355 132,793 33 11.1%

Valley Springs 739 792 759 32 1.52%

Physical Description

The geography of the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Region is heavily settled and

urban within in the Sioux Falls Metropolitan Area (SFMA), but the land outside of the SFMA is

mostly rural and devoted to the raising of crops such as corn, wheat, and soybeans. The land

primarily consists of what is referred to as Coteau De Prairies3 which is made of low lying

prairie and glacial lakes. The only major river within the region is the Big Sioux River. The Big

Sioux River acts as the eastern border for Lincoln County and runs through the center of

Minnehaha County. There are areas within the region in which drainage presents a major issue,

especially along the Big Sioux River Basin and other low lying areas.

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County are both located in the Big Sioux River Basin. The Basin

is formed within a topographic feature known as the Coteau de Prairies. The Coteau has what is

known as a flatiron shape lying in a general northwest to southeast direction. It is about 200

miles long and 80 miles wide at the widest point. The northern part of the Coteau de Prairies has

geologically developed features of potholes, sloughs, and lakes. During periods of low

precipitation, these features tend to hold backwater and do not contribute to the drainage of the

Big Sioux River. Conversely, during wet years, this area can accumulate enough moisture to

greatly increase the water supply to the drainage basin. These wet years pose a higher risk for

flood hazards in Lincoln County and Minnehaha County.

In general, most soil in the region is fertile with adequate rainfall to meet agricultural production

needs. In terms of precipitation, the average annual rainfall is 24.7 inches and is concentrated

during the warm summer months. Snowfall occurs mostly in light to moderate amounts during

the winter, and the annual average is at 39.3 inches. The climate of the region is considered a

humid continental climate which is characterized by hot, relatively humid summers and cold,

3 USGS – The Coteau de Prairies, http://www.nationalatlas.gov/tapestry/features/38coteau.html

http://www.nationalatlas.gov/tapestry/features/38coteau.html


8

drier winters. From mid-January to mid-July, highs range from 24 to 86 °F (-4 to 30 °C) and

lows from 2 to 61 °F (-17 to 16 °C).

Table 1.3: Monthly Climate Conditions in Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties Region4

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Ave.

High

(F°) 24.3 29.6 42.3 59.0 70.7 80.5 86.3 83.3 73.1 61.2 43.4 28.0

Ave.

Low (F°)

3.3 9.7 22.6 34.8 45.9 56.1 62.3 59.4 48.7 36.0 22.6 8.6

Ave.

Percip.

(Inches) .5 .6 1.6 2.5 3.0 3.4 2.7 2.9 3.0 1.8 1.1 .7

Ave.

Snow (Inches)

6.8 8.2 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 .8 5.8 7.2

Social and Economic Description

The economy of the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Region is heavily influenced by its

Sioux Falls Metropolitan Area (SFMA). The SFMA economy is comprised of diverse sectors

that include finance, healthcare, retail, agriculture, tourism, distribution, and trade. This

diversification has lead to the creation of high paying jobs within the region. As shown in Table

1.4, Lincoln County, as a whole, posts a higher median household income with $65,922 than the

national average of $51,425. The communities within Lincoln County have household incomes

that range from a low of $25,750 in the City of Hudson to a high of $67,717 in the City of

Harrisburg. The percentage of families living below the poverty level in Lincoln County is only

2.6% compared to the national average of 9.9%.

As shown in Table 1.5, Minnehaha County’s median household income of $50,671 was slightly

less than the national average of $51,425. The communities within Minnehaha County have

median household incomes that range from a low of $41,875 in Valley Springs to a high of

$72,113 in Crooks. The percentage of families living below the poverty level in Minnehaha

County is 6.4%, which is less than the national average of 9.9%.

4 Climate Information Sioux Falls Area, http://www.climate-zone.com/climate/united-states/south-dakota/sioux-

falls/


9

Table 1.4: Income, Job Earnings, and Poverty - Lincoln County5

Entity Median Household

Income (2009 Est.)

Per Capita Income

(2009 Est.)

% of Families Living

Below Poverty Level

Beresford $47,725 $25,518 4.9%

Canton $47,146 $22,980 2.9%

Fairview $51,875 $17,885 3.3%

Harrisburg $67,717 $24,699 .5%

Hudson $25,750 $15,501 3.4%

Lennox $53,558 $18,708 5%

Sioux Falls $49,157 $26,306 7.1%

Tea $66,213 $26,222 6.3%

Worthing $50,547 $20,231 2.7%

Lincoln County $65,992 $28,307 2.6%

South Dakota $44,828 $23,445 8.8%

United States $51,425 $27,041 9.9%

Table 1.5: Income, Job Earnings, and Poverty - Minnehaha County6

Entity Median Household

Income (2009 Est.)

Per Capita Income

(2009 Est.)

% of Families Living

Below Poverty Level

Baltic $55,708 $22,845 .7%

Brandon $63,295 $25,591 1.9%

Colton $49,531 $22,014 5%

Crooks $72,113 $27,417 2.1%

Dell Rapids $61,033 $26,490 4.4%

Garretson $44,138 $20,621 7%

Hartford $58,594 $22,450 5.2%

Humboldt $52,031 $26,746 0%

Sherman $55,000 $27,158 0%

Sioux Falls $49,157 $26,306 7.1%

Valley Springs $41,875 $16,722 7.7%

Minnehaha County $50,671 $25,836 6.4%

South Dakota $44,828 $23,445 8.8%

United States $51,425 $27,041 9.9%

5 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2005-2009, www.census.gov

6 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2005-2009, www.census.gov


10

Figure 1-1: Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Infrastructure


11

Transportation and Utility Infrastructure

The Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Region’s main routes are I-29 and I-90. Other

highways include I-229, US Hwy 46, SD Hwy 11, SD Hwy 115, SD Hwy 19, and SD Hwy 17.

The region is served by four railroad lines. These rail lines include the Burlington Santa Fe

Railroad Line, the D & I Railroad Line (Private), the D & I Rail Line (State Owned), and the Elis

and Eastern Rail Line. The region’s main airport is the Joe Foss Field Sioux Falls Regional

Airport. Additional airports are also located in Tea (large general aviation services provided) and

Canton (small general aviation services provided).

Most of the communities within Lincoln County and Minnehaha County own and operate their

water and sanitary sewer systems. Some communities belong to water or sanitary sewer system

districts. For rural customers, water service is provided primarily by Lincoln County Rural Water

System, Minnehaha Community Water Corporation, the South Lincoln Rural Water System, and

the Lewis and Clark Rural Water System. Rural residences often use individual septic tanks and

drain fields. Residential development is expected to continue in both Lincoln County and

Minnehaha County. Development into new areas needs to be controlled through planning and

development guidelines to help ensure growth is not occurring in hazard prone areas such as

floodways or wetlands.

Electric power in the region is provided through investor owned companies such as Xcel Energy

and rural electric cooperatives. Some communities operate and own their electric utilities. The

main phone companies serving the region are MidContinent Communication, CenturyLink, and

SPN Communications. The main cellular companies providing services within the region are

Version Wireless, AT&T, and Sprint.

Medical and Emergency Services

The hospitals and health centers serving the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Region are

listed below:

Avera McKennan Hospital & University Center – Sioux Falls

Sanford – USD Medical Center – Sioux Falls

VA Medical Center – Sioux Falls

Canton-Inwood Memorial Hospital – Canton

Dells Area Health Center – Dell Rapids

The main hospitals serving the region are the Avera McKenna Heart Hospital & University

Center and Sanford – USD Medical Center. Both hospitals provide a full range of emergency

and medical services to the region.


12

The fire departments in the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Region are as follows:

Baltic Volunteer Fire Department

Beresford Volunteer Fire Department

Brandon Volunteer Fire Department

Canton Volunteer Fire Department

Colton Volunteer Fire Department

Crooks Volunteer Fire Department

Dell Rapids Volunteer Fire Department

Fairview Volunteer Fire Department

Garretson Volunteer Fire Department

Harrisburg Volunteer Fire Department

Hartford Area Fire and Rescue Incorporated

Hudson Volunteer Fire Department

Humboldt Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance

Lennox Volunteer Fire Department

Lyons Volunteer Fire Department

Renner Fire and Rescue

Sherman Volunteer Fire Department

Sioux Falls Fire Department

Split Rock Volunteer Fire Department

Valley Springs Volunteer Fire Department

Tea Fire and Rescue Department

Worthing Community Fire Department Incorporated

Each department has the capability to respond to both structural and wild land fires. All

departments have training, expertise, and equipment at various levels in regard to hazardous

materials response.


13

Chapter II

Planning Process

2.1 Documentation of the Planning Process


Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties and the City of Sioux Falls” was completed in 2004 and

revised in 2005. The plan was developed by Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties Multi-Hazard Pre-

Disaster Planning Committee. The committee participated in discussions to identify, categorize,

and prioritize issues relevant to each historical and current hazard event in Lincoln and

Minnehaha Counties. During the 2004 and 2005 planning process, the only multi-jurisdictional

participants were from Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and the City of Sioux Falls. All

three jurisdictions continued to remain participating jurisdictions for the development of the

2011 plan update.

This section demonstrates the planning process used to develop this 2011 update for The Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. The planning

process began in late 2010, continued through the adoption of the plan, and will remain in effect

as the plan is maintained. This process has provided and continues to provide all relevant

stakeholders the opportunity to actively participate in the development/revision of this plan.

Production of the plan was led by Minnehaha County Emergency Manager Lynn DeYoung and

Lincoln County Emergency Manager Harold Timmerman. They both served as the main points

of contact for all activities associated with the plan’s development. Input was also received by

44 CFR Part §201.6(b): Requirement

An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective

plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of

natural hazards, the planning process shall include:

1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and

prior to plan approval;

2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved

in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate

development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and non-profit interests

to be involved in the planning process; and

3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and

technical information.


[The plan shall document] the planning process used to develop the plan, including

how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was

involved.


14

the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning

Committee whose membership is listed in Table 2.1 Participation in Plan Development (2011

Update) and Meeting Attendance (1-5). Lincoln County and Minnehaha County contracted

with South Eastern Council of Governments (SECOG) staff to provide technical assistance and

guidance with the drafting and overall development of the 2011 plan update.

2.2 Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Planning Committee

The communities and jurisdictions of Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties were notified by letter to

send at least one representative to participate in the planning process and attend the Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee Kick-

Off Meeting for the 2011 update held on August 31, 2010. Each representative acted as a local

liaison to relay information obtained from the hazard mitigation meetings back to local staff,

elected officials, fire districts, and other local personnel associated with emergency, planning,

and mitigation activities. A core planning committee was formed by those who were in

attendance at the kick-off meeting. A list of the planning committee members can be found in

Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Participation in Plan Development (2011 Update) and Meeting Attendance

Name Entity Represented M

1 M

2 M

3 M

4 M 5

Ryan Fods City of Baltic X X

Mike Wendland City of Baltic X X

Elaine Hendrickson City of Baltic X

Jim Fedderson City Beresford X X X X

Jerry Zeimetz City of Beresford X X X X

Bryan Reed City of Brandon X X X X

Amy Nelson City of Canton X X X

Erik Miller City of Colton X

Jeanne Hisek City of Crooks X X X X X

Scott Fiegen City of Dell Rapids X

Justin Weiland City of Dell Rapids X X X

Ann Uhl City of Garretson X X X

Albert Schmidt City of Harrisburg X X X X

Teresa Sidel City of Hartford X X X X X

Kira Schmeichel City of Humboldt X X X X X

Judy Finnell City of Lennox X

Roland VanDerWerff City of Lennox X X

Robin Berg City of Sherman X X X X

Andrew Berg City of Sioux Falls X X

Regan Smith City of Sioux Falls X X X X

Jason Kjenstad City of Tea/ HDR Engineering X X

Kevin Nissen City of Tea X X X X

Carrie McDannel City of Worthing X

Jeff Tanner City of Worthing X X

Jay Gilbertson East Dakota Water Development District X X


15

Table 2.1: Participation in Plan Development (2011 Update) and

Meeting Attendance – Continued

Jon Peters Lincoln County X X X X X

Harold Timmerman Lincoln County EM X X X X X

Robin Dykstra Lincoln County Rural Water System X

Scott Anderson Minnehaha County X

Robert Wilson Minnehaha County X

Lynn DeYoung Minnehaha County EM X X X X

Scott Buss Minnehaha Community Water Cooperation X

Tom Neville Sioux Valley Energy X

Michele Nielson Sioux Valley Energy X X X X X

Jay Cleveland Southeastern Electric Coop. X X X X X

Ralph Hammer South Lincoln Rural Water System X

In addition to assisting in the writing, editing, and coordination of the 2011 plan update, the

specific requirements and responsibilities of the planning committee include:

1. Meeting periodically to review and update the Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Plan as needed or at least once every 5 years

2. Establishing county-wide hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and action items

3. Reconfirming priorities for categories of hazard mitigation projects

Local Collaboration

The planning process involved five planning meetings, communication via e-mail and digital

data sharing. A summary of the meetings and collaboration is presented in Table 2.2: Summary

of the Planning Process. The South Eastern Council of Governments (SECOG) also ensured

regional collaboration occurred by sharing data, ideas, and information collected simultaneously

from both Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties during the 2011 plan update process.

Table 2.2: Summary of the Planning Process

August 31, 2010 – Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee

Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties (Update 2011) Meeting 1

Meeting 1 was facilitated by SECOG, Minnehaha County EM and Lincoln County EM -

(1) Introduction, (2) Purpose of PDM Plan (3) Roles and Responsibilities, (3) PDM

Planning Process, and (4) Review of Existing Plan

November 16, 2010 – Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee



(1) Review of Planning Process, (2) Reviewing Location of Critical Infrastructure, (3)

Identification of Hazards Most Affecting the Counties and Impacts, (4) Identifying Areas

of Flooding and Poor Drainage, (5) Valuing Property and Infrastructure in Flood-Prone

Areas, and (6) Discussion of Mitigation Actions Already Taken


16

Table 2.2: Summary of the Planning Process – (Continued)

January 24, 2011 – Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee



(1) Review of Draft PDM Report, (2) Discussion and Identification of Mitigation Goals

and Objectives, (3) Initial Discussion of Potential Mitigation Projects to Include in the

PDM, (4) Review and Assessment of Progress of Mitigation Projects Identified in the

Previous PDM Plan, and (5) Discussion of Next Steps

March 15, 2011 - Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee


Meeting 4 was facilitated by SECOG, Minnehaha County EM and Lincoln County EM –

(1) Review of Committee’s Prior Work, (2) Review Draft PDM, (3) Review Mitigation

Projects in Prior PDM, (4) Discussion and Identification of New Mitigation Strategies,

(5) Prioritizing Mitigation Projects, (6) Disaster Mitigation Project Grant Application

Process, and (7) Discussion/ Next Steps

August 31, 2011 - Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee


(1) Review complete draft PDM Plan (2) Establish Dates for Public Forum

Meeting 5 was facilitated by SECOG, Minnehaha County EM and Lincoln County EM –

(1) Review of Committee’s Prior Work, (2) Review Complete Draft PDM, (3)

Established Dates for Public Forums, and (4) Discussion/ Next Steps

September 27, 2011 - Public Forum in Lincoln County to Discuss Complete Draft

(1) Power Point Presentation, (2) Question and Answer Session with the Public

September 28, 2011 - Public Forum in Minnehaha County to Discuss Complete Draft

(1) Power Point Presentation, (2) Question and Answer Session with the Public

October 11, 2011 - Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Plan (2011 Update) SD State Office of Emergency Management - Review of

Complete Draft

February 9, 2012 Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Plan (2011 Update) FEMA - Review of Complete Draft

June 7 and June 12, 2012 Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-

Mitigation Plan (2011 Update) – Adoption

May 16, 2012 Final Plan Submittal to FEMA

August 1, 2012 FEMA Final Plan Approval

A copy of the Agendas, Minutes, and Sign-In Sheet from each of the planning meetings is

included in Appendix B.


17

State and Federal Collaboration

The State Office of Emergency Management provided additional support and information during

the entire planning process. The US Army Corps of Engineers, Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA), the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the

South Dakota Department of Transportation were unable to attend or send representatives to any

of the planning meetings. However, the majority of the aforementioned state and federal

agencies agreed to share information and participate in the planning process though phone

conversations and email.

Public Participation

To invite the public and private sector to attend meetings and participate in the planning process,

press releases were sent out to newspapers, radio and news outlets throughout the two counties

on November 11, 2010, January 21, 2011, and March 10, 2011, for the November 16th

, January

25th

, and March 15th

core planning meetings. A public notice was placed in the following

publications: Argus Leader - Sioux Falls, Hartford Area News - Hartford, Dell Rapids Tribune –

Dell Rapids, Sioux Valley News - Harrisburg, Sioux Valley News – Canton, Garretson Gazette -

Garretson, Humboldt Journal – Humboldt, Lennox Independent – Lennox, Beresford Republic –

Beresford, and the Tea Weekly – Tea, to invite the public to attend the fourth planning meeting

and give them the opportunity to provide input on the plan’s goals, objectives, and action steps.

The second public notice was placed in the same aforementioned publications on September 12,

2011 to invite the public to attend public forums held in Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties to

provide comments on the draft plan. The public was given an opportunity to comment both

during the drafting stage of the plan and prior to plan approval. A copy of the press releases and

public notices are included in Appendix C.

The South Eastern Council of Governments also maintained a Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation web page on its website at http://www.secog.org/disaster_mitigation/

disastermitigation.htm. The web site contained meeting information, PDM maps, PDM plan draft

components, and other useful information detailing the multi-hazard pre-disaster mitigation

planning process.

Drafting the Plan

Based on the collaboration among the planning committee, the SD State Office of Emergency

Management, and FEMA, the South Eastern Council of Governments drafted the updated 2011

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan for review by

the planning committee. Each section of the plan was reviewed, analyzed and thoroughly

updated. Comments and required actions noted in FEMA’s previously completed crosswalk

(reviewing the original 2005 Pre-Disaster Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties Multi-Jurisdictional

Hazard Mitigation Plan) were addressed and incorporated.


18

Chapter III

Hazard Assessment

3.1 Hazard Identification

Background

The risk assessment acts as the foundation for the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County


Update establishes a framework for identifying mitigation goals and prioritizing actions to help

make Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties’ residents more disaster resilient and safe. The planning

committee reviewed a variety of potential hazards and assessed their potential impacts on

Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties. The list of potential hazards was narrowed down to focus on

hazards that have the most significant impact on the area and hazards where potential pre-

disaster mitigation activities would result in the most substantial benefit. As part of this

assessment, data was compiled and maps produced that help analyze the potential impacts of

various hazards.

“The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines risk assessment terminology as

follows:

Hazard—A hazard is an act or phenomenon that has the potential to produce

harm or other undesirable consequences to a person or thing.

Vulnerability—Vulnerability is susceptibility to physical injury, harm,

damage, or economic loss. It depends on an asset’s construction, contents, and

economic value of its functions.

Exposure—Exposure describes the people, property, systems, or functions

that could be lost to a hazard. Generally, exposure includes what lies in the

area the hazard could affect.

Risk—Risk depends on hazards, vulnerability, and exposure. It is the

estimated impact that a hazard would have on people, services, facilities, and

structures in a community. It refers to the likelihood of a hazard event

resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage.

Risk Assessment—Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential

loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting

from hazards.”7

The planning committee began the risk assessment by reviewing the State of South Dakota

Hazard Mitigation Plan – Basic Plan (April, 2008) and the recently updated draft State of South

Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan – Basic Plan (January, 2011). These plans provided useful

7 State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan (2008 Update), Section 3, Pg. 1


The plan shall include a risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities

proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk

assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify

and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards.


19

information about potential hazards that represent a significant risk on a statewide basis. In

addition, planning committee participants reviewed the prior Lincoln and Minnehaha Multi-

Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan and determined that a complete re-write of the risk

assessment section was appropriate given that more than five years had passed since the previous

plan was approved.

Planning committee participants reviewed historical information about natural hazards that have

occurred over the past 60 years, including information reported in the Spatial Hazard Events and

Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS)8, as well as weather events data compiled by

the National Climatic Data Center’s Storm Events Database (NCDCSED).9

A list of historical hazard events for Lincoln County is included in Appendix D. A list of

historical hazard events for Minnehaha County is included in Appendix E. The information

included in these appendices is derived primarily from SHELDUS with descriptive information

from the NCDCSED incorporated where available (1993 and later). In addition, since

SHELDUS information is only current through 2009, information through September 2010 from

the NCDCSED was also included when the event resulted in injury, death, or monetary damage.

After reviewing this information, the planning committee began assessing which types of

hazards would likely result in the most significant impact on the area. Planning committee

members reviewed an extensive list of potential hazards including those covered in the statewide

Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan, as well as the previous plan for Lincoln and

Minnehaha Counties (April 2005).

In particular, the following hazards were discussed by the planning committee as potential

hazards to address in the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Plan 2011 Update, including:

1) Flooding

2) Winter Storms

3) Wild Fires

4) Drought

5) Tornado

6) Wind

7) Hazardous Materials

8) Landslides and mudflows

9) Earthquakes

10) Hail

11) Terrorism / Civil Disorder

12) Urban Fire

13) Nuclear Incident

14) Transportation Incident

8 SHELDUS database - http://webra.cas.sc.edu/hvri/products/sheldus.aspx

9 National Climatic Data Center database - http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms


20

The planning committee decided to focus on natural hazards in the Lincoln County and

Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011 Update. The planning

committee felt that disaster mitigation projects would be most effective in addressing and

mitigating against the impact of natural hazards. Man-made hazards such as terrorism were

considered to have a low probability of occurrence. No known incident of terrorism has

occurred in the two-county area. In addition, man-made hazards such as transportation incidents

and hazardous materials are covered in both of the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County

Hazardous Materials Plans.

Drought was considered as a hazard for the two counties and several droughts have been

recorded in the area over the past 60 years. However, the area has not been subject to a

Presidential Declaration related to drought. A review of USDA Risk Management Agency data

shows that over the past 10 years, about $8.9 million in crop damages occurred in Lincoln

County and $3.3 million in crop damages occurred in Minnehaha County as a result of drought

conditions. While this hazard has a significant impact on the agricultural economy and on local

economies reliant on the agricultural sector, the planning committee concluded that there are

minimal measures that can be taken to mitigate against the impacts of this hazard.

The other primary impact of drought conditions is lower water levels. While this is a potential

threat to the area, jurisdictions within the area have already implemented policies that mitigate

against the impacts of this threat, including restrictive water usage policies during drought and

non-drought periods. These restrictions relate primarily to limits on lawn watering and other

heavy uses of water.

Several natural hazards such as avalanches, coastal erosion, coastal storms, earthquakes,

expansive soils, hurricanes, land subsidence, mudflows, land slides, tsunamis, volcanoes, and

wildfires were excluded from further consideration due to the non-existent or limited

vulnerability of the area to the aforementioned hazards. For example, there are limited forested

areas within the two counties. Consequently, wildfire has a low probability of occurrence. Only

one incidence of wildfire was noted in a review of more than 60 years of data in the NCDCSED,

with this single event resulting in only $50,000 in damage.

Earthquakes were also excluded as a hazard even though this hazard is included in the State’s

Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. As illustrated in Figure 1-1: South Dakota Seismic

Hazard Map, the vulnerability of Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties to earthquakes is considered

minimal. According to the State’s plan, no major earthquakes have been reported in South

Dakota since 1967, and South Dakota is geologically stable. The U.S. Geological Survey

estimates only a 10 percent chance of an earthquake occurring exceeding a 5.1 magnitude in any

one 50-year period. Minor earthquakes that have been observed in the state have resulted in very

limited damage such as displaced foundations, stuck doors and windows, etc.


21

Figure 3-1: South Dakota Seismic Hazard Map10

Some areas within Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and the majority of South Dakota are

listed as having over 50 percent of their land area underlain with abundant clays of high swelling

or potential for expansive soils. As indicated in Figure 3-2, there are areas within Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County that have the potential to contain expansive soils, but the

planning committee decided not to profile the expansive soils hazard due to a lack of historical

damage information and modern building practices that often take this hazard into account

already.

The planning committee gave further consideration to other types of geological hazards

including landslides and land subsistence. However, after further consideration, these hazards

were identified as having a low probability of occurrence and low vulnerability factor. While

landslides and land subsidence are discussed in the State’s plan, Lincoln County and Minnehaha

County have fairly level topography, and based on the United States Geological Survey’s

Landslide Incidence and Susceptibility Map, the area’s vulnerability to landslides is low. As a

result of these assessments, both of these hazards were excluded from further consideration by

the planning committee. Figure 3-3 illustrates that Lincoln County and Minnehaha County have

a low incidence and susceptibility to landslides.

10

Draft State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan (January, 2011), Section 3, Pg. 121


22

Figure 3-2: Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Expansive Soils11

11



23

Figure 3-3: South Dakota Land Slide Incidence and Susceptibility12

Source: U.S. Geological Survey, map generated by www.nationalatlas.gov

Dam Failure and Levee Failure will be profiled as a type of flood hazard. The National Inventory

of Dams database13

indicated that there are 13 dams listed in Lincoln County and 12 dams in

Minnehaha County.

12

Draft State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan (January, 2011), Section 3, Pg. 101 13 National Inventory of Dams Database - http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nidpublic/webpages/nid.cfm


24

After reviewing a broad list of hazards and excluding those hazards where the area has limited or

no vulnerability, the planning committee decided to focus specifically on four hazard categories:

1) Severe Summer Storms (including excess rain, lightning, and hail);

2) Severe Winter Storms (including freezing and extreme cold);

3) Tornadoes and High Winds; and

4) Flooding

Hazards such as hail, excess precipitation, lightning, freezing and extreme cold were all

considered as hazards, but are incorporated under the broader headings of either severe summer

storms or severe winter storms.

3.2 Profiling Hazards & Assessing Vulnerability

44 CFR Part §201.6(c) (2) (i): Requirement

[The risk assessment shall include a] description of the….location and extent of all

natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on

previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events.

44 CFR Part §201.6(c) (2) (ii) (A) & (B) & (C): Requirement

The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of the types and numbers of existing

and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified

hazard areas…

[The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of an] estimate of the potential dollar

losses to vulnerable structure identified in paragraph (c) (2) (i) A of this section and a

description of the methodology used to prepare the estimate…

[The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of] providing a general description of

land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can

be considered in future land use decisions.


For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction’s risks

where they vary from the risks of the entire planning area


25

Scope of Analysis

The four hazard categories to be discussed in this Plan were analyzed based on five factors

including probability, vulnerability, existing capabilities, future development, and history.

Probability: The likelihood that a disaster event will take place within a defined period.

For purposes of this analysis, the probability of a hazard is considered “high” if it were

likely to occur five times in a ten-year period, “medium” if it were to occur one to two

times in a ten-year period, and “low” if it were likely to occur less than one time in a ten-

year period. The planning committee assessed the probability of an event occurring in

the future after reviewing data from SHELDUS and the NCDCSED to track the history of

such events, in addition to local experience with dealing with these types of hazard

events.

Vulnerability: The potential impact of a hazard in terms of monetary impact, disruption,

and potential to result in injury or loss of life. For purposes of this analysis, a “high”

vulnerability assessment is a hazard that is likely to threaten human life and a substantial

amount of property. A “medium” vulnerability assessment is a hazard that this is

unlikely to threaten human life but some risk exists and the hazard may pose a significant

risk to property. A “low” vulnerability assessment is a hazard that is unlikely to threaten

human life or pose a risk to property.

Vulnerability was assessed based on a variety of factors including:

(1) Historical hazard data provided through SHELDUS and the NCDCSED. In

particular, the incidence of property damage, loss of life, and injuries was

reviewed to assess potential vulnerability.

(2) Flood plain maps were reviewed to determine the vulnerability of particular

jurisdictions to flooding events.

(3) Information was collected on the number, type and value of properties located

in flood prone areas. This information is shown in Tables 3-22 and 3-23.

(4) Information pertaining to population density and building exposure

vulnerability to all hazards can be found in Section 3.4.

In particular, vulnerability is assessed based on its potential impact on critical

infrastructure. Maps showing the location of critical infrastructure such as hospitals,

schools, police stations, etc. are shown for each jurisdiction and are included in

Appendix F. These community assets play a vital role during any natural disaster and

their susceptibility to being impacted by a particular hazard factors heavily in the

community’s vulnerability to such hazards.


26

Existing Capabilities: Existing capabilities or previously implemented actions of a

jurisdiction to mitigate against the impact of a hazard event. In the following section,

each hazard category is analyzed in more detail, including a discussion of the existing

capabilities of various jurisdictions to mitigate against each hazard category.

Future Development: Development trends factor into the potential impact of particular

hazards. For example, development within flood prone areas may result in increased

vulnerability. The impact on property and life increases as development within these

areas occurs. In addition, development within flood prone areas may expand the

vulnerability of flooding to adjacent areas that may not have been previously vulnerable

to flooding. The impact of development trends was assessed by reviewing population

projections for the area, reviewing building permit activity, the reviewing of

comprehensive plans and zoning regulations, as well as feedback provided by planning

committee participants.

History: Historical information of various hazards and their occurrence in Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County was reviewed as a part of this analysis. Table 3-1 below

shows previous Presidential Disaster Declarations for Lincoln County. Since 1960, there

have been nine disaster declarations that have occurred in Lincoln County. The total

damage figures shown represent the total damages for the entire disaster-declared area,

which included Lincoln County. Since 1960, eight of the nine disaster declarations in

Lincoln County involved flooding, two were related to severe summer storms, two were

related to severe winter storms, and two involved tornadoes.

Table 3.1: Presidential Disaster Declarations in Lincoln County

Date

Disaster

Dec # Type

Total Damage

(2009 Dollars)

4/8/1960 99 Flooding $983,088

7/27/1962 132 Flooding and Tornadoes $3,843,478

4/18/1969 257 Flooding $4,599,306

7/19/1984 717 Severe Storms and Flooding $4,432,207

7/19/1993 999 Severe Storms, Tornadoes and Flooding $53,068,748

5/26/1995 1052 Flooding $35,649,349

1/10/1997 1156 Severe Winter Storms and Blizzard Conditions $19,455,263

4/7/1997 1173 Severe Flooding, Severe Winter Storm $87,069,429


Source: Public Entity and Risk Institute (www.peripresdecusa.org)


27

Table 3-2 shows previous Presidential Disaster Declarations for Minnehaha County. Since

1960, there have been eight disaster declarations that included Minnehaha County. The total

damage figures shown represent the total damages for the entire disaster-declared area, which

included Minnehaha County. Since 1960, five of the eight disaster declarations in Minnehaha

County involved flooding, three were related to severe summer storms, three were related to

severe winter storms, and one involved tornadoes. In addition, six of the disasters covered both

Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties.

Table 3-2: Presidential Disaster Declarations in Minnehaha County

Date

Disaster

Dec # Type

Total Damage

(2009 Dollars)

4/8/1960 99 Flooding $983,088

4/18/1969 257 Flooding $4,599,306

7/19/1993 999 Severe Storms, Tornadoes and Flooding $53,068,748

1/10/1997 1156

Severe Winter Storms and Blizzard

Conditions $19,455,263

2/28/1997 1161

Severe Winter Storms and Blizzard

Conditions $2,666,554

4/7/1997 1173 Severe Flooding, Severe Winter Storm $87,069,429



Source: Public Entity and Risk Institute (www.peripresdecusa.org)

Appendix D and Appendix E each provide a comprehensive list of weather related events over

the past 60 years for Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and their communities. The list

includes events that resulted in significant property or crop damages, injuries, or loss of life. The

list was derived primarily from information compiled by the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses

Database of the United States (SHELDUS), with descriptive information incorporated, when

available. Events occurring since 1993 were also included from the NCDCSED. In addition,

due to SHELDUS information only being current through 2009, information through September

of 2010 was incorporated using the NCDCSED when the event resulted in injury, death, or

monetary damage. It is important to note that the damage figures shown in these appendices are

estimated and reflect the total amount of reported damages caused by the event divided by the

number of counties impacted.


28

3.3 Hazard Assessment

As part of the process of identifying which hazards to include in the report, the planning

committee developed a risk assessment matrix to summarize the probability of each hazard’s

occurrence in relation to each hazard’s identified vulnerability. While the occurrence and

vulnerability of any particular hazard may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the Risk

Assessment Matrix included in Table 3-3 aggregates the information to determine the

vulnerability and probability of a hazard for the entire area. The Risk Assessment was made by

the planning committee considering the past incidence and impacts of these events, in addition to

their own knowledge of prior impacts for local jurisdictions.

Table 3-3: Hazard Risk Assessment Matrix

Vulnerability

Low Medium High

Pro

bab

ilit

y o

f O

ccu

rren

ce

Low Dam Failure;

Landslide

Medium

Tornado

High

Severe Summer Storms

Severe Winter Storm;

Flooding

For the purpose of discussion, the planning committee created Table 3-3: Hazard Risk

Assessment Matrix, with the categories of Low, Medium, and High defined as follows:

Probability of Occurrence:

Low – historically, the listed hazard has been analyzed with a frequency of one or fewer

noteworthy events within the last decade. This category also includes rare hazard events

that may occur only once every century.

Medium – the occurrence of the listed hazard has been noted more frequently than once

in a decade, but less frequently than twice every five year period on average.

High – the listed hazard has taken place more than twice every five years, and is

comprised of annual event hazards, and even multiple times per year hazards. To be

assigned this ranking, the hazard does not have to occur each year, but when considered

over a five year period, the hazard is observed three or more times within a five-year

period.


29

Vulnerability: Potential to Impact People, Structure, Infrastructure, and the Economy

Low – the occurrence of the listed hazard has a low probability of negatively impacting

critical resources based on the risk exposure to developments and population centers,

coupled with concerns in regard to available resources to respond to these threats. The

risk exposure potentially impacts no lives and less than 25 structures when it is recorded.

Medium- the occurrence of the listed hazard has moderate potential to negatively impact

critical resources based on the exposure to developments and population centers, coupled

with considerations for available resources to respond to these threats. The risk exposure

potentially impacts fewer than five lives or less than 50 structures when it is recorded.

High – the occurrence of the listed hazard has high potential to negatively impact critical

resources based on the exposure to developments and population centers, coupled with

considerations for available resources to respond to these threats. The risk exposure

potentially impacts more than five lives or more than 50 structures per occurrence.

Maps showing the location of critical community infrastructure are included in Appendix F.

This is particularly important as it relates to flooding, where the geographic impact is more

predictable. Alternatively, tornadoes, severe winter storms and severe summer storms are as

likely to occur anywhere in the region geographically and are less predictable in terms of their

overall impacts.

The remainder of this section discusses each of the four hazard categories (Severe Summer

Storms, Tornadoes, Severe Winter Storms, and Flooding) within the context of the five criteria

outlined previously including probability, vulnerability, existing capabilities, future

development, and history.

3.3.1 Severe Summer Storms (including excess rain, lightning and hail)

Probability of Occurrence

Severe Summer Storms, as defined for purposes of this report, include all storms occurring

during spring, summer, and fall with damages that may result from excess rain or thunderstorms,

lightning, and hail. The impact of tornadoes and high winds, which usually occur in conjunction

with summer storms (high winds and tornadoes) or winter storms (high winds), are considered as

separate hazards for the purposes of this report.

Severe summer storms are typically associated with unstable weather conditions and are not

geographically predictable. All portions of Minnehaha County and Lincoln County are equally

susceptible to these types of events, although the type and amount of damages will vary

depending on the location. For example, hail can result in significant agricultural damage in the

rural parts of the county, but the urbanized area of Sioux Falls is more vulnerable to significant

property damage due to having higher density population, housing, and commercial districts.


30

Planning committee participants identified the following potential impacts resulting from severe

summer storms:

1. Damage to trees and other physical property (homes and building, cars, etc.);

2. Knock down overhead power lines and result in power outages;

3. Negative impact on utilities and physical property due to power outages;

4. Lightning strikes starting fires (homes, grass fires, etc.) and causing power outages;

5. Crop damage in agricultural areas; and

6. Possible physical injuries due to hail and lack of appropriate shelter.

The probability of severe summer storms occurring in any given year is high. Based on

information compiled by the NCDCSED, 120 lightning/thunderstorm events occurred in Lincoln

County and 224 lightning/thunderstorm events occurred in Minnehaha County during the 17-

year period between 1994 and 2010. This is an average of seven events per year for Lincoln

County and 13 events per year for the geographically larger Minnehaha County. Similarly,

there have been 128 recorded hail events in Lincoln County and 334 hail events in Minnehaha

County between 1959 and 2010 or approximately 2.5 hail events per year in Lincoln County and

6.5 hail events per year in Minnehaha County. The likelihood of future severe summer storms

including hail, excess rain, lightning, and thunderstorms is inevitable.

Vulnerability and Loss Potential

All jurisdictions included in this plan are vulnerable to the impacts of summer storms,

particularly storms that include hail, lightning, or excess rain. Tables 3-4 and 3-5 show the

number of events and estimated damages from hail and lightning/thunderstorm events occurring

in Lincoln County and Minnehaha County.

Table 3-4: Impact of Severe Summer Storms -

Lincoln County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of

Events Deaths Injuries

Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Hailstorms 1959-2010 128 0 0 $4,006 $300 $4,306 $34

Lightning & Thunderstorms 1994-2010 120 0 1 $3,386 $0 $3,386 $28

*In Thousands Source: National Climatic Data Center’s Storm Events Database

Table 3-5: Impact of Severe Summer Storms -

Minnehaha County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Hailstorms 1959-2010 334 0 0 $23,761 $3,006 $26,767 $80

Lightning & Thunderstorms 1994-2010 224 3 6 $3,766 $51 $3,817 $17



31

Based on this data source, it is somewhat difficult to assess the true damage caused by these

events as the damage figures shown in the tables above are aggregated for all counties impacted

by particular hazard events, which may extend far beyond Lincoln County or Minnehaha County

individually. The data does, however, provide perspective on the probability of events occurring

and potential vulnerability. For example, between 1959 and 2010, the total damages resulting

from hailstorms were $4.3 million for events that included Lincoln County and $26.8 million for

events that include Minnehaha County.

It is not entirely surprising that Minnehaha County would sustain much higher damages relative

to Lincoln County. First, the City of Sioux Falls is the largest population center in the two

counties, and while the City of Sioux Falls extends into both counties, a majority of the City is in

Minnehaha County. With a higher population density, it is not unexpected that hail-related

damages would be higher for Minnehaha County since hail can exert significant damage on

physical property such as homes, buildings, and vehicles.

Hail can also cause significant monetary damage to agricultural areas, which would suggest that

Lincoln County, which is primarily agricultural, would have more monetary crop losses due to

hail events than what is shown in the NCDCSED. It appears that the NCDCSED estimates for

crop damages are highly speculative and unreliable. A more accurate estimate of crop damages

resulting from hail was generated from the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)

Risk Management Agency. Table 3-4 is able to demonstrate that crop damage for the 10 year

period between 2000 and 2009 from hail was nearly $2 million for Lincoln County, whereas the

NCDCSED only reported total crop damages from hail events impacting Lincoln County at

$300,000 for the 52-year period ending in 2010.

The primary conclusions that can be drawn from the information included in the NCDCSED is

that:

1) On average, a lightning/thunderstorm event is more likely to occur in a given year

compared with hail events;

2) Typically, hail events result in more monetary damage compared to

lighting/thunderstorm events, but hail events are unlikely to result in death or injury

as there are no such injuries/deaths reported in the database; and

3) Lightning/thunderstorm events are more likely to result in injury or death, but the

likelihood of this occurring is still relatively low.

Tables 3-6 and 3-7 provide more insight into the potential impact of summer storms as they

relate to the agricultural sector. A majority of the land area in Lincoln County and Minnehaha

County is devoted to agricultural production such as field crops. According to the USDA Risk

Management Agency, over a ten-year period ending in 2009, crop losses due to hail storms was

nearly $2 million for Lincoln County and about $500,000 for Minnehaha County. Crop losses

due to excess rain were much higher in both counties and totaled nearly $7.5 million in Lincoln

County and $5.3 million in Minnehaha County during this ten-year period.


32


Lincoln County

Hail Excess Rain

2000 $474,787 $10,694

2001 $7,421 $267,388

2002 $881,062 $13,591

2003 $11,820 $419,424

2004 $102,435 $226,001

2005 $88,417 $2,343,141

2006 $58,668 $46,415

2007 $108,953 $519,105

2008 $229,449 $3,184,523

2009 $23,606 $445,463

Total $1,986,618 $7,475,745

Annual Avg. $198,662 $747,575 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency


Minnehaha County

Hail Excess Rain

2000 $87,603 $87,748

2001 $93,771 $825,281

2002 $9,675 $31,192

2003 $36,720 $266,780

2004 $2,228 $182,109

2005 $4,937 $754,546

2006 $0 $316,270

2007 $0 $582,085

2008 $44,244 $1,960,533

2009 $209,932 $312,722

Total $489,110 $5,319,266

Annual Avg. $48,911 $531,927

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency


33

Vulnerability Summary

Severe Summer Storms (lightning, hail, or severe heat) in Lincoln County from 1959 – 2010

have resulted in annual damages of approximately $150,823 (non-adjusted for inflation) to

property and infrastructure. The annual losses caused by severe summer storms (2000 – 2009) to

the agricultural sector for Lincoln County is approximately $946,237 (non-adjusted for

inflation). The frequency of severe summer storm events is high. Hail storm events in Lincoln

County occur on average 2.5 times per year, and thunderstorm events occur 7.5 times per year.

Severe Summer Storms (lightning, hail, or extreme heat) incidents in Minnehaha County from

1959 – 2010 have resulted in annual damages of approximately $539,745 (non-adjusted for

inflation) to property and infrastructure. The annual crop losses caused by past severe summer

storms (2000 – 2009) within Minnehaha County are approximately $580,838 (non-adjusted for

inflation). The frequency of severe summer storm events is high. Hail storm events in Minnehaha

County occur on average six times per year and thunderstorm events occur 14 times per year.

Existing Capabilities

Planning committee participants identified several strategies already being utilized to mitigate

the impact of severe summer storms including:

1) Use of sirens and early warning systems;

2) Burying overhead power lines;

3) Identifying emergency shelters;

4) Installing backup generators for community utilities and other critical facilities (i.e. pump

stations);

5) Instant communication system for emergency management notification;

6) Established method for announcing alerts;

7) Regular maintenance of alert systems;

8) Establishing appropriate building codes to ensure new structures can withstand storm

damage;

9) Enforcement of nuisance ordinances;

10) Replacing and upgrading culverts;

11) Storm sewer improvements; and

12) Tree trimming.

Future Development

Since the geographic impact of severe summer storms is impossible to predict, severe summer

storms, as defined in this report, have minimal impact on land use planning and development.

However, each jurisdiction continues to assess the capacity of its utilities, such as storm sewers,

to determine where different types of development can take place, and ensuring that storm sewer

and other related utilities are capable of withstanding severe summer storms, particularly as it

relates to excess rain and localized flooding.


34

History

The two costliest severe summer storm events in Lincoln County and Minnehaha County region

occurred on 5/22/1993 in Minnehaha County with approximately $5,000,000 in property

damages and on 6/12/2001 in Minnehaha County, Lincoln County, and the City of Sioux Falls

with approximately $20,000,000 in total property damages. Damages in both incidents were

caused by hail.

This historical incidence of severe summer storms is discussed in the vulnerability section. It is

also appropriate to note that three Presidential Disaster Declarations within the two counties

reference severe summer storms as part of the disaster declaration, although these events

typically involved other hazards such as flooding and/or tornadoes.

3.3.2 Severe Winter Storms (including freezing and extreme cold)


Severe winter storms, as defined for the purposes of this report, include blizzards, as well as

freezing temperatures, and extreme cold. These storms tend to occur in the late fall, winter, and

early spring seasons. Similar to severe summer storms, severe winter storms are typically

associated with unstable weather conditions and are not geographically predictable. All areas

within Minnehaha County and Lincoln County are equally susceptible to the impact of these

events. Impacts can include hazardous driving conditions, loss of life or injury for individuals

without proper shelter, damage to agricultural crops, and budgetary issues for local governments

to clear snow from roadways.

Planning committee participants identified the following potential impacts resulting from severe

winter storms:

1) Excessive snow blocking roads, limited access for emergency personnel and

transportation access for residents;

2) Hazardous driving conditions resulting in potential loss of life or injury during winter

storm events;

3) Power outages due to damage to overhead power lines resulting in loss of heat to homes

and life safety issues, as well as loss of power damaging community infrastructure such

as lift stations;

4) Damage to community infrastructure such as freezing water mains and water towers,

resulting in loss of access to water for residents and businesses;

5) Budgetary pressure for local jurisdictions due to removing snow and ice from roadways

and repairing broken infrastructure as a result of extreme cold and winter storm events;

6) Ice jams on rivers leading to potential flooding; and

7) Negative impact on economic activity due to school and business closings during severe

winter storms.


35

The probability of a severe winter storm event occurring in any given year is high. Based on the

information available through the NCDCSED, there were 41 winter storm events in Lincoln

County during the 17-year period beginning in 1994 and ending in 2010. There were 90

recorded winter storm events impacting Minnehaha County during this same period. Based on

this data, it is likely that a severe winter storm will occur in this region on average of two to five

times annually. Typically, the storm events are widespread effecting larger geographic areas.

There is a high likelihood that there will be severe winter storms occurring every year in Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County.


All of the jurisdictions included in this plan are vulnerable to the impacts of severe winter

storms. Tables 3-8 and 3-9 summarize the number of winter storm events recorded in the

NCDCSED for both Lincoln County and Minnehaha County between 1994 and 2010. Based on

this data source, there were 41 events occurring during this period in Lincoln County, resulting

in 12 deaths and 160 injuries. Average damage per event is estimated at $184,000. Some of the

damage and injuries may have occurred outside Lincoln County as the information provided

through this data source aggregates the damages for all counties affected. By comparison, there

were 90 events reported for the geographically larger Minnehaha County resulting in 12 deaths,

123 injuries, and average monetary damages of $90,000 per event.

Table 3-8: Impact of Severe Winter Storms -

Lincoln County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Winter Storms 1994-2010 41 12 160 $7,535 $0 $7,535 $184


Table 3-9: Impact of Severe Winter Storms -

Minnehaha County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Winter Storms 1994-2010 90 12 123 $8,080 $0 $8,080 $90


Compared with other hazards discussed in this plan, winter storms are far more likely to result in

the loss of life or injuries. Since one of the primary impacts of winter storms is hazardous

driving conditions, it is likely that most of the deaths and injuries resulting from winter storms

were a result of traffic accidents on icy or snow covered roadways, or poor driving conditions

resulting from blowing snow.


36

Data available through the USDA Risk Management Agency over the ten-year period ending in

2009 was also reviewed to determine the impact of winter storms on the agricultural sector. The

impact of winter storms is relatively low for agricultural crop production as most crops are

harvested prior to the onset of the winter season. The primary impact of winter storms on the

agricultural sector are the delays it causes in planting crops due to an extended winter season, or

issues with harvesting crops due to the early onset of winter weather, neither of which is

reflected in the data available through the USDA Risk Management Agency. Cold weather and

freezing temperatures are more likely to shorten the growing season and reduce agricultural

production. The impact on the agricultural sector due to cold winters and freezing temperatures

is depicted in Tables 3-10 and 3-11 for Lincoln County and Minnehaha County. Overall, the

data provided by the USDA Risk Management Agency suggests limited overall monetary impact

of either cold winters or freezing temperatures during the past ten years.

Table 3-10: Crop Loss Due to Winter Weather (2000-2009) -

Lincoln County

Cold Winter Freeze / Frost

2000 $0 $0

2001 $4,772 $0

2002 $294 $0

2003 $0 $0

2004 $1,126 $3,256

2005 $0 $1,949

2006 $0 $0

2007 $0 $0

2008 $0 $371

2009 $5,606 $0

Total $11,798 $5,576

Annual Avg. $1,180 $558 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency


37

Table 3-11: Crop Loss Due to Winter Weather (2000-2009) -

Minnehaha County

Cold Winter Freeze / Frost

2000 $0 $0

2001 $16,700 $1,850

2002 $2,540 $817

2003 $0 $0

2004 $0 $22,715

2005 $0 $0

2006 $0 $0

2007 $0 $0

2008 $0 $0

2009 $33,924 $27,743

Total $53,164 $53,125

Annual Avg. $5,316 $5,313 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency

The primary conclusions that can be drawn from the information provided by the NCDCSED

and the USDA Risk Management Agency related to winter storms are:

1) The likelihood of a winter storm event occurring in the region is high in any given year;

2) Winter storms are more likely to result in death and injury compared to other potential

natural hazards affecting the region, which is most likely due to treacherous driving

conditions;

3) The monetary impact of severe winter storms can be significant; and

4) The impact on crop production is limited compared to other types of natural hazards such

as severe summer storms, high winds, and flooding.


Severe winter storms in Lincoln County from 1994-2010 resulted in annual damages of

approximately $470,937 (non-adjusted for inflation) to property and infrastructure. The annual

losses caused by severe winter storms (2000 – 2009) to the agricultural sector for Lincoln

County are approximately $1,738 (non-adjusted for inflation). The frequency of severe winter

storm events is high. Severe winter weather events in Lincoln County occur on average 2.5 times

per year.

Severe winter storms in Minnehaha County from 1994-2010 have resulted in annual damages of


losses caused by severe winter storms (2000 – 2009) to the agricultural sector for Lincoln


38

County are approximately $10,629 (non-adjusted for inflation). The frequency of severe winter

storm events is high. Severe winter storm events in Minnehaha County occur on average 5.5

times per year.


Planning committee participants identified several strategies already being utilized in some

jurisdictions to mitigate against the impact of severe winter storms including:

1) Burying power lines;

2) Identifying emergency routes to be cleared first in the event of a winter storm to

maximize transportation access for emergency responders and residents;

3) Established communication channels for identifying snow emergencies and getting

information out to residents during severe winter events;

4) Identification of emergency shelters to assist residents that are without power or have

limited access to shelter during winter storms;

5) Utilizing back up generators at critical infrastructure sites to mitigate the impact of

power outages on utility systems;

6) Utilizing back up generators at emergency shelters to ensure access to safe shelter

during winter storm events and power outages;

7) Tree trimming ordinances enforced to limit impact of falling trees and branches for

overhead power lines and roadways;

8) Closing certain transportation corridors during severe winter events to limit travel and

reduce potential for loss of life and injury; and

9) Keeping infrastructure and emergency equipment up-to-date and in working condition in

order to properly withstand and respond to severe winter events.

Future Development

Similar to severe summer storms, the geographic impact of severe winter storms is difficult to

predict and all areas of the region are equally likely to be impacted by severe winter events. As a

result, severe winter storms have minimal impact on land use planning and development. The

primary impact of severe winter storms is a continued effort to bury exposed overhead power

lines to limit future vulnerability. In addition, the identification of emergency snow routes is

reassessed based on development trends and the location of new businesses and homes in the

community.


39

History

The most severe winter storm impacting the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County region

occurred from November 14 – November 18, 1996, that resulted in $2,000,000 in property

damages. The storm event involved more than twenty counties and resulted in three traffic

fatalities due to the road conditions caused by the storm. The historical incidence of severe

winter storms is discussed in the vulnerability section. Two of the previous Presidential Disaster

Declarations for Lincoln County and three of the Presidential Disaster Declarations for

Minnehaha County were a result of severe winter storms.

3.3.3 Tornadoes and High Winds

Figure 3-4: Wind Zones in the United States14


Similar to the other natural hazards identified in this plan, tornadoes and high winds have the

potential to significantly impact the region. Based on historical information provided in the

NCDCSED, the likelihood of tornadoes or high wind events occurring in any given year is less

than the incidence of severe summer or winter storms. However, based on the nature of wind

and tornado events, they are likely to result in more damage than severe summer or winter

storms. As indicated in Figure 3-4: Wind Zones in the United States, sections of both Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County are located in a Wind Zone 4 (250 mph).

14



40

Similar to severe summer and winter storms, tornadoes and high wind events are associated with

unstable weather patterns and are geographically unpredictable. As a result, all areas within the

region are equally susceptible to the potential of tornadoes and high wind events. Planning

committee members identified the following potential impacts resulting from tornadoes and high

wind events:

1) Power outages due to damages to overhead power lines;

2) Loss of life and injury due to disrupted electrical service, disrupted utilities such as water

and sewer services, and physical destruction to business and residential structures;

3) Loss of life and injury due to a lack of adequate shelter;

4) Damage to vehicles and personal property;

5) Financial burden for local governments to clean up after tornadoes and high wind events;

6) Blocked roadways and transportation systems due to downed trees, power lines, and other

debris created by tornadoes and high wind events; and

7) Damage to and loss of critical infrastructure such as lift stations, utility stations,

communication towers, emergency response facilities, etc.

Based on information available through the NCDCSED, 50 tornadoes occurred between 1954

and 2010 for Lincoln County, or less than one event per year on average. By comparison, there

were 41 recorded tornado events in Minnehaha County during this same period, again equating

to less than one per year. As will be noted in the next section, however, the impact of these

events is likely to be greater than severe summer and winter storms on an individual basis.

High wind events are as likely to occur as tornadoes based on the information recorded in the

NCDCSED. Historical information on these wind events covers a slightly shorter time period

compared with historical information recorded for tornadoes. Between 1994 and 2010, the

NCDCSED recorded 15 high wind events/storms occurring in Lincoln County and Minnehaha

County, or slightly less than one incidence per year. This appears to coincide with the likelihood

of a tornado occurring in either county, which is also slightly less than one time per year on

average.


While tornadoes and high wind events are less likely to occur in any given year compared to

severe winter and summer storms, their impact is often greater given the severity of the

widespread damage that can result from these types of events. The incidence and impact of

tornadoes and high wind events are summarized in Tables 3-12 and 3-13 for Lincoln County

and Minnehaha County.

In Lincoln County, over the 57-year period in which tornadoes have been recorded in the

NCDCSED, total damages from tornadoes exceeded $31 million, or about $630,000 per

occurrence. It is important to note that not all of this damage may have occurred in Lincoln


41

County since the damage figures shown in the data are aggregated for all of the counties

impacted by a particular recorded event. By comparison, high wind events resulted in more than

$3 million in damages during the 17-year period in which data is available, or approximately

$200,000 per occurrence. In this case, high wind events were less likely to result in as much

damage as tornadoes, but on average, result in more monetary damage than either severe winter

or summer storms. There is also a higher likelihood of loss of life or injury, particularly for

tornadoes, resulting from the lack of appropriate shelter during these events.

In Minnehaha County, during the 57-year period in which information is available for tornadoes,

there was more than $12 million in physical damage as a result of tornadoes or about $300,000

per occurrence. This is less than the amount reported for Lincoln County, but still significant.

High wind events caused more than $3 million in damages during the 17-year period between

1994 and 2000, similar to Lincoln County. Average physical damage per wind storm event was

about $200,000 per occurrence, again very similar to Lincoln County.

Table 3-12: Impact of Tornadoes and High Winds -

Lincoln County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Tornadoes 1954-2010 50 2 8 $31,522 $0 $31,522 $630

Wind Storms 1994-2010 15 0 1 $3,025 $0 $3,025 $202


Table 3-13: Impact of Tornadoes and High Winds -

Minnehaha County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Tornadoes 1954-2010 41 0 4 $12,143 $0 $12,143 $296

Wind Storms 1994-2010 15 0 1 $3,105 $0 $3,105 $207


Similar to the impact of severe summer storms, the NCDCSED appears to underestimate the

impact of tornadoes and high winds on crop damages. Information from the USDA Risk

Management Agency on crop damages due to winds is summarized in Tables 3-14 and 3-15

below. Based on the information provided by the USDA Risk Management Agency,

approximately $36,000 in crop damages occurred in Lincoln County as a result of high winds

over the ten-year period ending in 2009. By comparison, slightly more than $190,000 in crop

damages is noted during the same period for Minnehaha County. While high winds have an

impact on crop production in the region, the overall impact of this hazard appears to be

negligible based on this data source.


42

Table 3-14: Crop Loss Due to High Winds (2000-2009) -

Lincoln County

Winds

2000 $1,306

2001 $0

2002 $0

2003 $1,427

2004 $143

2005 $3,728

2006 $0

2007 $11,049

2008 $18,203

2009 $0

Total $35,856

Annual Avg. $3,586 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency

Table 3-15: Crop Loss Due to High Winds (2000-2009) -

Minnehaha County

Winds

2000 $802

2001 $24,792

2002 $12,372

2003 $0

2004 $108,260

2005 $411

2006 $0

2007 $0

2008 $43,928

2009 $0

Total $190,565



43

The primary conclusions that can be drawn from the information provided by the NCDCSED

and USDA Risk Management Agency are:

1) On average, there is typically one or less tornado and one or less high wind event

occurring in either Lincoln County or Minnehaha County annually;

2) While the incidence of tornado and high wind events is lower, the impact is

significant in terms of physical damage compared to severe summer and winter

storms;

3) Tornadoes and high wind events are more likely to result in the loss of life and injury

compared to severe summer storms, but less likely to result in the loss of life or injury

compared to severe winter storms;

4) The loss of life and injury from tornadoes and high wind events is likely due to the

lack of adequate shelter; and

5) The impact of tornadoes and wind events on crops is less than the impact resulting

from severe summer storms.


Tornadoes and high winds in Lincoln County from 1954 - 2010 have resulted in annual damages

of approximately $616,910 (non-adjusted for inflation) to property and infrastructure. The annual

losses caused by tornadoes or high winds (2000 – 2009) to the agricultural sector for Lincoln

County are approximately $3,586 (non-adjusted for inflation). The frequency of tornadoes or

high wind events is moderate. High wind events in Lincoln County occur on average less than

once per year and tornado events occur less than once per year.

Tornadoes and high winds in Minnehaha County from 1954-2010 resulted in annual damages of


losses caused by tornadoes and high winds (2000 -2009) to the agricultural sector for Minnehaha

County are approximately $19,057 (non-adjusted for inflation). The frequency of tornadoes or

high wind events is moderate. High wind events in Minnehaha County occur on average less

than once per year and tornado events occur less than once per year.


44


Planning committee participants identified several strategies already being utilized by some

jurisdictions to mitigate the impact of tornado and high wind events including:

1. Use of sirens and other warning systems;

2. Continuing efforts to bury overhead power lines;

3. Identification of emergency shelters to assist residents that are without power or have

limited access to shelter during tornadoes and wind storms;

4. Utilizing back up generators at critical infrastructure sites to mitigate the impact of power

outages on utility systems;

5. Utilizing back up generators at emergency shelters to ensure access to safe shelter during

tornado/wind events and resulting power outages;

6. Use of ordinances to require shelters in trailer parks;

7. Establishing building codes so that newly built or renovated structures can better

withstand the impact of tornadoes and high winds;

8. Tree trimming ordinances enforced to limit the impact of falling trees and branches for

overhead power lines and roadways; and

9. Keeping infrastructure and emergency equipment up-to-date and in good working

condition so they can withstand and help respond to tornadoes and high wind events.

Future Development

Similar to severe summer and winter storms, the incidence of tornadoes and high wind events is

not geographically predictable, and therefore, makes it difficult to implement land use strategies

that mitigate the impact of these events. Primary strategies for mitigating against the impact of

tornadoes and high wind events include burying power lines in newly developed areas to avoid

power outages, requiring access to shelters in areas such as trailer parks, implementing more

restrictive building codes to ensure newly developed commercial and residential structures can

better withstand the impact of high wind events, and ensuring that early warning systems, such

as sirens, are constructed in newly developed areas.

History

The two most significant tornado/high winds events in Lincoln County occurred on July 14,

1970 that resulted in $25 million in total damages and on April 26, 1986, that resulted in $2.5

million in total damages. For Minnehaha County the two most significant tornado/high wind

events occurred on June 19, 1979, with $5 million in total damages and on June 16, 1992 that

resulted in $2.5 million in total damages.


45

The community of Hartford was also impacted by an F1 tornado on June 24, 2003, that resulted

in $2.5 million in property damages. During that storm event, 20 homes in the City of Hartford

were heavily damaged due to the incident.

The historical incidence of tornadoes and high wind events are discussed in the vulnerability

section. Two of the previous Presidential Disaster Declarations for Lincoln County and one of

the previous Presidential Disaster Declarations for Minnehaha County were related to tornadoes.

3.3.4 Flooding


Flooding and excess precipitation can significantly impact local communities, residents, and the

economy in general. Unlike the other hazards discussed in this Plan, flooding is more

geographically predictable. While flooding, particularly flash flooding, can potentially occur

anywhere during periods of excess precipitation, predictive modeling is done to determine areas

that are most at risk for flooding, and designating those areas as flood hazard areas.

In South Dakota, flooding is typically a result of runoff from excess rainfall during the spring,

summer and fall seasons, or runoff from melting snow during the spring. Flooding can occur as

a result of localized precipitation, or flooding can occur due to excess precipitation occurring

outside the region but resulting in elevated river levels flowing down stream from areas where

the excess precipitation occurred.

There are generally four types of flooding affecting the region based on information included in

the previous South Dakota Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan:

1) Flash Flooding: Results when several inches of rain and precipitation occur within a

short period of time. This type of excess precipitation generally occurs as part of a

severe summer storm and may be compounded by other hazards such as high winds,

hail, and tornadoes. Flash flooding usually occurs in a smaller geographic area and

results in excessive runoff which can exceed the capacity of the community’s sanitary

sewer system. This type of flooding is less predictable geographically.

2) Long-Rain Flooding: Occurs when there is a significant amount of precipitation or

rainfall over an extended period of days or weeks. Often, the intensity of the rainfall

is low, but cumulatively that amount of precipitation is larger and exceeds the

capacity of the ground to absorb the precipitation. Often the ground becomes “water

logged” or the rainfall can no longer infiltrate. This typically occurs over a

widespread geographic area due to the extended period of time in which the

precipitation occurs. Flooding can occur for several days or weeks depending on the

severity of the event. Water that is unable to infiltrate the soil runs off into low lying

areas, can enter homes and commercial facilities through windows and doors, and

results in devastating impacts for property owners.

Stagnant water that cannot infiltrate the ground can also lead to health issues and a

higher incidence of mosquitoes. Excess moisture in the ground can seep into


46

basements of homes and businesses, creating additional damage. Water seepage can

exceed the capacity of sump pumps and storm sewer systems to transfer the water out

of homes, businesses, and developed areas in general.

3) Flooding as a result of Snow Melt: Typically occurs in the spring and has

characteristics similar to flash floods and long-range floods. The impacted area is

typically larger than that of flash floods, but smaller than long-rain floods. The areas

impacted are more geographically predictable and center on low lying areas and areas

adjacent to rivers, streams, and other water bodies. Generally, flooding can last for

several days to several weeks. The flooding is compounded if the ground is frozen,

resulting in more runoff of precipitation to the lower lying areas and streams/rivers.

Recently, flooding from snow melt has become a major challenge for the region due

to the large amounts of snow received locally and in surrounding areas.

4) Dam or Levee Failure: There are several dams located within the region which could

result in flooding and economic loss if physical damage were to occur to the dam

structure or levee structure. Lincoln County has approximately 13 dams and

Minnehaha County has 12 dams according to the National Inventory of Dams. The

State defines a dam as follows: “a structure is a dam if the height to the dam crest is

greater than or equal to 25 feet and the storage at the dam crest (not at the spillway

elevation) is greater than 15 acre feet or if the height to the dam crest is greater than 6

feet and the storage at the dam crest (not at the spillway elevation) is greater than or

equal to 50 acre feet. The height of the dam is the difference in elevation between the

natural bed of the watercourse or the lowest point on the toe of the dam, whichever is

lower, and the crest elevation of the dam.”15

In “Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety: Hazard Potential Classification Systems for

Dams (FEMA 2004),” dams are classified as follows:

Low Hazard Potential—Dams assigned the low hazard potential classification are those

where failure or incorrect operation result in no probable loss of human life and low

economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to the owner’s

property.

Significant Hazard Potential—Dams assigned the significant hazard potential

classification are those dams where failure or incorrect operation result in no probable

loss of human life but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, disruption of

lifeline facilities, or can impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential classification

dams are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas but could be located in

areas with population and significant infrastructure.

High Hazard Potential—Dams assigned the high hazard potential classification are those

where failure or incorrect operation will probably cause loss of human life as well as

economic, environmental, and lifeline losses.

15

State of South Dakota’s Hazard Mitigation Plan (2008), State Office of Emergency Management - Section 3, Page

10).


47

Of the total 25 dams listed for both Lincoln County and Minnehaha County, no dams are

listed as high hazard dams. However, Lincoln County has one significant hazard dam that

is located near Canton, SD, and Minnehaha County has two significant hazard dams that

are located near Sioux Falls. The remaining 22 dams are classified as low hazard dams

Table 3-16: Lincoln and Minnehaha County Dams Inventory16

Dam Name Legal Description County

Hazard

Class-

ification

Dam

Height

Alvin SE NE SEC.34-T100N-R49W Lincoln L 36

Evenson NW SW SEC.23-T100N-R49E Lincoln L 27

Canton Dam No. 1 NWSE SEC.13-098N-49W Lincoln S 27

Pattee Creek Watershed Dam

N0.4 NW SE SEC.28-T96N-R48W Lincoln L 27

Pattee Creek Watershed Dam P-2 NE SE SEC.32-T97N-R48W Lincoln L 41

Brule Creek Watershed DT Dam

B-1 SW SE SEC.35-T97N-R49W Lincoln L 25


B-7 SE SEC.20-T96N-R49W Lincoln L 27

Pattee Creek Watershed Dam P-3 NW SE SEC.34-T97N-R48W Lincoln L 34

Juel Dam NE SW SEC.31-T99N-R48W Lincoln L 22

Lakota Dam NW SE SEC.19-T98N-R48W Lincoln L 46


B-4 SE NW SEC.14-T96N-R49W Lincoln L 25

Jensen Dam SE NW SEC.25-T96N-R51W Lincoln L 21

Klondike Dam NE NW SEC.21-T99N-R48W Lincoln L 7

Nordstrom SW NE SEC.19-T102N-R48W Minnehaha L 27

Assam SW SE SEC.17-T101N-R48W Minnehaha L 30

Sioux Falls Diversion N SEC.32-T102-R49 Minnehaha S 21

Sioux Falls Diversion Weir NW SEC.33-T102-R49 Minnehaha S 27

Harr Dam SW SE SEC.19-T101N-R48W Minnehaha L 28

Silver Creek Watershed DT #1 SE SW SEC.22-T104N-R49W Minnehaha L 19

Silver Creek Watershed DT Dam

#2 SE SW SEC.34-T104N-R49W Minnehaha L 24


#4 NW SW SEC.3-T103N-R49W Minnehaha L 22


S-3 SW SEC.34-T104N-R49W Minnehaha L 27


S-5 SW SE SEC.4-T103N-R49W Minnehaha L 22


S-6 SE SEC.10-T103N-R49W Minnehaha L 24

Eros Data Center Dam SE SEC.8-T103N-R48W Minnehaha L 31

16

National Inventory of Dams Database, http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nidpublic/webpages/nid.cfm

http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nidpublic/webpages/nid.cfm


48

Planning committee Members identified the following potential impacts resulting from flooding

and excess precipitation:

1) Property damage to roads, homes, businesses, community infrastructure, and personal

property;

2) Displacement of residents from flooded homes;

3) Reduced economic activity due to flooded businesses;

4) Health hazards due to contaminated water;

5) Personal injury and possible death due to moving waters;

6) Excess precipitation exceeding the capacity of the community infrastructure system,

resulting in failure of the infrastructure, sewage back-ups, damage to wastewater

treatment facilities, lagoon overflows, etc.;

7) Erosion of soils exposing buried infrastructure; and

8) Negative impact on development when areas are reclassified as flood hazard areas.

Based on information included in the NCDCSED, there were 24 incidents of flooding in Lincoln

County during the 18-year period from 1993 to 2010. For Minnehaha County, there were 43

flooding events listed for the same period. The likelihood of a flooding event occurring in each

county typically varies from 1.3 to 2.4 flooding events annually.


While the incidence of flooding is less than severe summer or winter storms in general, the

impact of flooding can be widespread and significant in terms of physical damage. According to

the Storm Event Database, physical damage from flooding for Lincoln County over the past 18

years totaled $850,000 or about $35,000 per event. For Minnehaha County, total damages

during the same period exceeded $69 million, or $1.7 million per event. The NCDCSED

historical information for flooding in Lincoln County and Minnehaha County is summarized in

Tables 3-17 and 3-18.

Table 3-17: Impact of Flooding -Lincoln County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Flooding 1993-2010 24 0 0 $850 $0 $850 $35



49

Table 3-18: Impact of Flooding -Minnehaha County

Type

Years

Covered

Nu. of


Total

Physical

Damage*

Total

Crop

Damage*

Total

Damage*

Avg.

Damage

Per

Event*

Flooding 1993-2010 43 0 0 $69,852 $2,205 $72,057 $1,676


According to the FEMA, “Policy and Loss Data by Community with County and State Data,”

June 3, 2010, there were 112 recorded flood insurance losses in Minnehaha County between

1978 and 2010 that resulted in payouts of $836,205 from the National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP). For Lincoln County, there were 46 incidents of losses for NFIP insured properties

totaling over $413,000.

Repetitive loss properties are those properties which NFIP defines as any insurable building for

which two or more claims of more than $1,000 were paid by NFIP within any rolling 10-year

period since 1978. At least two of the claims must be more than 10-days apart. Minnehaha

County has 10 repetitive loss properties and Lincoln County has none.18

Neither county has any severe repetitive loss properties. According to the Flood Insurance

Reform Act of 2004, a severe repetitive loss property is defined as, “a single family property

(consisting of one-to-four residences) that is covered under flood insurance by the NFIP and has

incurred flood-related damage for which four or more separate claims payments have been paid

under flood insurance coverage with the amount of each claim payment exceeding $5,000 and

with cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeding $20,000; or for which at least two

separate claims payments have been made with the cumulative amount of such claims exceeding

the reported value of the property.”17

The State Office of Emergency Management conducted a HAZUS-MH impact analyses on all 66

counties within the state to determine direct economic losses for buildings and potential societal

impacts caused by a flooding event. Based upon a 1% chance loss estimation scenario, it is

projected that Lincoln County would have 26 buildings damaged with 524 persons displaced and

Minnehaha County is projected to have 719 buildings damaged with 7,482 persons displaced.

The primary indicators used to assess flood losses were:

• Direct building losses combined with income losses;

• Loss ratio of the direct building losses compared to overall building inventory;

• Loss ratio of building contents compared to overall building inventory; and

• Population displaced by the flood and shelter needs.18

17

State of South Dakota Multi-Hazard Mitigation - Basic Plan (2011) 18

State of South Dakota Multi-Hazard Mitigation - Basic Plan (2011)


50

Table 3-19: HAZUS-MH Base Flood (1 Percent Chance) Loss Estimation Results:

Impacts on Lincoln and Minnehaha County

County Building

Damage

Count

Building

Damage

Loss

($K)

Building

Damage

Loss

Ratio*

Contents

Damage

Loss

($K)

Contents

Loss

Ratio

Total

Direct

Economic

Bldg.

Loss

**($K)

Short

Term

Shelter

Needs

Displaced

Population

Lincoln 26 7,275 0.5% 6,826 0.7% 14,514 210 524

Minnehaha 719 162,527 1.6% 252,358 3.6% 432,484 6,159 7,482

Source: FEMA Region VIII HAZUS-MH MR2 Notes:

*Loss ratio is the percent of the total building inventory value that could be damaged from flooding in any given year.

**Total Direct Economic loss includes relocation loss, capital-related loss, wages loss, rental income loss and building loss.

Tables 3-20 and 3-21 show the amount of crop damages resulting from flooding for the 10-year

period ending in 2009. According the USDA Risk Management Agency, total crop damage for

Lincoln County during this period was nearly $300,000. Crop damage for Minnehaha County

was minimal at slightly more than $16,000.

Table 3-20: Crop Loss Due to Flooding (2000-2009) -

Lincoln County

Flooding

2000 $356 2001 $16,127 2002 $17,775

2003 $122,113 2004 $25,772

2005 $19,133 2006 $0 2007 $5,391 2008 $90,602

2009 $0 Total $297,269 Annual Avg. $29,727

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency


51

Table 3-21: Crop Loss Due to Flooding (2000-2009) -

Minnehaha County

Flooding

2000 $0

2001 $0

2002 $0

2003 $4,793

2004 $9,136

2005 $2,368

2006 $0

2007 $0

2008 $0

2009 $0

Total $16,297


The vulnerability of each county and participating jurisdiction was analyzed using FEMA’s

HAZUS software to develop maps for Lincoln County and Minnehaha County’s Flood Prone

Areas. Maps indicated flood prone areas for the communities of Baltic, Beresford, Brandon,

Canton, Colton, Crooks, Dell Rapids, Fairview, Garretson, Harrisburg, Hartford, Hudson,

Humboldt, Lennox, Sherman, Sioux Falls, Tea, Valley Springs, and Worthing can be found in

Appendix G.


52

Figure 3-5: Vulnerability in Flood Prone Areas Lincoln County


53

Figure 3-6: Vulnerability in Flood Prone Areas Minnehaha County


Flooding in Lincoln County from 1993-2010 has resulted in annual damages of approximately

$50,000 (non-adjusted for inflation) to property and infrastructure. The annual losses caused by

flooding (2000–2009) to the agricultural sector for Lincoln County are approximately $29,727

(non-adjusted for inflation). The frequency of severe flooding events is high. Flooding events in

Lincoln County occur on average 1.4 times per year.

Flooding in Minnehaha County from 1993-2010 resulted in annual damages of approximately

$4,108,941 (non-adjusted for inflation) to property and infrastructure. The annual losses caused

by flooding (2000-2009) to the agricultural sector for Minnehaha County are approximately

$1,630 (non-adjusted for inflation). The frequency of severe flooding events is high. Flooding

events in Minnehaha County occur on average 2.5 times per year.


54


Planning committee participants identified several strategies already being utilized in some

jurisdictions to mitigate the impact of flooding and excess precipitation including:

1) Cleaning culverts to ensure flow of excess precipitation;

2) Designation of emergency shelters for displaced residents due to flooding;

3) Completion of drainage studies and storm sewer improvements to address deficiencies in

waste water infrastructure;

4) Requiring detention ponds in newly developed areas to reduce flooding impacts;

5) Creating greenways and linear open spaces in floodplain areas; and

6) Implementation of flood damage, flood plain management, and other ordinances to

reduce the impact of flooding and limiting development in flood prone areas.

Future Development

Because the impact of flooding is typically more geographically predictable and because of the

recent severity that floods have had on the region, mitigating against future flooding is often

emphasized as part of land use planning. As noted above, several participating jurisdictions have

established flood plain management and development ordinances that prevent or limit

development in flood hazard areas. In addition, managing storm water run off is a major

consideration in the development of new wastewater infrastructure and replacement of existing

wastewater infrastructure.

A major challenge impacting the region over the past two years was the release of the new Flood

Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for Lincoln County (2008) and Minnehaha County (2009). As a

result of new predictive flood modeling completed by FEMA, several areas that were not

previously part of the flood hazard area are now within the floodplain. This has created

significant issues for residents whose homes are within the newly expanded floodplain.

Homeowners and businesses within this expanded floodplain are now often required by lending

institutions to purchase flood insurance creating a financial burden, limiting marketability of the

properties in the event of sale, and limiting the ability to expand the facilities within the

floodplain. This is particularly an issue for commercial structures within the expanded

floodplain that would like to expand but can not because of the cost of purchasing flood

insurance or ordinances that restrict further development within the flood plain.

The City of Sioux Falls is undertaking a two-year project to improve the levees along the Big

Sioux River and construct a dam at Skunk Creek. Once completed, the City will work with

FEMA to review the existing FIRM for the City, with the intent of reducing the expanded flood

hazard area and removing several commercial and residential properties that were included in the

flood hazard area as a result of the FIRM issued in 2009.


55

History

The most significant flooding event to occur in the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County

region happened in the City of Sioux Falls on May 22, 1993, that resulted in $50 million in total

damages. During the flash flood event in Sioux Falls, nearly 200 homes had water in their

basements, 2,600 households were without power, and flooding in the Silver Glen area had

turned a normally three-feet wide creek into a 100 feet wide creek in some places. A second

flooding event in Sioux Falls occurred on June 16, 2004, that resulted in $10 million in damages.

Another significant flooding event impacted the community of Valley Springs on June 12, 2001.

Most of the town was flooded, with widespread damages to basements and first floors of homes.

The flooding left a layer of mud over much of the town. The sewer system backed up, leaving

sewage in several houses and apartments. A mobile home park was also hard hit, with damages

to the mobile home structures and contents. Flooding and debris left some roads in the area

closed for three days.

The historical incidence of flooding in Lincoln County and Minnehaha County is discussed in

the previous vulnerability section. A majority of the Presidential Disaster Declarations since

1960 for Lincoln County and Minnehaha County have involved flooding, including eight of nine

declarations for Lincoln County and six of eight declarations for Minnehaha County.

3.4 National Flood Insurance Program Participation


Tables 3-22 and 3-23 summarize the status of various jurisdictions within Lincoln County and

Minnehaha County participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). According to

FEMA BureauNet, Lincoln County and five of its municipalities are participating in the NFIP.

Minnehaha County and nine of its municipalities are participating in the NFIP.

44 CFR Part §201.6(c) (3) (ii): Requirement

[The mitigation strategy] must also address the jurisdiction’s participation in the

NFIP, and continued compliance with NFIP requirements as appropriate.


56

Table 3-22: National Flood Insurance Program Participation -

Lincoln County

Jurisdiction CID # NFIP Status

Entry

Date Into

Regular

Program

FIRM

Effective

Date

Policies

in

Place

Amount of

Insurance

Lincoln County 460277 Participating 10/1/1986 7/2/2008 104 $26,471,300

Beresford 460155 Not Participating

7/2/2008

Canton 460047 Participating 9/4/1985 7/2/2008 2 $420,000

Fairview 460048 Not Participating

7/2/2008

Harrisburg 460114 Participating 6/8/1998 7/2/2008 6 $970,000

Hudson 460049 Suspended 12/18/1985 7/2/2008

Lennox 460192 Participating 6/8/1998 7/2/2008 1 $70,000

Tea 460143 Participating 4/25/1997 7/2/2008 15 $3,326,000

Worthing 460151 Participating 4/25/1997 7/2/2008 2 $350,000

Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency Community Status Book Report; FEMA BureauNet web site.

Insurance policy information as of 11/30/2010.

Table 3-23: National Flood Insurance Program Participation -

Minnehaha County

Jurisdiction CID # NFIP Status

Entry

Date Into

Regular

Program

FIRM

Effective

Date

Policies

in

Place

Amount of

Insurance

Minnehaha

County 460057 Participating 9/5/1979 9/2/2009 129 $21,665,000

Baltic 460058 Participating 11/19/1980 9/2/2009 3 $259,600

Brandon 460296 Participating 7/10/1979 9/2/2009 4 $875,000

Colton 460166 Participating 6/8/1998 9/2/2009 0 $0

Crooks 460314 Not Participating

9/2/2009

Dell Rapids 460059 Participating 8/15/1980 9/2/2009 32 $3,702,500

Garretson 460177 Participating 1/30/1984 9/2/2009 1 $175,000

Hartford 460180 Participating 4/25/1997 9/2/2009 14 $2,596,600

Humboldt 460118 Participating 6/8/1998 9/2/2009 0 $0

Sherman 460313 Not Participating

9/2/2009

Sioux Falls 460060 Participating 1/17/1979 9/2/2009 1242 $318,931,200

Valley Springs 460221 Participating 7/16/1980 9/2/2009 1 $210,000

Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency Community Status Book Report; FEMA BureauNet web site.

Insurance policy information as of 11/30/2010.


57

3.5 Population Density & Building Exposure Vulnerability to All Hazards

Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and their communities are all at risk to the hazards of

severe summer storms, severe winter storms, flooding, and tornadoes. Areas with a higher

population or a higher degree of building exposure will have a higher risk of being impacted by

the aforementioned hazards.

Building Exposure — To best compare the vulnerability of one community or county to

another, it is necessary to consider the total assets vulnerable to loss. This rating is based on total

building exposure from total property valuations (residential, commercial, industrial,

agricultural, religion, government, and education) for each community and county. The total

range of building exposure ($59,332,000 to $11,610,000,000) was divided into 10 ranges as

shown in Table 3-24. The ranges were numbered 1 through 10 in ascending order and assigned a

vulnerability ranking of low, moderate, or high.

Table 3-24: Building Exposure

Building Exposure ($000)

Ranking Vulnerability

59,332 – 100,000 1 Low 100,001 - 2,079,144 2 Moderate 2,079,145 - 3,089,051 3 Moderate 3,089,052 - 4,098,957 4 Moderate 4,098,958 - 5,108,863 5 Moderate 5,108,864 - 6,118,769 6 Moderate 6,118,770 - 7,128,675 7 Moderate 7,128,676 - 8,138,582 8 High 8,138,583 - 9,148,488 9 High 9,148,489 – 11,610,000 10 High

Population Density — In order to compare the vulnerability of one community or county to

another, it is necessary to examine a location’s population density. This rating is based on the

number of persons per square mile for each community and county. The total range of population

density (75 to 3,000) was divided into 10 ranges as shown in Table 3-25. The ranges were

numbered 1 through 10 in ascending order and assigned a population density ranking of low,

moderate, or high.


58

Table 3-25: Population Density

Population Density Ranking Vulnerability

75-300 1 Low

301-600 2 Moderate

601-900 3 Moderate

901-1200 4 Moderate

1201-1500 5 Moderate



2101-2400 8 High

2401-2700 9 High

2701-3000 10 High

As illustrated in Tables 3-26 and 3-27, in terms of building exposure vulnerability, Minnehaha

County and the City of Sioux Falls are most at risk to the hazards of severe summer storms,

severe winter storms, flooding, and tornadoes with building exposure vulnerability rankings of

ten and eight. The communities of Baltic, Beresford, Colton, Crooks, Fairview, Garretson,

Humboldt, Hudson, Lennox, Sherman, Worthing, and Valley Springs with less than

$100,000,000 in building exposure vulnerability have the least building exposure within the

region.

The communities of Brandon, Crooks, Sioux Falls, and Tea with more than 2,101 persons per

square mile are most vulnerable, based on population density, to the hazards of severe summer

storms, severe winter storms, flooding, and tornadoes. Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and

the community of Sherman have the least population density with less than 300 persons per

square mile.

Table 3-26: Total Property Evaluation & Population Density -

Lincoln County

Jurisdiction Total Property

Valuation

(Exposure) (2009)19

Building

Exposure

Ranking

Population

2010

Population

Density per

Square Mile

Population

Density

Ranking

Lincoln County $4,059,264,827 4 44,828 77.8 1

Beresford $11,600,595 1 359 1,114.4 4

Canton $114,428,778 2 3,057 1,019 4

Fairview $1,353,110 1 60 600 2

Harrisburg $183,197,083 2 4,089 1,648.8 6

Hudson $6,566,383 1 296 986.6 4

Lennox $71,878,170 1 2,111 1,919 7

Sioux Falls City

(Lincoln County)

$1,912,390,135

2 21,095 2,306.5 8

Tea $168,794,285 2 3,806 2,903 10

Worthing $31,023,357 1 877 1,754 6

19

SD Department of Revenue, http://www.state.sd.us/drr2/propspectax/booklets/CITY_TAX_PAY2010.pdf


59

Table 3-27: Total Property Evaluation & Population Density -

Minnehaha County

Jurisdiction Total

Property

Valuation

(Exposure)

(2009)20

Building

Exposure

Rating

Population

2010

Population

Density

Ranking

Population

Density

Ranking

Minnehaha

County

$11,609,473,010 10 169,468 209.2 1

Baltic $42,404,400 1 1,089 1,555.7 6

Brandon $470,532,463 2 8,785 2,311.8 8

Colton $23,873,473 1 687 981.4 4

Crooks $57,937,026 1 1,269 2,115 8

Dell Rapids $163,077,780 2 3,633 1,816.5 7

Garretson $45,307,051 1 1,166 777.3 3

Hartford $108,704,944

2 2,534 1,689.3 6

Humboldt $22,653,643 1 589 981.6 4

Sherman $2,595,960 1 78 260 1

Sioux Falls $7,823,188,044 8 132,793 2,306.5 8

Valley Springs $26,533,275 1 759 975 4

3.6 Lincoln County and Communities Future Growth and Development

Trends

From 2000 to 2010, Lincoln County’s population increased 86% from 24,131 to 44,828, making

it one of the fastest growing counties in the United States. The majority of this growth has

occurred in Sioux Falls. The population of Sioux Falls in Lincoln County has more than tripled

from 6,620 in 2000 to 21,095 in 2010. Much growth has also occurred in the communities of Tea

and Harrisburg as well. This rapid transformation of what once was agricultural land into

commercial and residential developments has occurred with proper planning and land use

policies in place. During 2011, Lincoln County has been in the process of updating its drainage

ordinances and drafting a drainage management plan. Future development is anticipated to occur

within southern Sioux Falls, Tea, and Harrisburg. Each of these communities is using previously

developed drainage master plans to address future development and flood plains concerns.

20

SD Department of Revenue, http://www.state.sd.us/drr2/propspectax/booklets/CITY_TAX_PAY2010.pdf


60

Table 3-28: Lincoln County and Communities Future Growth and Development Trends

Jurisdiction Future Growth 2011-2020

Lincoln County Lincoln County has grown 86% in the last ten years, nearly doubling in size

from 24,131 in 2000 to 44,828 in 2010. The majority of this growth has

occurred within the municipalities of Harrisburg, Sioux Falls, and Tea. Over

the next decade, future growth is anticipated to occur on the fringes of

Harrisburg, Sioux Falls, and Tea. Growth is also expected to occur along the I-

29 corridor.

Beresford Beresford’s population has remained steady over the last decade. No major

future projects or development are anticipated.

Canton The City of Canton’s population has decreased 1.7% from 3,110 in 2000 to

3,057 in 2010. Future industrial expansion is expected to occur over the next

decade for businesses along US Hwy 18.

Fairview The Town of Fairview’s population has decreased significantly from 94

persons in 2000 to 60 persons in 2010. Future growth within the Town of

Fairview is anticipated to be minimal.

Harrisburg The City of Harrisburg has quadruped in population from 958 in 2000 to 4,089

in 2010.The number of housing units has increased from 318 to 1,507 as well.

In order to keep up with the influx of growth, the City has had to make system-

wide improvements to its drinking water and sanitary sewer infrastructure. In

2012, the City will undertake the Columbia Basin Storm Sewer Project to make

much needed drainage improvements at the south end of the Columbia Basin.

These infrastructure improvements are being undertaken in response to

recommendations provided by the City of Harrisburg’s Master Drainage Plan.

Growth has slowed with the downturn in the housing market and the United

States (US) economy post the US 2008-2009 recession. Growth and future

development is expected to continue in a northwestern general direction, as

planned by the 2011 revised Comprehensive Plan for the City of Harrisburg.

Hudson The population of Hudson has decreased from 402 in 2000 to 296 in 2010.

Future growth in Hudson is anticipated to be minimal over the next decade.

Lennox The population of Lennox has increased 3.6% from 2,037 in 2000 to 2,111 in

2010. Additional growth along the City’s fringe is anticipated to occur over the

next decade.

Sioux Falls City

(Lincoln County)

The population of Sioux Falls within Lincoln County limits has increased

318.7% from 6,620 in 2000 to 21,095 in 2010. The number of housing units

has increased dramatically from 2,154 to 8,700. The southern fringe of Sioux

Falls is anticipated to grow over the next decade with the majority of the

development occurring southeast of existing city limits. According to the

Shape Sioux Falls 2035 Comprehensive Plan, two drainage basin areas in

Southeastern Sioux Falls are slated as a high priority for future storm water

infrastructure projects. The City of Sioux Falls’ growth management policies

advocate for infill development and contagious growth along the City’s fringe.

Adequate City services, including storm sewer, must be in place prior to the

approval of future development.

Tea The City of Tea’s population has increased 118.48% from 1,742 in 2000 to

3,806 in 2010. The number of housing units has increased from 600 in 2000 to

1,354 in 2010. The majority of Tea’s future growth over the next decade is

anticipated to occur north and east of Tea’s City Limits toward I-29. In the near

future, a large commercial and residential development is planned south of Tea

City Hall.

Worthing The population of Worthing has increased nearly 50% from 585 persons in

2000 to 877 in 2010. The majority of Worthing’s future growth over the next

decade is anticipated to occur west of Worthing’s City Limits toward I-29.


61

3.7 Minnehaha County and Communities Future Growth and Development

Trends

Minnehaha County’s population has increased by 14.3% from 148,281 in 2000 to 169,468 in

2011. Much of this growth has occurred within the communities of Baltic, Brandon, Crooks, Dell

Rapids, Hartford, and Sioux Falls. Drainage has been a primary concern within Minnehaha

County since the first drainage districts were created in the early 1900s. The prevention of

downstream impacts and the importance of maintaining wetlands are policies advocated by

Minnehaha County’s Drainage Plan (August, 2011). The county revised its drainage ordinance in

2010 to better address drainage complaints/concerns and to ensure that South Dakota Codified

Law and local laws are followed during the issuance of drainage permits.21

Table 3-29: Minnehaha County and Communities Future Growth

and Development Trends


Minnehaha County The population of Minnehaha County has increased 14.3% from 148,281 in

2000 to 169,468 in 2010. The majority of this growth has occurred within the

municipalities of Brandon, Crooks, Dell Rapids, Hartford, and Sioux Falls.

Over the next decade, future growth is anticipated to occur on the fringes of the

aforementioned cities. Growth is also expected to occur along the I-29, I-229,

and I-90 corridors.

Baltic The City of Baltic’s population has increased 34.2% from 811 in 2000 to 1,089

in 2010. Additional future residential growth is anticipated along the City’s

fringe.

Brandon The City of Brandon’s population has increased 54.3% from 5,693 in 2000 to

8,785 in 2010. Growth is restrained by the Big Sioux River to the west, Split

Rock Creek to the east, and Beaver Creek to the south and east of Brandon.

Growth over the next decade will likely occur along the southern and western

fringes of Brandon that are not designated as floodplain conservation areas.

Colton Colton’s population has increased from 662 in 2000 to 667 in 2010. Growth is

expected to be minimal over the next decade.

Crooks Crook’s population has increased 47.7% from 859 in 2000 to 1,269 in 2010.

Growth is anticipated to occur along the City’s fringe residential areas.

Dell Rapids The City of Dell Rapids population has increased 21.9% from 2,980 in 2000 to

3,633 in 2010. Growth will occur to the west and north of the existing city

limits. The southeast corner of the City is located in the 100-year flood plain.

Garretson Garretson’s population remained steady from 2000 to 2010. Minimal future

growth is anticipated over the next decade.

Hartford The City of Hartford’s population increased by 37.4% from 1,844 in 2000 to

2,534 in 2010. Additional growth is expected to occur along the City’s fringe.

Humboldt The population of Humboldt has increased 13.05% from 521 in 2000 to 589 in

2010. Additional growth is expected to occur along the City’s fringe.

Sherman Sherman’s population fell 10.3% from 87 in 2000 to 78 in 2010. Growth is

expected to be minimal over the next decade.

21

Minnehaha County – 2010 Drainage Ordinance:

http://www.minnehahacounty.org/dept/pl/pl_ordinances/2010_revised_drainage.pdf


62

Table 3-29: Minnehaha County and Communities Future Growth

and Development Trends (continued)


Sioux Falls

(City-Wide)

The City of Sioux Falls has increased 24.13% from $123,975 in 2000 to

$153,888 in 2010. Over the next decade growth is anticipated to occur along

the City’s fringe, with the majority of the growth occurring to the south and

west of existing city limits.

As indicated previously, the Shape Sioux Falls 2035 Comprehensive Plan

identified two drainage basin areas in Southeastern Sioux Falls that are slated

as a high priority for future storm water infrastructure projects. As indicated in

the Comprehensive Plan, drainage will be addressed utilizing two methods:

“(1) on-site drainage ponds, and, (2) regional drainage basins. On-site drainage

ponds will need to provide for the rainfall and snow melt needs of the

development site and detain it on the site. Regional drainage basins will have

one or several drainage facilities which serve large drainage basin areas; these

basin areas drain naturally through low areas into settlement facilities to

improve the overall water quality.”22

Valley Springs Valley Springs’ population decreased 4% from 792 in 2000 to 759 in 2010.

Minimal growth is expected over the next decade.

22

The Shape Sioux Falls 2035 Comprehensive Plan (December 2009) Section, Page 33.


63

Chapter IV

Hazard Mitigation Strategy

4. 1 Hazard Mitigation Goals and Objectives

Background

The previous chapters of this plan discussed the potential hazards impacting both Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County. This chapter discusses the mitigation goals and objectives

established by the planning committee for the joint jurisdiction, followed by a discussion of the

mitigation projects identified for implementation, and concluding with a discussion for how the

proposed mitigation projects were prioritized.

Mitigation Goals and Objectives

The planning committee began the process of developing mitigation goals and objectives by

reviewing the mitigation goals and objectives included in the draft State of South Dakota Hazard

Mitigation Plan – Basic Plan (January, 2011). The committee wanted to ensure that the goals

and objectives identified in this updated plan would complement the goals and objectives

identified in the statewide plan, while specifically focusing on the impact of hazards for Lincoln

County and Minnehaha County. In addition, the planning committee reviewed the goals and

priorities established for a nearby jurisdiction in its recently updated PDM Plan to use as a guide

and reference for discussion. After reviewing these reference materials and further discussion,

an initial draft set of goals and objectives was identified by the planning committee.

To further flesh out the goals and objectives and ensure that the goals and objectives fully

represented the issues identified in the Hazard Risk Assessment, planning committee members

split into several small working groups with each group being assigned a specific hazard

category to be discussed in the report (i.e. severe summer storms, severe winter storms,

tornadoes/high winds, and flooding). Each group was tasked with developing a set of problem

statements that would recognize the impact, vulnerability, and challenges faced by the region as

a result of the specific hazard events. To help facilitate this process, groups were given a copy of

the problem statements identified in the draft State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan –

Basic Plan (January, 2011) to utilize as a guide for conceptualizing problem statements for the

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan 2011

Update. Once each group had completed its work, the group reported its draft problem

statements to the entire planning committee.

It became apparent that while each group focused on a particular hazard category, many of the

problem statements identified by various groups were similar and were not always specifically

unique to a particular hazard. A summarized consolidated list of problem statements identified

by the planning committee was then developed.


[The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] description of mitigation goals to

reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.


64

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation

Plan 2011 Update - Problem Statements

1) There are an insufficient number of shelters to accommodate residents without power

or needing protective shelter during and after hazard events.

2) Need to better maintain existing shelters.

3) Residents are often not aware of the location of protective shelters.

4) Power outages due to freezing or heavy rains, lightning, high winds, tornadoes, or

blizzard events have a significant negative impact on resident safety, provision of

emergency services, and operation of critical community infrastructure.

5) Need to make sure that warning systems are adequate, appropriately maintained, and

operational during power outages.

6) Ensure emergency notification systems are adequate, appropriately maintained, and

operational during hazard events.

7) There are not enough resources to clear emergency routes during blizzards and large

snow events resulting in public safety issues for emergency responders and an

inability of people to travel to work and access critical services.

8) In extreme cold conditions, the water distribution system is at risk of failure.

9) Drainage and infrastructure are insufficiently capable of handling heavy rains

resulting in infiltration and contamination of storm sewer systems.

10) In response to winter storms, local governments are financially burdened by increased

costs for clearing snow from roads including costs related to gravel, salt, employee

wages, etc.

11) Significant property and crop damage resulting from severe storms including

blizzards, heavy rains, flooding, tornadoes, heavy winds, lightning, etc.

12) Need to ensure that structures such as mobile homes and storage sheds are property

anchored to withstand the impact of hazards and that anchoring systems continue to

be maintained. There is a lack of inspection and enforcement of building codes.

13) Communities need defined action plans for preparing and responding to disaster or

hazard events to mitigate against the impact of the hazards.

14) Residents lack knowledge of flood insurance coverage and an appropriate

understanding of what is covered and what is not covered.

15) There is a general lack of enforcement and knowledge by local communities

regarding flood plain management.

16) Erosion of waterways causes infrastructure such as waterlines to be exposed during

flooding and heavy rains resulting in defective infrastructure.

17) There is a need for more coordinated responses to mitigating, preparing, and

responding to hazards and disaster events at a county-wide and joint county level.

After completing the exercise of developing problem statements, planning committee members

again reviewed their previously identified goals and objectives and further refined the goals and


65

objectives to ensure that they represented the problem statements identified by the planning

committee. The final list of goals and objectives for the plan are listed below.

Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation

Plan 2011 Update - Goals and Objectives

Goal 1: Reduce injuries and loss of life from natural hazards

Objective: Reduce the number of injuries/fatalities caused by severe weather related

hazards

Objective: Ensure that people have adequate warning when violent weather is imminent

Objective: Ensure that people have access to adequate shelter from hazardous weather

conditions and are aware of the location of shelters

Goal 2: Reduce damage to existing and future structures within hazard areas

Objective: Reduce the number of repetitive and non-repetitive loss structures

Objective: Reduce flood damage to flood prone properties, structures, and critical

facilities through property acquisition, property relocation, or elevating

structures at least one foot above the base flood elevation

Objective: Reduce damage by better maintaining and replacing aging infrastructure

Goal 3: Reduce the losses to critical facilities, utilities, and infrastructure from natural

hazards

Objective: Reduce the number of power outages

Objective: Reduce negative impacts to water supply and sewage treatment systems by

indentifying and implementing storm water drainage and infrastructure

projects as needed

Objective: Improve reliability of communications during/following hazard events

Goal 4: Reduce impacts to the economy, the environment, and cultural resources from

hazards

Objective: Reduce loss to environment and cultural resources

Objective: Reduce agricultural losses

Goal 5: Better coordinate efforts to mitigate, prepare, manage, and respond to all hazard

events across jurisdictions in Lincoln and Minnehaha Counties.

Objective: Establish a centralized Emergency Operations Center (EOC)/Multi-Agency

Coordinating Center (MACC) to coordinate emergency management services

for both Lincoln County and Minnehaha County and the communities located

therein.


66

4.2 Hazard Mitigation Actions

The planning committee then began the process of identifying specific mitigation projects that

reflect the goals, objectives and problem statements identified in this chapter, and that if

implemented, would mitigate the impact of future hazard events. At the Multi-Hazard Pre-

Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties (Update 2011)

Meeting 4 on March 15, 2011, the planning committee first assessed the status of mitigation

projects included in the prior 2005 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan.

Table 4.1: Status of Mitigation Projects included in the revised 2005 “Multi-Hazard Pre-

Disaster Mitigation Plan - Serving the Jurisdictions and Communities of Minnehaha and

Lincoln Counties and the City of Sioux Falls”

Hazard Area of Concern Potential Project Status Wildfire Threat Sioux Falls / Brandon

Future development in the NE

corner of the City of Sioux

Falls between Great Bear

Recreation Park and the City

of Brandon

Ordinance for development area,

suggesting the placement of

vegetation & debris to that of the

residential structure. The distance

between the structure and any

nearby tree or outbuilding should be

greater than the height of the mature

tree or building or at least 10 feet.

Building codes, which advice of

appropriate roofing materials. For

instance, instead of using wooden

shingles, use asphalt, fiberglass,

metal or ceramic tile.

Building codes, which advise of

appropriate and safer landscaping

techniques. For instance, instead of

using heavy vegetation next to the

structure, use stones, pavers, or rock

features.

Enforce the existing and/or new

ordinances and codes in both

existing and future residential and

commercial development areas.

Debris clean up off future

development sites to ensure lack of

fuel for potential fire.

No Progress

Reason: No

progress has

occurred regarding

this identified hazard

mitigation action

due to lack of time

and resources, as

well as low

perceived

vulnerability to the

hazard.

44 CFR Part §201.6(c) (3) (ii): Requirement

[The mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a

comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to

reduce the effects of each hazard, with the particular emphasis on new and existing

buildings and infrastructure.


67

Hazard Area of Concern Potential Project Status

Steep Slope

Development /

Landslide

Sioux Falls / Brandon

Future development in the NE

corner of the City of Sioux

Falls between Great Bear

Recreation Park and the City

of Brandon

Use retention walls when

developing hillsides to prevent

landslide.

Educate developers and

homeowners of emergency response

problems that could occur within

the area.

No Progress

Reason: No

progress has

occurred regarding

this identified hazard

mitigation action

due to a lack of time

and resources.

Rail lines

carrying

hazardous

materials

Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties

Countywide area, but

especially throughout

municipalities

Develop communications plan with

rail companies and emergency

management officials to ensure that

emergency management officials

have knowledge of what and when

hazardous materials are being

transported by rail.

No Progress

Reason: After

conducting basic

research, it became

apparent that this

hazard mitigation

action could not be

feasibly

implemented.

Gas pipeline

explosion Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties

Countywide area, but


municipalities

Project in which all pipelines

throughout the City would be

identified and mapped. This project

would also include a

communications plan between city

officials and gas companies so that

city officials (especially emergency

responders) are aware of what type

of product is being carried in each

pipe and what the type of pipe in

which the product is being

transported.

Completed

State Pipeline

Association /

Industry Group have

met with local

leaders and

emergency

responders to

discuss the location

of pipelines and

responding to

pipeline hazards.

Power outages

due to electrical

storms

Sioux Falls

Busy Intersections within the

City of Sioux Falls

Back up power supplies within

traffic signals at busy intersections.

Completed

Back up power

supplies now go into

every traffic signal

Storm water

discharge Sioux Falls Funding is needed for the design

and construction of facilities.

On-going

Creek Slope

Failure Sioux Falls

Along Skunk Creek, below

12th

Street within the City of

Sioux Falls

Soft bank stabilization, which will

create fish habitat and stop slope

failure along the creek in critical

areas.

On-going

High Wind and

Tornado Entire County

Countywide area, and


municipalities

Enforcement of tougher building

codes for tornado shelters

Aggressive education of public on

debris clean up and tree thinning.

The project would provide free

debris pick-up more often in return

for participation in the event.

No Progress

Reason: It became

difficult to

implement this

hazard mitigation

action due to lack of

time and resources.


68

Hazard Area of Concern Potential Project Status

Storm water

discharge Dell Rapids City of Dell Rapids,

particularly at 12th

Street from

Clarke Avenue to Garfield

Avenue

Construction of storm water

detention area and improvement to

storm sewer in the vicinity.

Completed

Storm water

discharge Humboldt

Town of Humboldt Funding needed for construction of

storm water detention area and

improvements to storm sewer in the

vicinity.

No Progress

Reason: This Hazard

Mitigation action is

still being

considered.

Lack of accurate

data needed to

support

emergency

response actions

and hazard

mitigation

analysis


Counties The City will include the feature

compilation projection with the

aerial photo project in 2004 in

which the City will provide the

additional GIS work necessary to

join attribute information to the

building footprint features.

Completed

Lack of agreed

upon evacuation

routes for rural

municipalities


Counties and their Rural

municipalities

Evacuation routes will be developed

by County Planning & GIS

personnel and copies of the routes

will be given to the local

municipalities to adopt.

Completed

Cities were later

covered under plans.

Table 4.2: Status of Mitigation Projects included in the revised 2005 “Multi-Hazard Pre-

Disaster Mitigation Plan - Serving the Jurisdictions and Communities of Minnehaha and

Lincoln Counties and the City of Sioux Falls”

Hazard Area of Concern Potential Project Status Wildfire Threat Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties

Countywide grasslands

Enforcement of burn ban as deemed

appropriate by officials.

No Progress

Reason: No

progress has

occurred regarding

this identified

hazard mitigation

action due to a lack

of time and

resources.

Gas pipeline

explosion Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties Countywide area, but


municipalities

Project in which all pipelines

throughout the cities would be

identified and mapped. This project

would also include a

communications plan between city

officials and gas companies so that

city officials (especially emergency

responders) are aware of what type

of product is being carried in each

pipe and what the type of pipe in

which the product is being

transported.

Completed

State Pipeline

Association /

Industry Group

have met with local

leaders and

emergency

responders to

discuss the location

of pipelines and

responding to

pipeline hazards.


69

Hazard Area of Concern Potential Project Status Power outages

due to electrical

storms

Sioux Falls

Busy Intersections within the

City of Sioux Falls

Back up power supplies within

traffic signals at busy intersections.

Completed

Back up power

supplies now go in

every traffic signal

High Wind and

Tornado Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties

Countywide area, and

especially throughout the

municipalities

Enforcement of tougher building

codes for tornado shelters.

Aggressive education of public on

debris clean up and tree thinning.

The project would provide free

debris pick-up more often in return

for participation in the event.

Progress

Reason: The cities

of Harrisburg and

Tea did conduct

storm damage

debris pickup, but

the other cities have

not.

Storm water

discharge Harrisburg

(NE side of town) Funding will be needed to provide

an appropriate storm sewer drainage

system in the Northeast portion of

the City. An engineering study has

been completed and an application

for funds is the next step.

Completed

Flooding Hudson

Northern portion of the Town

of Hudson

Flooding is occurring in the northern

portion of Hudson. A buyout of

flooded cropland would solve the

flooding problem. However, the

town and the property owner have

not yet negotiated a buyout.

On-Going

Reason: Issue has

been worked on, but

land owner

continues to refuse

to sell the property.

Lack of agreed

upon evacuation

routes for rural

municipalities

Rural municipalities

in Lincoln and Minnehaha

Counties

Evacuation routes will be developed

by County Planning & GIS

personnel and copies of the routes

will be given to the local

municipalities to adopt.

Completed

Cities were later

covered under the

hazardous materials

plan.

At the Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee Minnehaha and Lincoln

Counties (Update 2011) Meeting #4 on March 15, 2011, the planning committee members

divided into five small groups with 4-5 jurisdictions represented per group to prioritize and rank

potential hazard mitigation projects for their communities. Prior to the meeting, representatives

for each community submitted a list of potential hazard mitigation projects. The list of projects

included the name of the jurisdiction, rating (high, medium, or low), responsible party,

timeframe, cost, and hazard type.

Later, each small group member was given a ledger sheet detailing the aforementioned project

information regarding potential hazard mitigation projects for 2011. Each small group was then

tasked with ranking and prioritizing each project utilizing the following categories: Overall

Benefit (High, Medium, or Low); Cost Effective (Yes, No); Politically Feasible (Yes, No);

Technically Feasible (Yes, No); Environmentally Feasible (Yes, No); Revised Rating (High,

Medium, or Low); Funding Resources (FEMA, SD Office of Emergency Management, SD

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, etc.); and Included on the South Dakota’s

Hazard Mitigation Project List (Yes, No). Each small group deliberated and ranked each project

using the criteria previously mentioned. After 30 minutes of discussion, each small group


70

reported back to the entire group. This activity gave each planning committee member the

opportunity to see what other communities are undertaking in terms of potential hazard

mitigation projects, and planning committee members were able to take a second look at the

potential hazard mitigation projects that they plan on submitting to the state. A table listing the

proposed mitigation actions/projects for Lincoln County, Minnehaha County, and their

communities can be found in Appendix H. Hazard Mitigation projects that are being submitted

to the state will be reviewed for their cost effectiveness and must have a benefit cost analysis

ratio of 1.0 or greater to be considered for submission. SECOG will work with Lincoln County,

Minnehaha County, and their communities to help them determine whether or not a project is

cost effective.


71

4.3 Lincoln and Minnehaha County HMGP Project Applications 2011

Lincoln County, Tea Tributary Project Area, Redwood Avenue looking East

July 2010, photo taken by Lincoln County GIS

Table 4-3: Lincoln and Minnehaha County HMGP Project Applications 2011

July – 2011,

Lincoln County

Spring Creek

Tributary Project

The Lincoln County – Spring Creek Tributary Project will permanently

remove 20 residences from the 100-year flood plain through the use of

increased culverts sizes and channel improvements.

July – 2011,

Lincoln County

Tea Tributary

Project

The Lincoln County – Tea Tributary Project will permanently remove 70

residences from the 100-year flood plain through the use of increased

culverts sizes, channel improvements, and the creation of water detention

areas.

July – 2011, City

of Canton

Holiday Drive

Drainage Project

The City of Canton – Holiday Drive Project through the construction of

channel improvements and storm sewer inlets will provide increased flood

protection to a home and nearby residences along Holiday Drive.


72

Chapter V

Plan Maintenance

5.1 Plan Maintenance Process

In order to be an effective hazard mitigation tool, the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County

Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan must be updated on an annual basis or after

the occurrence of a hazard event. It must also be flexible enough so that it can be used with

existing planning and emergency management documents at both the city and county level. This

chapter will address how local officials within Lincoln County and Minnehaha County, and their

communities intend to ensure the following:

The plan’s goals and objectives address current and expected conditions.

The plan has addressed the nature, magnitude, and/or type of risks that have changed.

The current resources available are appropriate for implementing the plan.

The plan has addressed implementation issues such as technical, political, legal or

coordination issues with other agencies.

The plan has measured the outcomes that have occurred and the progress that has been

made regarding meeting hazard mitigation goals and objectives.

5.2 Plan Monitoring, Evaluation, and Updating


Update is an open document that will be evaluated and updated as needed. The Lincoln County

Emergency Management Director and the Minnehaha County Emergency Management Director

are both responsible for ensuring the plan is maintained. They will both work with the Multi-

Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee throughout the plan’s maintenance process.

Each year, the Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee will assemble as a

group at an annual review meeting to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the hazard mitigation

plan. The group will scrutinize each chapter and individually discuss hazard mitigation actions

that have been undertaken to indicate what has worked and not worked for their communities. At

each annual review meeting, the group shall acknowledge: The occurrence of a significant event,

funding availability, changes in local priorities, and technological advancements.

When the review meeting concludes, the group will make changes to the current mitigation

strategy, goals, and objectives as needed. If no changes are proposed, it is anticipated that the

plan would not be updated until required (within five years).The emergency managers will be

responsible for ensuring that the plan updates are incorporated into the plan document. Each

44 CFR Part §201.6(4) (3) (i): Requirement

[The plan maintenance process shall include a] section describing the method and

schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-

year cycle.


73

Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning Committee member will then be tasked with

reporting their findings back to their local government officials.

Each year the emergency managers for both Lincoln County and Minnehaha County will be

tasked with annually reporting the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-

Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011 Update’s effectiveness to its County Commission. At each annual

review meeting, an update on the progress of current and ongoing hazard mitigation projects and

priorities will be discussed. Each participating jurisdiction represented in the plan will be invited

to send a representative to each county’s review meeting of the County Commission. This will

help ensure local jurisdiction input is a part of the annual plan review process.

Table 5.1: Plan Monitoring, Evaluation, and Updating Schedule 2011-2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

January-

October

Conduct

meetings

with Pre-

Disaster

Mitigation

Planning

Committee

to Update

PDM Plan

2011

October –

Annual Pre-

Disaster

Mitigation

Planning

Committee

meeting to

discuss Plan

October –

Annual Pre-

Disaster

Mitigation

Planning

Committee

meeting to

discuss Plan

October –

Annual Pre-

Disaster

Mitigation

Planning

Committee

meeting to

discuss Plan

October –

Annual Pre-

Disaster

Mitigation

Planning

Committee

meeting to

discuss Plan

January –

October

Conduct

meetings with

Pre-Disaster

Mitigation

Planning

Committee to

Update PDM

Plan 2016

November–

Meetings

with

Lincoln

County

Commission

and

Minnehaha

County

Commission

to approve

updated

PDM Plan

2011

November –

Annual

Meetings with

Lincoln

County

Commission

and

Minnehaha

County

Commission

November –

Annual

Meetings with

Lincoln

County

Commission

and

Minnehaha

County

Commission

November –

Annual

Meetings with

Lincoln

County

Commission

and

Minnehaha

County

Commission

November –

Annual

Meetings with

Lincoln

County

Commission

and

Minnehaha

County

Commission

November–

Meetings with

Lincoln

County

Commission

and

Minnehaha

County

Commission

to approve

updated PDM

Plan 2016


74

5.3 Plan Integration


Update will be used as a blueprint to address hazards within Lincoln County, Minnehaha County,

and their communities. The plan is designed to work with other local planning and emergency

management documents, tools, and systems at both the city and county level. The plan’s

effectiveness hinges on incorporating local plans and policy documents. For example, addressing

the flood hazard can easily be done at the city or county level through tools such as local

comprehensive plans, zoning, and floodplain ordinances. Future property losses can be prevented

or mitigated against at no cost by simply directing development to areas that are less prone to the

flood hazard. The Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation

Plan acts as another tool in addressing hazard mitigation concerns.

It is highly critical that the goals, objectives, and actions highlighted in the hazard

mitigation plan build upon existing information that is currently included in existing local

comprehensive plans, emergency operations plans, land use plans, zoning ordinances, flood

plain ordinances, and emergency response plans. Listed below are some of the local planning

and emergency planning documents that the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-

Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2011 Update is designed to work with. Each document was

analyzed and reviewed as the plan was being drafted:

Lincoln County Local Emergency Operations Plan

Proposed Lincoln County Drainage Plan 2011

Minnehaha County Local Emergency Operations Plan

Sioux Falls EM Plan 2007

2010 Revised Drainage Ordinance of Minnehaha County

Minnehaha County Drainage Plan

Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan (2005-2025)

Minnehaha County Compressive Development Plan (December 1998)

Baltic Comprehensive Plan (2005-2025)

Brandon Comprehensive Plan (2000-2025)

Beresford Comprehensive Plan (2003-2025)

Colton Comprehensive Plan (2000-2025)

Crooks Comprehensive Plan (2000-2025)

Dell Rapids Comprehensive Plan (2000-2025)

Hartford Comprehensive Plan (2006-2026)

Humboldt Comprehensive Plan (2003-2025)

Shape Sioux Falls Comprehensive Plan (2010-2035)

Canton Comprehensive Plan (2000-2020)

Harrisburg Comprehensive Plan (2005-2025)

Lennox Comprehensive Plan (1995-2015)

Tea Comprehensive Plan (2005-2030)

Drainage Master Plan for the City of Tea, South Dakota (2007)

Worthing Comprehensive Plan (2010-2030)

Valley Springs Comprehensive Plan (1978)


75

Reviewing the comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances was a highly useful activity during

the development of the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster

Mitigation Plan 2011 Update because the plans and ordinances are able to demonstrate where

growth is occurring within Lincoln County and Minnehaha County and what policies are in place

to direct future growth. The integration between existing plans is critical; otherwise the plans

will not work together effectively if they each contain contradicting goals or policy

recommendations.

To ensure the Lincoln County and Minnehaha County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation

Plan 2011 Update’s usefulness, local policy makers need to be familiar with the goals and

actions that are indentified in this plan, and these items need to be incorporated into local

priorities. This can be accomplished by aligning local capital improvements with mitigation

improvements during each community’s annual budgeting process. This will allow local

jurisdictions to better plan for future hazard mitigation projects and activities.

It is also imperative that County Officials and City Officials within Lincoln County, Minnehaha

County, and their municipalities work together as a region when confronting the flooding hazard

and other hazards. As Sioux Falls and its surrounding municipalities continue to grow,

cooperation at all levels must occur.

LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY MULTI-HAZARD … · LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY...

Documents

Transcript of LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY MULTI-HAZARD … · LINCOLN COUNTY AND MINNEHAHA COUNTY...