Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
2015-345-Resolution No. 2015-087 Recorded 7/22/2015 ^f}
REVIE ED DESCHUTES BLANKENSHIP RECORDS �, COUNTY CLERKJ 2015.345
NANCY
�
,� SEL
arAir COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL
LE 0112712015 08;30;43 AM
11111111111111IIIIII0111 II 2 15-3
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
A Resolution Adopting Upda tes to the
Deschutes County Multi-Jurisdictional * RESOLUTION NO. 2015-087
Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
WHEREAS, Deschutes County recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people,
property and infrastructure within our community; and
WHEREAS, undertaking hazard mitigation actions will reduce the potential for harm to people,
property and infrastructure from future hazard occurrences; and
WHEREAS, an adopted Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan is required as a condition of future
funding for mitigation projects under multiple Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA")
pre- and post-disaster mitigation grant programs; and
WHEREAS, Deschutes County fully participated in the FEMA prescribed mitigation planning
process to prepare this Deschutes County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
("Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Oregon Office of Emergency Management ("OEM") submitted to FEMA
Region X its approval of the Plan, and
WHEREAS, the FEMA Region X officials have reviewed the Plan and pre-approved it
contingent upon this official adoption of the participating governments and entities, see Exhibit A,
attached and incorporated by reference herein; and
WHEREAS, upon the completion of the plan addenda for the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond
and Sisters, the County intends to amend the Plan to include those addenda; now,therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES
COUNTY, OREGON, as follows:
Section 1. Deschutes County adopts the Deschutes County Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards
Mitigation Plan, attached as Exhibit B and incorporated by reference herein, as an official plan of
Deschutes County.
///
Page 1 of 2-RESOLUTION NO. 2015-087
Section 2. Deschutes County will submit this resolution to the OEM and FEMA Region. X
officials to enable final state and federal approval of the Deschutes County Multi-Jurisdictional
Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.
Dated this of , 2015 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ANTHONY DEBONE, Chair
ALAN UNGER, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary TAMMY BANEY, C 'ssioner
Page 2 of 2--RESOLUTION NO. 2015-087
U.S.Department of Homeland Security
Fr;% r,A Region X
Federal Regional Center
131)228th Street.SW
;;':a Bothell.WA 98021-8627
y
L)
June 30, 2015
Mr. Dennis Sigrist,
State Hazard Mitigation Officer
Oregon Military (Department
Office of Emergency Management
P.O. Box 14370
Salem, Oregon 97309
Dear Mr. Sigrist:
As requested, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has completed a pre-adoption review of the Deschutes County Multi-
Jurisdictional Naturra!Hazards Mitigation Plan. The plan successfully contains the required
criteria. excluding the adoption. fin- hazard mitigation plans. as outlined in 44 CFR Part 201. This
letter serves as Region 10's commitment to approve the plan upon receiving documentation (Wits
adoption by the Community.
The plan will not be formally approved by FEMA until it is adopted. The communities are not
eligible for mitigation project grants until the plan is formally approved by FEMA.
Please contact our Regional Mitigation Planning Manager, Kristen. Meyers, at (425) 487-4543 with
any questions.
Sincerely,
fit.
k'-
1'amra I3iasco '
Y Chief, Risk Analysis Branch
Mitigation l.)ivision.
1311:bb
Page 1 of 1-EXHIBIT A to RESOLUTION 2015-087 wwwJema.goV
Deschutes County
Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
Prepared for: Deschutes County, Bend, La.Pine, Redmond,and Sisters
0 .
Xd.
s„ t,
■j9
Oei
Page 1 of 469-EXHIBIT B to RESOI,U'I'ION 2015-087
®2015,. University,of Oregon's Community Service Center Photos°reg.,s,ateArch,ves
114.•4"—
C y pf sis
} ����«qa ��F `r c��w
LA PINE IF,;‘ 0 ,��.
UV � !PpORATtP
DESCHUTES COUNTY
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL
NATURAL HAZARDS MITIGATION PLAN
Report for:
Deschutes County
Bend
La Pine
Redmond
Sisters
Prepared by:
Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Community Service Center
1209 University of Oregon
Eugene,Oregon 97403---1209
May 2015
0 -
DISASTER
RI.S I I,I i M. r Community
NI t.t 51r Service
u o C o I Center
Page 3 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
SPECIAL THANKS & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Deschutes County developed this Multi—jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
(NHMP) through a regional partnership funded by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's Pre---Disaster Mitigation Competitive Grant Program. FEMA awarded the grant to
support the update of the natural hazards mitigation plan. The county's planning process
utilized a four---phased planning process, plan templates and plan development support
provided by the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience (OPDR) at the University of
Oregon's Community Service Center- This project would not have been possible without
technical and in---kind staff support provided by Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, La
Pine, Redmond, and Sisters.
Partners include:
Deschutes County FEMA Region X
City of Bend City of La Pine
City of Redmond City of Sisters
Oregon Military Department – Office of Emergency Management
Community Service Center, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Project Steering Committee:
Deschutes County
Representatives from the following organizations served as steering committee members
for the Deschutes County natural hazards mitigation planning process.
Convener, Nathan Garibay Emergency Services Manager, Deschutes County
Sheriff's Office
Bill Adams Planning Director, La Pine
Melinda Campbell GIS Analyst/ Programmer, Deschutes County
Ben Duda Assistant Unit Forester, Oregon Department of
Forestry---Sisters
Daniel Fishkin Volunteer, Deschutes County Sheriff's Office
Search and Rescue; Chair, Bend Park and
Recreation District Board of Directors
Gordon Foster Acting Unit Forester, Oregon Department of
Forestry
Jeremy Giffin Water Master– District 11, Oregon Water
Resources
Phil Grieb Government Liaison, Red Cross
Richard Grimes Volunteer, Red Cross
William Groves Senior Planner, Deschutes County
Dave Howe Battalion Chief, Bend Fire
Page 5 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201.5-087
Ed Keith County Forester, Deschutes County
Matt Martin Associate Planner, Deschutes County
Deborah McMahon Principal Planner, Redmond
Daniele McKay Geology Instructor,OSU---Cascades
Karen Parmelee Disaster Program Manager, Red Cross
Eric Porter Planner, Sisters
Damian Syrnyk Senior Planner, Bend
Emily Wegener Preparedness Coordinator, Red Cross
City of Bend
Convener, Damian Syrnyk Senior Planner, Bend
Daniel Fishkin Volunteer, Deschutes County sheriff's Office
Search and Rescue; Chair, Bend Park and
Recreation District Board of Directors
Dave Howe Battalion Chief, Bend Fire
Ed Keith County Forester, Deschutes County
City of La Pine
Convener, Bill Adams Planning Director, La Pine
Rick Allen City Manager, La Pine
City of Redmond
Convener, Deborah Principal Planner, Redmond
McMahon
Keith Witcosky City Manager
Mike Caccavano City Engineer
Bill Duerden Public Works Director
Heather Richards Community Development Director
City of Sisters
Convener, Paul Bertagna Public Works Director, Sisters
Andrew Gorayeb City Manager, Sisters
Gary Marshall Fire Safety Manager, Sisters/ Camp Sherman Fire
Page 6 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Project Managers:
Nathan Garibay, Emergency Services Manager, Deschutes County Sheriff's Office
Michael Howard, AICP, CFM, Program Specialist, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Community Service Center Staff:
Bob Parker, AICP, Director of the Community Service Center and
Community Planning Workshop, University of Oregon
Josh Bruce, AICP, Director, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Evelyn Perdomo, Project Associate, Community Service Center
Drew Pfefferle, Project Associate, Community Service Center
Julie Foster, Grants Administrator, Community Service Center
Julie Havens, Office Coordinator, Community Service Center
About the Community Service Center
The Community Service Center (CSC), a research center affiliated with the Department of
Planning, Public Policy, and Management at the University of Oregon, is an interdisciplinary
organization that assists Oregon communities by providing planning and technical assistance
to help solve local issues and improve the quality of life for Oregon residents. The role of the
CSC is to link the skills, expertise, and innovation of higher education with the
transportation, economic development, and environmental needs of communities and
regions in the State of Oregon, thereby providing service to Oregon and learning
opportunities to the students involved.
About the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
The Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience (OPDR) is a coalition of public, private, and
professional organizations working collectively toward the mission of creating a disaster---
resilient and sustainable state. Developed and coordinated by the Community Service
Center at the University of Oregon, the OPDR employs a service---learning model to increase
community capacity and enhance disaster safety and resilience statewide.
Plan Template Disclaimer
This Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan is based in part on a plan template developed by the
Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience. The template is structured to address the
requirements contained in 44 CFR 201.6; where language is applicable to communities
throughout Oregon, OPDR encourages the use of standardized language. As part of this
regional planning initiative, OPDR provided copies of the plan templates to communities for
use in developing or updating their natural hazards mitigation plans. OPDR hereby
authorizes the use of all content and language provided to Jackson County in the plan
template.
Page 7 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
DESCHUTES COUNTY
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL
NATURAL HAZARDS MITIGATION PLAN
Table of Contents
Volume I: Basic Plan
Executive Summary
Section 1: Introduction 1---1
Section 2: Risk Assessment 2---1
Section 3: Mitigation Strategy 3---1
Section 4:Plan Implementation and Maintenance 4---1
Volume II: Hazard Annexes
Drought DR---1
Earthquake EQ---1
Flood FL---1
Landslide LS---1
Volcano VE---1
Wildfire WF---1
Windstorm WS---1
Winter Storm SI---1
Volume III: Jurisdictional Addenda
City of Bend BA---1
Cityof La Pine LA---1
City of Redmond RA---1
City of Sisters SA---1
Page 8 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Volume IV: Mitigation Resources
Appendix A:Action Item Forms A---1
Appendix B:Planning and Public Process B---1
Appendix C: Community Profile C---1
Appendix D: Economic Analysis of Natural Hazard Mitigation Projects.. D---1
Appendix E:Grant Programs and Resources E---1
Appendix F: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Community Survey F---1
Page 9 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Volume I:
Basic Plan
Page 10 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Deschutes County developed this Multi---jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
(NHMP, MNHMP or Plan) in an effort to prepare for the long---term effects resulting from
natural hazards. It is impossible to predict exactly when these hazards will occur, or the
extent to which they will affect the community. However, with careful planning and
collaboration among public agencies, private sector organizations, and citizens within the
community, it is possible to create a resilient community that will benefit from long---term
recovery planning efforts.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) defines mitigation as ". . . the effort to
reduce loss of life and property by lessening the
impact of disasters . . . through risk analysis,
which results in information that provides a
foundation for mitigation activities that reduce
risk." Said another way, natural hazard
mitigation is a method of permanently reducing
or alleviating the losses of life, property, and
injuries resulting from natural hazards through
long and short---term strategies. Example strategies include policy changes, such as updated
ordinances, projects, such as seismic retrofits to critical facilities; and education and
outreach to targeted audiences, such as Spanish speaking residents or the elderly. Natural
hazard mitigation is the responsibility of the "Whole Community" --- individuals, private
businesses and industries, state and local governments, and the federal government.
Why Develop this Mitigation Plan?
In addition to establishing a comprehensive
community---level mitigation strategy,the
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K) and the
regulations contained in 44 CFR 201 require that
jurisdictions maintain an approved Natural
Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) in order to
receive federal funds for mitigation projects.
Local and federal approval of this Plan ensures
that the county and listed jurisdictions will remain eligible for pre---and post---disaster
mitigation project grants.
Who Participated in Developing the Plan?
The Deschutes County NHMP is the result of a collaborative effort between the county,
cities, special districts, citizens, public agencies, non---profit organizations, the private sector
and regional organizations. County and City steering committees guided the Plan
development process.
Page 12 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The County Steering Committee included representatives from the following jurisdictions
and agencies:
• Deschutes County
• City of Bend
• City of La Pine
• City of Redmond
• City of Sisters
• American Red Cross
• Bend Park and Recreation District
• Deschutes County Search and Rescue
• Oregon Department of Forestry
• Oregon State University---Cascades
• Oregon Water Resources
• Sisters/ Camp Sherman Fire
The Deschutes County Emergency Services Manager convened the planning process and will
take the lead in implementing, maintaining and updating the plan. Deschutes County is
dedicated to directly involving the public in the continual review and update of the natural
hazards mitigation plan. Although members of the Steering Committee represent the public
to some extent, the public will also have the opportunity to continue to provide feedback
about the Plan throughout the implementation and maintenance period.
The county will ensure continued public involvement by posting the NHMP on the county's
website. The Plan will also be archived and posted on the University of Oregon Libraries'
Scholar's Bank Digital Archive.
How Does this Mitigation Plan
Reduce Risk?
The NHMP is intended to assist Deschutes
County reduce the risk from natural hazards by
identifying resources, information, and
strategies for risk reduction. It is also intended
to guide and coordinate mitigation activities throughout the county. A risk assessment
consists of three phases: hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and risk analysis, as
illustrated in the following graphic.
Page 13 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLIJTION 2015-087
Figure ES-I Understanding Risk
'`r uSGS Understanding Risk DISASI kK
RE:SII.IE N(.1
science 10,5 changing world
Natural Hazard \\Vulnerable System
Potential Catastrophic // s` Exposure,Sensitivity
and Chronic Physical Events , Risk , and Resilience of:
• Past Recurrence Intervals I I • Population
•Future Probability I of t • Economic Generation
•Speed of Onset I I - Built Environment
• Magnitude I Disaster/I • Academic and Research Function
•Duration t • Cultural Assets
•Spatial Extent / • Infrastructure
5. /
Ability, Resources
and Willingness to:
• Mitigate• Respond
• Prepare • Recover
Source:USGS-Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience Research Collaboration,2006
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience.
By identifying and understanding the relationship between natural hazards, vulnerable
systems, and existing capacity, Deschutes County is better equipped to identify and
implement actions aimed at reducing the overall risk to natural hazards.
What is the County's Overall Risk to Hazards?
Deschutes County reviewed and updated their risk assessment to evaluate the probability of
each hazard as well as the vulnerability of the community to that hazard. In addition, the
steering committees for the participating cities reviewed the recently updated Deschutes
County risk assessment to compare risk and vulnerability particular to their jurisdiction (see
addenda for more information). Table ES---1 below summarizes hazard probability and
vulnerability as determined by the county steering committee (for more information see
Section 2, Risk Assessment).
Page 15 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table ES-I Risk Assessment Summary
Total Threat
Hazard ,Probability Vulnerability Score Hazard Rank
Drought High Low 149 #6
Earthquake(Cascadia) Moderate High 191 #3
Earthquake(Crustal) Low Low 94 #8
Flood High Low 114 #7
Landslide Low Low 54 149
Volcano Low High 173 #5
Wildfire High High 220 #2
Windstorm High Moderate 179 #4
Winter Storm High High 230 #1
Source:Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
What is the Plan's Mission?
The mission of the Deschutes County NHMP is to:
Mission: To promote sound public policy
designed to protect citizens, critical facilities,
infrastructure, private property, and the
environment from natural hazards.
This can be achieved by increasing public awareness, documenting the resources for risk
reduction and loss---prevention, and identifying activities to guide the county towards
building a safer, more disaster resistant community.
What are the Plan Goals?
The Plan goals describe the overall direction that the participating jurisdiction's agencies,
organizations, and citizens can take toward mitigating risk from natural hazards. Below is a
list of the plan goals (Note: although numbered the goals are not prioritized):
Goal 1: Protect life and reduce injuries resulting from natural hazards.
Goal 2: Minimize public and private property damages and the disruption of essential
infrastructure and services from natural hazards.
Goal 3: Implement strategies to mitigate the effects of natural hazards and increase the
quality of life and resilience of economies in Deschutes County.
Goal 4: Minimize the impact of natural hazards while protecting, restoring, and
sustaining environmental processes.
Goal 5: Enhance and maintain local capability to implement a comprehensive hazard
loss reduction strategy.
Goal 6: Document and evaluate progress in achieving hazard mitigation strategies and
action items.
Page 16 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Goal 7: Motivate the public, private sector, and government agencies to mitigate the
effects of natural hazards through information and education.
Goal 8: Apply development standards that mitigate or eliminate the potential impacts of
natural hazards.
Goal 9: Mitigate damage to historic and cultural resources from natural hazards.
Goal 10: Increase communication, collaboration, and coordination among agencies at all
levels of government and the private sector to mitigate natural hazards.
Goal 11: Integrate local natural hazard mitigation plans with comprehensive plans and
implementing measures.
How are the Action Items Organized?
The action items are organized within an action
matrix included within Section 3, Mitigation
Strategy (full descriptions are provided in
Appendix A, Action Item Forms). Deschutes ,,r. r„z :;r
County has not identified highest priority action re!+er_ ;orge of S,e'tf'r
items at this time; the Steering Committee will pf5
identify prioritized actions during one of their
semi---annual meetings following adoption and
approval of the NHMP.
Data collection, research and the public participation process resulted in the development
of the action items. The Action Item Matrix portrays the overall Plan framework and
identifies linkages between the plan goals and actions. The matrix documents the title of
each action along with, the coordinating organization, timeline, and the Plan goals
addressed. Action items particular to each of the participating cities are included at the end
of the action item matrix in Section 3, Mitigation Strategy and in the addenda.
How will the plan be
implemented?
C !2c E c t li`r, F.;ia n.
The plan maintenance section of this Plan details ;e ,rroritzed,ur;ra,er;ente i i rci
the formal process that will ensure that the
Deschutes County NHMP remains an active and
relevant document. The Plan will be c rh (c)(41- ;n r„rrr tenarce
implemented, maintained and updated by a :xocess
designated convener. The Deschutes County
Emergency Services Manager is the designated
convener (Plan Convener) and is responsible for
overseeing the review and implementation processes. The Plan maintenance process
includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the Plan semi---annually and producing a
plan revision every five years. This section also describes how the communities will
integrate public participation throughout the plan maintenance process.
Page 17 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Plan Adoption
' ' ' '- nr-'
Once the Plan is locally reviewed and deemed
complete the Plan Convener submits it to the
State Hazard Mitigation Officer at the Oregon
Military Depaumen¢ — Of ce of Emergency
Management (OEM). OEM reviews the Plan and z^c^ ( .7/ r^, �w~��="=�
submits it to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA— Region X) for
review. This review will address the federal
criteria outlined in FEMA Interim Final Rule 44 CFR Part 201.6. Once the Plan is pre—'
approved by FEMA, the county hind cities formally adopt the Plan via resolution. The
Deschutes County Plan Convener will be responsible for ensuring local adoption of the
Deschutes County NHMP and providing the support necessary to ensure plan
implementation. Once the resolution is executed at the local level and documentation is
provided to FEMA, the Plan is formally acknowledged by FEMA and the county (and
participating cities)will re---establish eligibility for the Pre---Disaster Mitigation Grant Program,
the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds, and the Flood Mitigation Assistance progr2lm
funds.
The accomplishment of the NHMP goals and actions depends upon regular Steering
Committee participation and adequate support from county and city leadership. Thorough
familiarity with this Plan will result in the efficient and effective implementation of
appropriate mitigation activities and a reduction in the risk and the potentiI for loss from
future natural hazard events.
The Steering Committees for Deschutes County and participating cities each met to review
the Plan update process and their governing bodies adopted the NHMP as shown below:
Deschutes County adopted the plan on [DATE], 2015
The City of Bend adopted the plan on [DATE], 2015
The City of La Pine adopted the plan on [DATE], 2015
The City of Redmond adopted the plan on [DATE], 2015
The City of Sisters adopted the plan on [DATE], 2015
FEMA Region X approved the Deschutes County NHMP on [DATE], 2015. With approval of
this Plan, the entities listed above are now eligible to apply for the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act's hazard mitigation project grants through
[DATE], 2020.
Page 18 of 469- EX IBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
SECTION I:
INTRODUCTION
Section I: Introduction provides a general introduction to natural hazard mitigation planning
in Deschutes County. In addition, it addresses the planning process requirements contained
in 44 CFR 201.6(b) thereby meeting the planning process documentation requirement
contained in 44 CFR 201.6(c)(1). The section concludes with a general description of how
the plan is organized.
What is Natural Hazard Mitigation?
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines mitigation as ". . . the effort to
reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters . . . through risk analysis,
which results in information that provides a foundation for mitigation activities that reduce
risk."' Said another way, natural hazard mitigation is a method of permanently reducing or
alleviating the losses of life, property, and injuries resulting from natural hazards through
long and short---term strategies. Example strategies include policy changes, such as updated
ordinances, projects, such as seismic retrofits to critical facilities; and education and outreach
to targeted audiences, such as Spanish speaking residents or the elderly. Natural
hazard mitigation is the responsibility of the "Whole Community" --- individuals, private
businesses and industries, state and local governments, and the federal government.
Engaging in mitigation activities provides jurisdictions with a number of benefits, including
reduced loss of life, property, essential services, critical facilities and economic hardship;
reduced short---term and long---term recovery and reconstruction costs; increased cooperation
and communication within the community through the planning process; and increased
potential for state and federal funding for recovery and reconstruction projects.
Why Develop a Mitigation Plan?
Deschutes County developed this Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (NHMP or Plan) in an
effort to reduce future loss of life and damage to property resulting from natural hazards. It
is impossible to predict exactly when natural hazard events will occur, or the extent to which
they will affect community assets. However, with careful planning and collaboration among
public agencies, private sector organizations, and citizens within the community, it is
possible to minimize the losses that can result from natural hazards.
In addition to establishing a comprehensive community---level mitigation strategy, the
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K) and the regulations contained in 44 CFR 201
require that jurisdictions maintain an approved NHMP in order to receive federal funds for
mitigation projects. Local and federal approval of this plan ensures that the county and
listed cities will remain eligible for pre---and post---disaster mitigation project grants.
1 FEMA, What is Mitigation?http://www.fema.gov/what---mitigation
Page 19 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
What Federal Requirements Does This Plan Address?
DMA2K is the latest federal legislation addressing mitigation planning. It reinforces the
importance of mitigation planning and emphasizes planning for natural hazards before they
occur. As such, this Act established the Pre---Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grant program and
new requirements for the national post---disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).
Section 322 of the Act specifically addresses mitigation planning at the state and local levels.
State and local jurisdictions must have approved mitigation plans in place in order to qualify
to receive post---disaster HMGP funds. Mitigation plans must demonstrate that State and
local jurisdictions' proposed mitigation measures are based on a sound planning process
that accounts for the risk to the individual and State and local jurisdictions' capabilities.
Chapter 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), section 201.6, also requires a local
government to have an approved mitigation plan in order to receive HMGP project grants.2
Pursuant of Chapter 44 CFR, the Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan planning processes shall
include opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during review, and the updated
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan shall include documentation of the public planning process
used to develop the plan.3 The Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan update must also contain a
risk assessment, mitigation strategy and a plan maintenance process that has been formally
adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction.4 Lastly, the Natural Hazard Mitigation
Plan must be submitted to Oregon Military Department— Office of Emergency Management
(OEM) for initial plan review, and then federal approval.' Additionally, a recent change in
the way OEM administers the Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG), which
helps fund local emergency management programs, also requires a FEMA--approved NHMP.
What is the Policy Framework for Natural Hazards
Planning in Oregon?
Planning for natural hazards is an integral element of Oregon's statewide land use planning
program, which began in 1973. All Oregon cities and counties have comprehensive plans
(Comprehensive Plans) and implementing ordinances that are required to comply with the
statewide planning goals. The challenge faced by state and local governments is to keep this
network of local plans coordinated in response to the changing conditions and needs of
Oregon communities.
Statewide land use planning Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards calls for local plans to
include inventories, policies and ordinances to guide development in or away from hazard
areas. Goal 7, along with other land use planning goals, has helped to reduce losses from
natural hazards. Through risk identification and the recommendation of risk---reduction
actions, this plan aligns with the goals of the jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan, and helps
each jurisdiction meet the requirements of statewide land use planning Goal 7.
Code of Federal Regulations,Chapter 44.Section 201.6,subsection(a),2015
ibid,subsection(b).2015
ibid,subsection(c).2015
ibid,subsection(d).2015
Page 20 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLU.I.ION 2015-087
The primary responsibility for the development and implementation of risk reduction
strategies and policies lies with local jurisdictions. However, additional resources exist at the
state and federal levels. Some of the key agencies in this area include Oregon Military
Department — Office of Emergency Management (OEM), Oregon Building Codes Division
(BCD), Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF), Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral
Industries (DOGAMI), and the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD).
How was the Plan Developed?
The Plan was developed by the Deschutes County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering
Committee and the Steering Committees for the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and
Sisters. The Deschutes County Steering Committee formally convened on three occasions to
discuss and revise the plan. Each of the participating city Steering Committees met at least
once formally. Steering Committee members contributed data and maps, and reviewed and
updated the community profile, risk assessment, action items, and implementation and
maintenance plan.
An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In
order to develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the
P lannin g process shall include opportunity for the public, neighboring communities, local
and regional agencies, as well as, private and non---profit entities to comment on the Plan
during review.G OPDR provided a publicly accessible project website for the general public to
provide feedback on the draft NHMP via a web form. In addition, Deschutes County
provided a press release on their websites to encourage the public to offer feedback on the
Plan update_
In addition, OPDR administered a public opinion survey to obtain additional input from the
public regarding the counties risks, vulnerabilities, hazards history, and mitigation strategies.
See Appendix F for more information.
How is the Plan Organized?
Each volume of the Plan provides specific information and resources to assist readers in
understanding the hazard---specific issues facing county and city residents, businesses, and
the environment. Combined, the sections work in synergy to create a mitigation plan that
furthers the community's mission to reduce or eliminate long---term risk to people and their
property from hazards and their effects. This plan structure enables stakeholders to use the
section(s) of interest to them.
Volume I: Basic Plan
Executive Summary
u ry
The executive summary provides an overview of the FEMA requirements plans process and
highlights the key elements of the risk assessment, mitigation strategy, and implementation
and maintenance strategy.
Code of Federal Regulations,Chapter 44.Section 201.6,subsection(b).2015
Page 21 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Section I: Introduction
The Introduction briefly describes the countywide mitigation planning efforts and the
methodology used to develop the Plan.
Section 2: Risk Assessment
Section 2 provides the factual basis for the mitigation strategies contained in Section 3.
(Additional information is included within Appendix C, which contains an overall description
of Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters.) This section
includes a brief description of community sensitivities and vulnerabilities and an overview of
the hazards addressed in Volume II of this plan. The Risk Assessment allows readers to gain
an understanding of the county's, and other jurisdictions', sensitivities — those community
assets and characteristics that may be impacted by natural hazards, as well as the county's,
and other jurisdictions', resilience — the ability to manage risk and adapt to hazard event
impacts. Additionally, this section provides information on the jurisdictions' participation in
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
Section 3: Mitigation Strategy
This section documents the Plan vision, mission, goals, and actions (mitigation strategy) and
also describes the components that guide implementation of the identified actions. Actions
are based on community sensitivity and resilience factors and the risk assessments in
Section 2 and the Hazard Annexes (Volume II).
Section 4: Plan Implementation and Maintenance
This section provides information on the implementation and maintenance of the Plan. It
describes the process for prioritizing projects, and includes a suggested list of tasks for
updating the Plan to be completed at the semi---annual and five---year review meetings.
Volume II: Hazard Annexes
The hazard annexes describe the risk assessment process and summarize the best available
local hazard data. A hazard summary is provided for each of the hazards addressed in the
Plan. The summary includes hazard history, location, extent, vulnerability, impacts, and
probability.
The hazard specific annexes included with this Plan are the following:
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
• Landslide
• Volcanic Event
• Wildfire
• Windstorm, and
• Winter Storm (Snow/ Ice)
Page 22 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Volume Ill: Jurisdictional Addenda
Volume III of the plan is reserved for any city or special district addenda developed through
this multi---jurisdictional planning process. Each of the cities with a FEMA approved
addendum went through an update to coincide with the county's update. As such,the five---
year update cycle will be the same for all of the cities and the county.
The Plan includes city addenda updates for the following jurisdictions:
• City of Bend
• City of La Pine
• City of Redmond
• City of Sisters
Volume IV: Mitigation Resources
The resource appendices are designed to provide the users of the Deschutes County NHMP
with additional information to assist them in understanding the contents of the mitigation
plan, and provide them with potential resources to assist with plan implementation.
Appendix A: Action Item Forms
This appendix contains the detailed action item forms for each of the mitigation strategies
identified in this Plan.
Appendix B: Planning and Public Process
This appendix includes documentation of all the countywide public processes utilized to
develop the Plan. It includes invitation lists, agendas, sign---in sheets, and summaries of
Steering Committee meetings as well as any other public involvement methods.
Appendix C: Community Profile
The community profile describes the county and participating cities from a number of
perspectives in order to help define and understand the regions sensitivity and resilience to
natural hazards. The information in this section represents a snapshot in time of the current
sensitivity and resilience factors in the region when the Plan was updated. Sensitivity factors
can be defined as those community assets and characteristics that may be impacted by
natural hazards, (e.g., special populations, economic factors, and historic and cultural
resources). Community resilience factors can be defined as the community's ability to
manage risk and adapt to hazard event impacts (e.g., governmental structure, agency
missions and directives, and plans, policies, and programs).
Appendix D: Economic Analysis of Natural Hazard Mitigation Projects
This appendix describes the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
requirements for benefit cost analysis in natural hazards mitigation, as well as various
approaches for conducting economic analysis of proposed mitigation activities. The Oregon
Partnership for Disaster Resilience developed this appendix. It has been reviewed and
accepted by FEMA as a means of documenting how the prioritization of actions shall include
Page 23 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost
benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs.
Appendix E: Grant Programs and Resources
This appendix lists state and federal resources and programs by hazard.
Appendix F: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Community Survey (2015)
Appendix F includes the survey instrument and results from the preparedness survey
implemented by OPDR. The survey aims to gauge household knowledge of mitigation tools
and techniques to assist in reducing the risk and loss from natural hazards, as well as
assessing household disaster preparedness.
Page 24 of469- EXHIBIT l3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
SECTION 2:
RISK ASSESSMENT
This section of the NHMP addresses 44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) --- Risk Assessment. In addition, this
chapter can serve as the factual basis for addressing Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 7 —
Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. Assessing natural hazard risk has three phases:
• Phase 1: Identify hazards that can impact the jurisdiction. This includes an
evaluation of potential hazard impacts — type, location, extent, etc.
• Phase 2: Identify important community assets and system vulnerabilities. Example
vulnerabilities include people, businesses, homes, roads, historic places and drinking
water sources.
• Phase 3: Evaluate the extent to which the identified hazards overlap with, or have
an impact on, the important assets identified by the community.
The information presented below, along with hazard specific information presented in the
Hazard Annexes and community characteristics presented in the Community Profile
Appendix, will be used as the local level rationale for the risk reduction actions identified in
Section 3 — Mitigation Strategy. The risk assessment process is graphically depicted in Figure
2---1 below. Ultimately,the goal of hazard mitigation is to reduce the area where hazards and
vulnerable systems overlap.
Figure 2-I Understanding Risk
L USGS Understanding Risk '�DISASTER
REJIEIE\LE
science for n changing work!
Natural Hazard \Vulnerable System
Potential Catastrophic f� Exposure,Sensitivity
and Chronic Physical Events Risk and Resilience of:
•Past Recurrence Intervals I t • Population
•Future Probability I of I • Economic Generation
•Speed of Onset I I • Built Environment
•Magnitude t Disaster • Academic and Research Function
•Duration f • Cultural Assets
•Spatial Extent S f • Infrastructure
■ , Ability,Resources
and Willingness to:
•Mitigate•Respond
•Prepare •Recover
Source:U565-Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience Research Collaboration,2006
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience.
Page 25 0'469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
What is a Risk Assessment?
A risk assessment consists of three phases: hazard identification, vulnerability assessment,
and risk analysis, as illustrated in the following graphic.
Figure 2-2 Three Phases of a Risk Assessment
-4 The Three Levels of Hazard Assessment —
Community-Wide Community-Wide
Hazard Identification ` Vulnerability Assessment ' Risk Analysis
Source:Planning for Natural Hazards:Oregon Technical Resource Guide,1998
The first phase, hazard identification, involves the identification of the geographic extent of
a hazard, its intensity, and its probability of occurrence. This level of assessment typically
involves producing a map. The outputs from this phase can also be used for land use
planning, management, and regulation; public awareness; defining areas for further study;
and identifying properties or structures appropriate for acquisition or relocation.'
The second phase, vulnerability assessment, combines the information from the hazard
identification with an inventory of the existing (or planned) property and population
exposed to a hazard, and attempts to predict how different types of property and
population groups will be affected by the hazard. This step can also assist in justifying
changes to building codes or development regulations, property acquisition programs,
policies concerning critical and public facilities, taxation strategies for mitigating risk, and
informational programs for members of the public who are at risk.2
The third phase, risk analysis, involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be
incurred in a geographic area over a period of time- Risk has two measurable components:
(1)the magnitude of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability
assessment, and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. An example of a
product that can assist communities in completing the risk analysis phase is HAZUS, a risk
assessment software program for analyzing potential losses from floods, hurricane winds
and earthquakes.In Hazards U.S.—Multi---Hazard(HAZUS---MH)current scientific and
engineering knowledge is coupled with the latest geographic information systems (GIS)
technology to produce estimates of hazard---related damage before, or after a disaster
occurs.
This three---phase approach to developing a risk assessment should be conducted
sequentially because each phase builds upon data from prior phases. However, gathering
data for a risk assessment need not occur sequentially.
Burby,Cooperating with Nature(Washington,DC:Joseph Henry Press,19981,126.
`Ibid,133.
Page 26 4.469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Hazard Analysis Methodology
This NHMP utilizes a hazard analysis methodology that was first developed by FEMA circa
1983, and gradually refined by the Oregon Military Department's Office of Emergency
Management over the years.
The methodology produces scores that range from 24 (lowest possible) to 240 (highest
possible). Vulnerability and probability are the two key components of the methodology.
Vulnerability examines both typical and maximum credible events, and probability
endeavors to reflect how physical changes in the jurisdiction and scientific research modify
the historical record for each hazard. Vulnerability accounts for approximately 60% of the
total score, and probability approximately 40%.
This method provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, or relative risk. It
doesn't predict the occurrence of a particular hazard, but it does "quantify" the risk of one
hazard compared with another. By doing this analysis, planning can first be focused where
the risk is greatest.
In this analysis, severity ratings, and weight factors, are applied to the four categories of
history, vulnerability, maximum threat (worst---case scenario), and probability as
demonstrated below.
History
Weight factor for category= 2
History is the record of previous occurrences. Events to include in assessing history of a
hazard in your jurisdiction are events for which the following types of activities were
required:
• The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) or alternate EOC was activated;
• Three or more Emergency Operations Planning (EOP) functions were implemented,
e.g., alert & warning, evacuation, shelter, etc.;
• An extraordinary multi---jurisdictional response was required; and/or
• A "Local Emergency" was declared.
LOW = 0 to 1 event in the past 100 years, scores between 1 and 3 points
MODERATE= 2 to 3 event in the past 100 years, scores between 4 and 7 points
HIGH = 4+ events in the past 100 years, scores between 8 and 10 points
Probability
Weight factor for category= 7
Probability is the likelihood of future occurrence within a specified period of time.
LOW = one incident likely within 75 to 100 years, scores between 1 and 3 points
MODERATE = one incident likely within 35 to 75 years, scores between 4 and 7 points
HIGH = one incident likely within 10 to 35 years, scores between 8 and 10 points
Page 27 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Vulnerability
Weight factor for category=5
Vulnerability is the percentage of population and property likely to be affected under an
"average" occurrence of the hazard.
LOW = < 1% affected, scores between 1 and 3 points
MODERATE= 1--- 10% affected, scores between 4 and 7 points
HIGH = > 10% affected, scores between 8 and 10 points
Maximum Threat
Weight factor for category = 10
Maximum threat is the highest percentage of population and property that could be
impacted under a worst---case scenario.
LOW = < 5% affected, scores between 1 and 3 points
MODERATE= 5 --- 25%affected, scores between 4 and 7 points
HIGH = > 25% affected, scores between 8 and 10 points
Hazard Identification
Deschutes County identifies eight natural hazards that could have an impact on the county
(as shown in Table 2---1). For specific information pertaining to individual hazards, including
location information, reference the Hazard Annexes (Volume II).Table 2---1 shows the
hazards identified in the county in comparison to the hazards identified in the State of
Oregon NHMP for Central Oregon (Region 6), which includes Deschutes County. The Dust
Storm hazard is the only hazard identified in the state profile that is not perceived as a
threat by the Deschutes NHMP steering committee; as such it was not included.
Table 2-I Deschutes County Hazard Identification
"tote of Aregon
`? " NHIVIP Region 0
I esch,ntes donna',�;' t al°iOregon
Drought Drought
Dust Storm
Earthquake Earthquake
Flood Flood) Riverine
Landslide Landslide
Volcano Volcano
Wildfire Wildfire
Windstorm Windstorm
Winter Storm Winter Storm
Source:Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee(2014)and
State of Oregon(Draft)NHMP,Region 6:Central Oregon(2015)
Page 28 (4.469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Drought
A drought is a period of drier than normal conditions that results in water---related problems.
Drought occurs in virtually every climatic zone, but its characteristics vary significantly from
one region to another. Drought is a temporary condition; it differs from aridity, which is
restricted to low rainfall regions and is a permanent feature of climate. The extent of
drought events depends upon the degree of moisture deficiency, and the duration and size
of the affected area. Typically, droughts occur as regional events and often affect more than
one city and county.
For more information on the Drought Hazard (including history and extent)see the Drought
Annex in Volume ll.
Earthquake
Oregon and the Pacific Northwest in general are susceptible to earthquakes from four
sources: 1)the off---shore Cascadian Fault Zone;2)deep intra---plate events within the
subducting Juan de Fuca Plate; 3) shallow crustal events within the North American Plate;
and 4) earthquakes associated with volcanic activity.3
The areas most susceptible to ground amplification and liquefaction have young, soft alluvial
sediments, found along river and stream channels. The extent of the damage to structures
and injury and death to people will depend upon the type of earthquake, proximity to the
epicenter and the magnitude and duration of the event.
For more information on the Earthquake Hazard(including history and extent)see the
Earthquake Annex in Volume II.
Flood
Flooding results when rain and snowmelt creates water flow that exceed the carrying
capacity of rivers, streams, channels, ditches, and other watercourses. In Oregon, flooding is
most common from October through April when storms from the Pacific Ocean bring intense
rainfall. Most of Oregon's destructive natural disasters have been floods.4 Flooding
can be aggravated when rain is accompanied by snowmelt and frozen ground; the spring
cycle of melting snow is the most common source of flood in the region. The principal types
of flood that occur in Deschutes County include: spring/snow melt flooding, warm winter
rain---on---snow flooding,Ice jams,flash floods,and dam failure.
For more information on the Flood Hazard(including history and extent)see the Flood Annex
in Volume II.
4 Taylor,George H.and Chris Hannan.The Oregon Weather Book.Corvallis,OR:Oregon State University Press.
1999
Page 29 of 469- EXHIBIT I3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Landslide
A landslide is any detached mass of soil, rock, or debris that falls, slides or flows down a
slope or a stream channel. Landslides are classified according to the type and rate of
movement and the type of materials that are transported. In a landslide, two forces are at
work: 1) the driving forces that cause the material to move down slope, and 2) the friction
forces and strength of materials that act to retard the movement and stabilize the slope.
When the driving forces exceed the resisting forces, a landslide occurs. Avalanches also
occur in the mountainous west portion of the county; avalanches are similar to landslides
except they involve snow and ice with some movement of rock or other debris.
For more information on the Landslide Hazard (including history and extent)see the
Landslide Annex in Volume II.
Volcano
The Pacific Northwest lies within the "ring of fire", an area of very active volcanic activity
surrounding the Pacific Basin. Volcanic events occur regularly along the ring of fire, in part
because of the movement of the Earth's tectonic plates. Volcanic events have the potential
to coincide with numerous other hazards including ash fall, earthquakes, lava flows,
pyroclastic flows, lahars, and debris flows, and landslides.
For more information on the Volcano Hazard (including history and extent)see the Volcano
Annex in Volume II.
Wildfire
Wildfires occur in areas with large amounts of flammable vegetation that require a
suppression response due to uncontrolled burning. Fire is an essential part of Oregon's
ecosystem, but can also pose a serious threat to life and property particularly in the state's
growing rural communities. Wildfire can be divided into three categories: interface,
wildland, and firestorms. The increase in residential development in interface areas has
resulted in greater wildfire risk. Fire has historically been a natural wildland element and
can sweep through vegetation that is adjacent to a combustible home. New residents in
remote locations are often surprised to learn that in moving away from built---up urban
areas, they have also left behind readily available fire services providing structural
protection.
For more information on the Wildfire Hazard(including history and extent) see the Wildfire
Annex in Volume II.
Windstorm
A windstorm is generally a short duration event involving straight---line winds and/or gusts
in excess of 50 mph. Although windstorms can affect the entirety of Deschutes County,
they are especially dangerous in developed areas with significant tree stands and major
infrastructure, especially above ground utility lines. A windstorm will frequently knock
down trees and power lines, damage homes, businesses, public facilities, and create tons
of storm related debris.
Page 30 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
For more information on the Windstorm Hazard (including history and extent)see the
Windstorm Annex in Volume II.
Winter Storm
Severe winter storms can consist of rain, freezing rain, ice, snow, cold temperatures, and
wind. They originate from troughs of low pressure offshore that ride along the jet stream
during fall, winter, and early spring months. Severe winter storms affecting Deschutes
County typically originate in the Gulf of Alaska or in the central Pacific Ocean. These storms
are most common from November through March.
For more information on the Winter Strom Hazard (including history and extent) see the
Winter Storm Annex in Volume II.
Federal Disaster and Emergency Declarations
Looking at the past events that have occurred in the county can provide a general sense of
the hazards that have caused significant damage in the county. Where trends emerge,
disaster declarations can help inform hazard mitigation project priorities.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved the first federal disaster declaration in May 1953
following a tornado in Georgia. Since then, federally declared disasters have been approved
within every state as a result of natural hazard related events. As of January 2015, FEMA has
approved a total of 29 major disaster declarations, two emergency declarations, and 58 fire
management assistance declarations in Oregon.5 When governors ask for presidential
declarations of major disaster or emergency, they stipulate which counties in their state
they want included in the declaration. Table 2---2 summarizes the major disasters declared in
Oregon that affected Deschutes County, since 1955. The table shows that there have been
two major disaster declarations for the county; both were weather related.
An Emergency Declaration is more limited in scope and without the long---term federal
recovery programs of a Major Disaster Declaration. Generally, federal assistance and
funding are provided to meet a specific emergency need or to help prevent a major disaster
from occurring. There have been two emergency declarations that have affected Deschutes
County.
Fire Management Assistance may be provided after a State submits a request for assistance
to the FEMA Regional Director at the time a "threat of major disaster" exists. There have
been ten fire management assistance declarations for the county (for a list of wildfires that
have affected the county, between 1990 through 2014, see Table II---7 within Volume II,
Hazard Annexes).
51-LMA,Declared Disasters by Year or State,httpl/www.fema.gov/news/disaster_totals_annual.fema#markS.
Accessed January 9,2015.
Page 31 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 2-2 FEMA Major Disaster, Emergency, and Fire Management Declarations
for Deschutes County
Declaration DecIarati3On i';14c dent
Per o4 :Individual Pubf#ic Assistance
Nu1ber : ;Pate , . ,Frog , TO , .Incident , 'Assistance ' categories
DR#184 12/24/64 12/24/64 12/24/64 Heavy rains and yes A, B,C, D, E, F,G
flooding
DR#1510 2/19/04 12/26/03 1/14/04 Severe Winter None A, B,C, D, E, F,G
_ Storm
EM#3039 4/29/77 4/29/77 4/29/77 Drought None A, B
EM#3228 9/7/05 8/29/05 10/1/05 Hurricane Katrina None B
Evacuation
FMA#2034 7/25/79 7/25/79 # Bridge Creek Fire None #
FMA#2035 7/26/79 7/26/79 # Sisters Fire None #
FMA#2046 8/27/84 8/27/84 # La Pine/Wampus None #
Butte Fire
FMA#2075 8/5/90 8/4/90 # Aubrey Hall Fire None #
FMA#2189 8/24/96 8/24/96 # Skelton,Evans None B
West Fire
FMA#2455 7/29/02 7/28/02 8/1/02 Cache Mountain None B
Fire
FMA#2493 8/20/03 8/20/03 10/22/03 Booth Fire None B, H
FMA#2659 7/27/06 7/27/06 8/14/06 Black Crater Fire None B, H
FMA#2727 9/3/07 9/2/07 9/11/07 GW Fire None B, H
FMA#5056 6/8/14 6/7/14 6/14/14 Two Bulls None #
Source:FEMA,Oregon Disaster History.Major Disaster Declarations.
Vulnerability Assessment
Community vulnerabilities are an important component of the NHMP risk assessment. For
more in---depth information regarding specific community vulnerabilities, reference Volume
II, Hazard Annexes and Appendix C: Community Profile.
Population
The socio---demographic qualities of the community population such as language, race and
ethnicity, age, income, and educational attainment are significant factors that can influence
the community's ability to cope, adapt to and recover from natural disasters. Historically, 80
percent of the disaster burden falls on the public.6 Of this number, a disproportionate
burden is placed upon special needs groups, particularly children, the elderly, the disabled,
minorities, and low---income persons. Population vulnerabilities can be reduced or eliminated
with proper outreach and community mitigation planning. For planning purposes, it is
essential that Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters
consider both immediate and long---term socio---demographic implications of hazard
resilience.
6 Hazards Workshop Session Summary#16,Disasters,Diversity,and Equity,University of Colorado,Boulder
(2000).
Page 32 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Population Vulnerabilities
• As of 2012, more than 15% of Deschutes County's population is over the age of 64, a
number that is projected to rise to 25% by 2030. Deschutes County's elderly
population is expected to grow faster than Oregon as a whole which has currently
14% of its population over the age of 64, with a projection of 21% by 2030.'
• The Deschutes County age dependency ratio8 is 51.7, which is higher than that of
the State of Oregon (48.6); the age dependency figure for the county is expected to
increase to 69.7 by the year 2030 (largely due to the growth in population over age
64). As of 2012, La Pine has the highest age dependency ratio in the county (73.2).
• The cities of La Pine (16.9%) and Sisters (12.1%) have a high percentage of their
populations over age 64 living alone.
• Even though the vast majority of the county population is reported as proficient in
English, 41.6% of Spanish speakers are not proficient in English. These populations
would stand to benefit from mitigation outreach, with special attention to cultural,
visual and technology sensitive materials.
• Although the county ($51,468) has a higher median household income than the
state ($50,036); La Pine ($28,942) has much lower median household income.
• The poverty rate of La Pine (27.7%) is almost double the county percentage (15.3%);
Redmond's poverty rate is 21.6%.
• La Pine has more than 50% of its population spending more than 35% of household
income on housing (mortgage or rent).9
• Approximately two---thirds of La Pine's population 65 years and over have a disability.
Economy
Economic diversification, employment and industry are measures of economic capacity.
However, economic resilience to natural disasters is far more complex than merely restoring
employment or income in the local community. Building a resilient economy requires an
understanding of how the component parts of employment sectors, workforce, resources
and infrastructure are interconnected in the existing economic picture. The current and
anticipated financial conditions of a community are strong determinants of community
resilience, as a strong and diverse economic base increases the ability of individuals, families
and the community to absorb disaster impacts for a quick recovery. It is imperative that
Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters recognize that
economic diversification is a long---term issue; more immediate strategies to reduce
g g
vulnerability should focus on risk management for the dominant industries.
7 Office of Economic Analysis,Department of Administrative Services.Long Term County Forecast.Long---term
Oregon State's County Population Forecast,2010---2050.Accessed December 2013.
e Dependency Ratio:the ratio of population typically not in the work force(less than 15,greater than 64)
U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Tables 825070&B25091.
Page 33 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Economic Vulnerabilities
• According to the Oregon Employment Department, Deschutes County
unemployment has decreased since 2009 when it was at 14.7% to 9.5% in 2013. In
the event of a large—scale disaster, unemployment has the potential to rise when
businesses and companies are unable to overcome the ramifications of the hazard
event.
• The largest sectors of employment in Deschutes County are Trade, Transportation,
and Utilities (19.5%), Education and Health Services (16.3%), Leisure and Hospitality
(15.7%), and Government (13.4%).10
• The largest revenue sectors in Deschutes County are Health Care and Social
Assistance ($351.5 million), Retail Trade ($271.9 million), and Manufacturing
($201.7 million). In the event of a natural disaster, the manufacturing sector may
not be as vulnerable in the short term as other sectors; however, other large
industries such as retail and wholesale trade may be significantly affected by a
disaster as these basic industries tend to rely on a stable disposable income, which
may decline following a disaster.
• The Construction (26%), Professional and Business Services (24%), and Education
and Health Services (24%) industries are expected to have the most growth from
2012 to 2022.11
Environment
The capacity of the natural environment is essential in sustaining all forms of life including
human life, yet it often plays an underrepresented role in community resiliency to natural
hazards. The natural environment includes land, air, water and other natural resources that
support and provide space to live, work and recreate.12 Natural capital such as wetlands and
forested hill slopes play significant roles in protecting communities and the environment
from weather---related hazards, such as flooding and landslides. When natural systems are
impacted or depleted by human activities, those activities can adversely affect community
resilience to natural hazard events.
Environmental Vulnerabilities
• Dynamic weather and relatively flat (east of the Cascades), arid land across
Deschutes County are indicators of hazard vulnerability when combined with the
changing climate and severe weather related events. Both wet and dry cycles are
likely to last longer and be more extreme, leading to periods of deeper drought and
more frequent flooding. Less precipitation in the summers and subsequently lower
Oregon Employment Department,"2013 Covered Employment and Wages Summary Reports,"
http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/labforce.Accessed October 2014.
11 Oregon Employment Department"Regional Employment Projections by Industry&Occupation 2012---2022".
http://www.qualityinfo.org.Accessed October 2014.
t2 Mayunga,J."Understanding and Applying the Concept of Community Disaster Resilience:A capital---based
approach.Summer Academy for Social Vulnerability and Resilience Building,"(2007).
Page 34 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
soil moisture with hotter temperatures will likely increase the amount of vegetation
consumed by wildfire.
• Extended drought periods affect snowpack and agricultural irrigation.
• The combination of a growing population and development intensification can lead
to the increasing risk of hazards, threatening loss of life, property and long—term
economic disruption if land management is inadequate.
Built Environment, Critical Facilities, and Infrastructure
Critical facilities (i.e. police, fire, and government facilities), housing supply and physical
infrastructure are vital during a disaster and are essential for proper functioning and
response. The lack or poor condition of infrastructure can negatively affect a community's
ability to cope, respond and recover from a natural disaster. Following a disaster,
communities may experience isolation from surrounding cities and counties due to
infrastructure failure. These conditions force communities to rely on local and immediately
available resources.
Housing Vulnerabilities
• It is crucial to maintain the quality of built capacity (transportation networks, critical
facilities, utility transmission, etc.) throughout the area, as poor infrastructure can
negatively affect Deschutes County's ability to cope, respond, and recover from a
natural disaster.
• Mobile home and other non---permanent residential structures account for 9% of the
housing in Deschutes County. In La Pine and Sisters mobile homes account for more
than 12% of all homes respectively.13 These structures are particularly vulnerable to
certain natural hazards, such as windstorms and heavy flooding events.
• Based on U.S. Census data, more than 55% of the residential housing throughout
Deschutes County was built after the current seismic building standards of 1990.14
• Approximately one---third of residential structures were constructed prior to the local
implementation of the flood elevation requirements of the 1970's (county Flood
Insurance Rate Maps—FIRMS---were not completed until the mid---1980s).15
• The county has one---third of the housing units occupied by renters,versus two---thirds
homeowners.16 The cities of La Pine and Sisters have more than 50% of their
housing occupied by renters. Studies have shown that renters are less likely than
homeowners to prepare for hazardous events.
• The cities of La Pine (13.7%) and Sisters (18.7%) have the highest percentages of
vacant units. In addition, seasonal or recreational housing accounts for
approximately 11% of the county's housing stock; Black Butte Ranch, Sisters, and
Sun River have the highest percentages.17
13 U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP04.
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid.
171bid,fable 825004.
Page 35 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Vulnerabilities
• Some roads and bridges in the county are highly vulnerable to hazards, specifically
earthquakes. Because bridges vary in size, materials, siting, and design, any given
hazard will affect them differently. The county and cities should pay considerable
attention to roads and bridges that may become obstructed that serve as primary
interstate travel routes (Highways 97, 20/126), as this will likely have significant
impacts on access in and out of the county and region. Oregon Department of
Transportation has jurisdiction over the interstate and highways, but the cities and
county may control maintenance in and around the communities.
• There is one power plant within Deschutes County, a Pacific Power station at Mirror
Pond Dam in Bend operated by Pacific Power.
• There are three high hazard dams located in Deschutes County: Wickiup Reservoir,
North Unit Diversion Dam, and Crane Prairie. In addition, the moraine lake dam on
Whychus Creek (Carver Lake) above Sisters is identified as a potential flood concern
(see Sisters Addendum in Volume III for more information).
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
The Deschutes County Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) were modernized in September
2007. The table below shows that as of November 2014, Deschutes County (including the
incorporated cities) has 267 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policies (90 of these
are for properties developed before the initial FIRM) in force and five paid claims. The last
Community Assistance Visit (CAV) for Deschutes County was on July 22, 1994 (the most
recent CAV was in Sisters on April 26, 2004). The county, and cities, are not members of the
Community Rating System (CRS). The table displays the number of policies by building type
and shows that the majority of residential structures that have flood insurance policies are
single---family homes and that there are 14 non---residential structures with flood insurance
policies. According to data from 2012, the proportion of single---family homes (excluding
condominiums) within the mapped special flood hazard area (SFHA, floodplain) that have
flood insurance (the market penetration rate) for Deschutes County is 15.3% (105 out of
688).
The Community Repetitive Loss record for Deschutes County, Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and
Sisters identifies zero repetitive loss buildings, zero severe repetitive loss buildings, and zero
total repetitive loss claims.
Page 36 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Table 2-3 Food Insurance Detail �y y
p, ,N d i ` d!{I a,+ ,∎ b rMi hi , P ) , g a ,n,jj1�� t��}�y , t ,;;�! yy�� ,
t?N d,f ' li"r�5° .Irl+t l Total± Pfe•FIRM Singh '; '7 p,, , "+,„"”, ,R 0°
�q 1p ! 1, ",, ,,441' 1 +t " ,e .,:• omDate PPIIPIeas i�ol'r[le5 Family ..Ea rly i0# 40l Ndalltial AZrtt,''
Deschutes ) ) 267 90 244 7 2 14 14
County* 9/28/07 9/29/86 171 66 158 1 0 12 11
Bend 9/28/07 9/4/87 57 21 48 5 2 2 1
La Pine 9/28/07 9/28/07 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Redmond 9/28/07 9/28/07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sisters 9/28/07 9/29/86 38 2 37 1 0 0 2
PrezFlRtill SO fitantlal .,iRepo i lae liep tlt1ve ,ti',; A e,,,, 4, ,", sJaa I1 4
lfSiilrttnae °'Total,Paid C oe �pamage tess , joss ,, o ,.0 'Class Las ,,,t,
ltlrisdictlon' N4 Fotte Claims' Paid , ,'5Ia>nls Buildings' r*00Is } ''mrnkyunt Rating CAV
Deschutes County $76,039,700 8 5 0 0 0 $63,794 ) 1
County* $46,890,300 3 1 0 0 0 $13,400 NP 7/22/94
Bend $17,290,600 5 4 0 0 0 $50,393 NP 7/20/94
La Pine $280,000 0 0 0 0 0 $0 NP NA
Redmond $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 NP NA
Sisters $11,578,800 0 0 0 0 0 $0 NP 4/26/04
*Portion of entire county under county jurisdiction
NP)Not Participating NA)Information not Available/Not Applicable
Source:Information compiled by Department of Land Conservation and Development,November 2014.
Vulnerability Summary
Vulnerability is a measure of the exposure of the built environment to hazards. The
exposure of community assets to hazards is critical in the assessment of the degree of risk a
community has to each hazard. Identifying the facilities and infrastructure at risk from
various hazards can assist the county in prioritizing resources for mitigation, and can assist
in directing damage assessment efforts after a hazard event has occurred. The exposure of
county and city assets to each hazard and potential implications are explained in each
hazard section.
Vulnerability includes the percentage of population and property likely to be affected under
an "average" occurrence of the hazard. Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, La Pine,
I Redmond, and Sisters evaluated the best available vulnerability data to develop the
vulnerability scores presented below. For the purposes of this Plan, the county and cities
utilized the Oregon Military Department — Office of Emergency Management (OEM) Hazard
Analysis methodology vulnerability definitions to determine hazard probability.
The table below presents the vulnerability scores for each of the natural hazards present in
Deschutes County and for participating cities. As shown in the table with bold text, several
hazards are rated with high vulnerabilities.
Page 37 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 2-4 Community Vulnerability Assessment Summary
Hazard ,? 0a};Pi4 ' +i !' ti. end ! Redmond Sisters
Drought Low Low Low Low Low
Earthquake(Cascadia) High High High High High
Earthquake(Crustal) Low Moderate Low Low Low
Flood Low Moderate Low Low High
Landslide Low Low Low Low Low
Volcano High High High High High
Wildfire High High High High High
Windstorm Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High
Winter Storm High High High High High
Source: Deschutes County,Bend,La Pine,Redmond,and Sisters NHMP Steering Committees,2015.
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the
magnitude of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment
(assessed in the previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm
occurring. The table below presents the probability scores for each of the natural hazards
present in Deschutes County and for the participating cities. As shown in the table with bold
text, several hazards are rated with high probabilities.
Table 2-5 Natural Hazard Probability Assessment Summary
eitlirt+tes
Hazard ' ,,v",, tounty Bend La Pine Redmond Sisters
Drought High High High High High
Earthquake(Cascadia) Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Earthquake(Crustal) Low Low Low Low Low
Flood High High Moderate Low High
Landslide Low Low Low Low Low
Volcano Low Low Low Low Low
Wildfire High High High Moderate High
Windstorm High High High High High
Winter Storm High High High High High
Source: Deschutes County,Bend,La Pine,Redmond,and Sisters NHMP Steering Committees,2015.
The table below presents the entire updated hazard analysis matrix for Deschutes County.
The hazards are listed in rank order from high to low. The table shows that hazard scores are
influenced by each of the four categories combined. With considerations for past historical
events, the probability or likelihood of a particular hazard event occurring, the vulnerability
to the community, and the maximum threat or worst---case scenario, winter storm, wildfire,
and Cascadia earthquake events rank as the top hazard threats to the county (top tier).
Page 38 of 469- PXI IIRIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Windstorms, volcano, and drought events rank in the middle (middle tier). Flood, crustal
earthquakes, and landslides comprise the lowest ranked hazards in the county (bottom tier).
Table 2-6 Hazard Analysis Matrix — Deschutes County
`ata , !' t+ °9 JIA„
'`.,,t``
ur i, Naxitnilfi, 10, ,, 9 eat ! R ,`,
y a w t ti G
Hazard ,` y St ry V, It l lt( Threat Probability � Seor j ; aflk
Winter Storm 20 50 90 70 230 #1
Top
Wildfire 20 50 80 70 220 #2 Tier
Earthquake (Cascadia) 2 40 100 49 191 #3
Windstorm 16 20 80 63 179 #4 Middle
Volcano 2 50 100 21 173 #5 Tier
Drought 8 15 70 56 149 #6
Flood 8 10 40 56 114 #7
Earthquake (Crustal) 2 5 80 7 94 #8 Bottom
Tier
Landslide 2 5 40 7 54 #9
Source;Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
For local governments, conducting the hazard analysis is a useful step in planning for hazard
mitigation, response, and recovery. The method provides the jurisdiction with sense of
hazard priorities, but does not predict the occurrence of a particular hazard.
Multi-Jurisdictional Risk Assessment
Multi--jurisdictional Risk Assessment---§201.6(c)(2)(iii):For multi---jurisdictional plans,the risk
assessment must assess each jurisdiction's risks where they vary from the risks facing the
entire planning area.
The four participating cities in Deschutes County: Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters each
held local Steering Committee meetings and completed a jurisdiction specific hazard
analysis. The multi---jurisdictional risk assessment information is located within the Risk
Assessment section of each city's addendum, which is located in Volume Ill of this NHMP.
Page 39 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RLSOLIJ"I'ION 2015-087
SECTION 3:
MITIGATION STRATEGY
Section 3 outlines Deschutes County's strategy to reduce or avoid long---term vulnerabilities
to the identified hazards. Specifically, this section presents a mission and specific goals and
actions thereby addressing the mitigation strategy requirements contained in 44 CFR
201.6(c). The NHMP Steering Committee reviewed and updated the mission, goals and
action items documented in this plan. Additional planning process documentation is in
Appendix B.
Mitigation Plan Mission
The Plan mission states the purpose and defines the primary functions of Deschutes
County's NHMP. It is intended to be adaptable to any future changes made to the Plan and
need not change unless the community's environment or priorities change.
The mission of the Deschutes County NHMP is:
To promote sound public policy designed to protect citizens,critical facilities,infrastructure,
private property,and the environment from natural hazards.
This can be achieved by increasing public awareness,documenting the resources for risk reduction
and loss---prevention,and identifying activities to guide the county towards building a safer,more
disaster resistant community.
The 2015 NHMP Steering Committee reviewed the 2010 plan mission statement and agreed
it accurately describes the overall purpose and intent of this Plan. This is the exact wording
that was present in the 2010 plan. The Steering Committee believes the concise nature of
the mission statement allows for a comprehensive a pp roach to mitigation planning.
Mitigation Plan Goals
Mitigation plan goals are more specific statements of direction that Deschutes County
citizens, and public and private partners can take while working to reduce the county's risk
from natural hazards. These statements of direction form a bridge between the broad
mission statement and particular action items. The goals listed here serve as checkpoints as
agencies and organizations begin implementing mitigation action items.
Public participation was a key aspect in developing the Plan goals. Meetings with the project
Steering Committee, stakeholder interviews and public workshops all served as methods to
obtain input and priorities in developing goals for reducing risk and preventing loss for
natural hazards in Deschutes County.
The 2015 Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee reviewed the 2010 plan goals in
comparison to the Draft State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan goals and determined they
would modify their goals to align with the State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan goals.
Page 41 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLIYI'LON 2015-087
All the Plan goals are important and are listed below in no particular order of priority.
Establishing community priorities within action items neither negates nor eliminates any
goals, but it establishes which action items to consider to implement first, should funding
become available. Below is a list of the re---confirmed plan goals:
Goal 1: Protect life and reduce injuries resulting from natural hazards.
Goal 2: Minimize public and private property damages and the disruption of essential
infrastructure and services from natural hazards.
Goal 3: Implement strategies to mitigate the effects of natural hazards and increase the
quality of life and resilience of economies in Deschutes County.
Goal 4: Minimize the impact of natural hazards while protecting, restoring, and
sustaining environmental processes.
Goal 5: Enhance and maintain local capability to implement a comprehensive hazard
loss reduction strategy.
Goal 6: Document and evaluate progress in achieving hazard mitigation strategies and
action items.
Goal 7: Motivate the public, private sector, and government agencies to mitigate the
effects of natural hazards through information and education.
Goal 8: Apply development standards that mitigate or eliminate the potential impacts of
natural hazards.
Goal 9: Mitigate damage to historic and cultural resources from natural hazards.
Goal 10: Increase communication, collaboration, and coordination among agencies at all
levels of government and the private sector to mitigate natural hazards.
Goal 11: Integrate local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plans with comprehensive plans and
implementing measures.
(Note: although numbered the goals are not prioritized.)
During the Steering Committee meetings for the participating jurisdictions (Bend, La Pine,
Redmond, and Sisters) the Deschutes County NHMP mission statement and goal statements
were reviewed and agreed upon by each community.
Existing Mitigation Activities
Existing mitigation activities include current mitigation programs and activities that are
being implemented by the county in an effort to reduce the community's overall risk to
natural hazards. Documenting these efforts can assist the jurisdiction to better understand
risk and can assist in documenting successes. For a comprehensive list of existing mitigation
activities for each specific hazard, reference Volume II, Hazard Annexes.
Page 42 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RI:;SOLUTION 2015-087
Government Structure
Beyond Emergency Management, most departments within the county and city governance
structures have some degree of responsibility in building overall community resilience. Each
plays a role in ensuring that jurisdiction functions and normal operations resume after an
incident, and the needs of the population are met. For further explanation regarding how
these departments influence hazard resilience, reference Appendix C, Community Profile
and within the city addenda of Volume III.
Existing Plans and Policies
Communities often have existing plans and policies that guide and influence land use, land
development, and population growth. Linking existing plans and policies to the NHMP helps
identify what resources already exist that can be used to implement the action items
i have support from in the Plan. Plans and policies already in existence b a e suppa t o mlocal
residents, businesses and policy makers.' A list documenting plans and policies already in
place in the county and participating cities can be found in Appendix C, Community Profile
and within the city addenda of Volume III.
Community Organizations and Programs
In planning for natural hazard mitigation, it is important to know what social systems
already exist within the community because of their existing connections to the public. The
county and cities can use existing social systems as resources for implementing such
communication---related activities because these service providers already work directly with
the public on a number of issues, one of which could be natural hazard preparedness and
mitigation. Appendix C, Community Profile, provides a comprehensive list of community
organizations and programs, and offers a more thorough explanation of how existing
community organizations and programs can be utilized for hazard mitigation.
Mitigation Plan Action Items
Action items identified through the planning process are an important part of the mitigation
plan. Action items are detailed recommendations for activities that local departments,
citizens and others could engage in to reduce risk. They address both multi---hazard (MH)
and hazard---specific issues. Action items can be developed through a number of sources. The
figure below illustrates some of these sources. A description of how the Plan's mitigation
actions were developed is provided below.
'Raymond J.Burby,"Cooperating with Nature:Confronting Natural Hazards with Land---Use Planning for
Sustainable Communities,"(1998).
Page 43 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 3-I Development of Action Items
_ . : E_„---
Steering Cornnxltee Stakeholder Pubic Community I tailed Household Local Records,Plans Regional Pick Assessment&
lark sessions Intervinr roams Surveys Rohcies and Repent Sensileily R eparl
000000 ,
Potential Action Item
Pool
4V ........--
11 •Ifl
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience,2008.
Action Item Worksheets
Each action item has a corresponding action item worksheet describing the activity,
identifying the rationale for the project, identifying potential ideas for implementation, and
assigning coordinating and partner organizations. The action item worksheets can assist the
community in pre---packaging potential projects for grant funding. The worksheet
components are described below. These action item worksheets are located in Appendix A,
Action Item Forms.
Proposed Action Title
Each action item includes a brief description of the proposed action.
Alignment With Plan Goals
The Plan goals addressed by each action item are identified as a means for monitoring and
evaluating how well the mitigation plan is achieving its goals, following implementation.
Affected Jurisdiction
Many of the action items within this Plan apply to all of the participating cities and the
county; however, some actions items are specific. The list of affected jurisdictions is
provided on the right side of the matrix. Each city identified as an
Page 44 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
"affected jurisdiction" will contribute to accomplishing the specified action at a local level.
The action item form in Appendix A provides more detailed information.
Alignment with Existing Plans / Policies
Identify any existing community plans and policies where the action item can be
incorporated. Incorporating the mitigation action into existing plans and policies, such as
comprehensive plans, will increase the likelihood that it will be implemented.
Rationale or Key Issues Addressed
Action items should be fact---based and tied directly to issues or needs identified throughout
the planning process. Action items can be developed at any time during the planning
process and can come from a number of sources, including participants in the planning
process, noted deficiencies in local capability, or issues identified through the risk
assessment. The rationale for proposed action items is based on the information
documented in Section II and the Hazard Annexes.
Implementation through Existing Programs
For each action item, the form is designed to solicit ideas for implementation, which serve
as the starting point for taking action. Ideas for implementation could include: (1)
collaboration with relevant organizations, (2) alignment with the community priority areas,
and (3) applications to new grant programs.
The ideas for implementation offer a transition from theory to practice and serve as a
starting point for this Plan. This component of the action item is dynamic, since some ideas
may prove to not be feasible, and new ideas may be added during the Plan maintenance
process. Ideas for implementation include such things as: collaboration with relevant
organizations, grant programs, tax incentives, human resources, education and outreach,
research, and physical manipulation of buildings and infrastructure. When an action is
implemented, more work will probably be needed to determine the exact course of action.
The Deschutes County NHMP includes a range of action items that, when implemented, will
reduce loss from hazard events in the County. Within the Plan, FEMA requires the
identification of existing programs that might be used to implement these action items.
Deschutes County and the participating cities currently address statewide planning goals
and legislative requirements through their comprehensive land use plans, capital
improvements plans, mandated standards, and building codes. To the extent possible, the
jurisdictions will work to incorporate the recommended mitigation action items into existing
programs and procedures. (Note: Deschutes County is currently participating in a review of
their development code to determine options for improvement regarding the flood and
wildfire hazards.)
Many of the recommendations contained in the Deschutes County NHMP are consistent
with the goals and objectives of the existing plans and policies. Where possible, Deschutes
County and the participating cities will implement the recommendations and actions
contained in the NHMP through existing plans and policies. Plans and policies already in
existence have support from local residents, businesses, and policy makers. Many land---use,
comprehensive, and strategic plans get updated regularly, and can adapt easily to changing
Page 45 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
conditions and needs.' Implementing the action items contained in the NHMP through such
plans and policies increases their likelihood of being supported and implemented.
Coordinating Organization:
The coordinating organization is the public agency with the regulatory responsibility to
address natural hazards, or that is willing and able to organize resources, find appropriate
g g
funding, or oversee activity implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
Internal and External Partners:
The internal and external partner organizations listed in the Action Item Worksheets are
potential partners recommended by the project Steering Committee but not necessarily
contacted during the development of the Plan. The coordinating organization should
contact the identified partner organizations to see if they are capable of and interested in
participation. This initial contact is also to gain a commitment of time and/or resources
toward completion of the action items.
Internal partner organizations are departments within the county or other participating
jurisdiction that may be able to assist in the implementation of action items by providing
relevant resources to the coordinating organization.
External partner organizations can assist the coordinating organization in implementing the
action items in various functions and may include local, regional, state, or federal agencies,
as well as local and regional public and private sector organizations.
Potential Funding Sources
Where possible, identify potential funding sources for the action item. Example funding
sources can include: the federal Pre---Disaster Mitigation and Flood Mitigation Assistance
Programs; state funding sources such as the Oregon Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program;
or local funding sources such as capital improvement or general funds. An action item may
also have multiple funding sources.
Estimated Cost
Where possible, an estimate of the cost for implementing the action item is included.
Timeline
Action items include both short and long---term activities. Each action item includes an
estimate of the timeline for implementation. Short---term action items (ST) are activities that
may be implemented with existing resources and authorities in one to two years. Long---term
action items (LT) may require new or additional resources and/or authorities, and may take
from one to five years to implement. Ongoing action items signify that work has begun and
will either exist over an indefinite timeline, or an extended timeline.
2
!bid
Page 46 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Status
As action items are implemented or new ones are created during the Plan maintenance
process, it is important to indicate the status of the action item—whether it is new, ongoing,
deferred, or complete. Documenting the status of the action will make reviewing and
updating the mitigation Plan easier during the Plan's five---year update, and can be used as a
benchmark for progress. Deferred action items have yet to see any significant work begin on
the particular action.
Priority
High priority action items are designated in order to clarify the importance of these
mitigation actions for the affected jurisdictions.
Action Item Development Process
Development of action items was a multi---step, iterative process that involved
brainstorming, discussion, review, and revisions. The majority of the action items were first
created during the 2005 and 2010 NHMP planning process. During those processes, steering
committees developed maps of local vulnerable populations, facilities, and infrastructure in
respect to each identified hazard. Review of these maps generated discussion around
potential actions to mitigate impacts to the vulnerable areas. The Oregon Partnership for
Disaster Resilience (OPDR) provided guidance in the development of action items by
presenting and discussing actions that were used in other communities. OPDR also took note
of ideas that came up in Steering Committee meetings and drafted specific actions that
met the intent of the Steering Committee. All actions were then reviewed by the Steering
Committee, discussed at length, and revised as necessary before becoming a part of this
document.
Action Item Matrix
The action item matrix portrays the overall action plan framework and identifies linkages
between the Plan goals, partnerships (coordination and partner organizations), and actions.
The matrix documents a description of the action, if the Steering Committee identified the
action as high priority, the coordinating organization, partner organizations, timeline, and
the Plan goals addressed. Refer to Appendix A, Action Item Forms for detailed information
about each action item.
Note: Deschutes County has not identified highest priority action items at this time; the
Steering Committee will identify prioritized actions during one of their semi---annual meetings
following adoption and approval of the NHMP.
Page 47 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
f,:: "4CL,id'
x X X X x X x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
ao ao as
U aao IS no z z z z
), ti c c
m as m E E E E
at c
E c c m . m oco
F 0 0 0 0 o J
T " N 4 N
v U 0- ro p a v o w E E a o a E'
o a
a al N
8 C W v c t d O _m m m _ - W E Y
Ii v E Z v E v °- c a v E' v o o v•,n a •`-' Ln E t u -o a '" a : v E - W 0
D 0 a N T p a a) LL u <- 0 . gO O 00 5 _ W U 5
0 o v o � LL o -■ W z o a, c l' w
w z w ❑ W a O r 0 0 a m a O v .� w U E w
7 « ¢ c ' O c ' E _ E
r c E y E v = E X2 c c ca c E c E E L, E
E
, ^, t E v o a v E
3 m o a 0 v o a y, o a v E o a W % w
I ,, r u ° w o U ° 3 w ❑ 'E. w > > -' g w o c r w u
}r ,11 • u a w
i 5 9
m m
S 8 ,o z C c z ai
Z W 2
O ?a O m O m e.
O D O N o ,
,0, ..,
U a1 U al U U U U n
i° 1, 2 Y N 2 Y N W N 6' W 8- W 8- W 8- oc
.p " 3 � 3 -0 a1 S W m E Q
E L - E = . E u u eo v L
M m O N ti 4 al n o v E W E W E N �
0 I U 0 T U O I U O w O O lil —
c0
'din` � �, o Cl
w O u o o - 7
a m ' v v ° E , v N .'
o Y A e po c 'a 0
v v m o M
YG m 0 0 ,� W an C
@' c Y o ro 0 c an c v y r a t E ° E Gil
u ` = ' E
a -077a 0 vv ,, Y = = „ `c
c v C c ° 0 0 W w . - a) E = c y r a W a N d o _ E 0 ' L N 3 as al = " 0
O p 'V :�U , c ro a ? ao O m � a
° v v O m nn ea p c a ° w° a =
Z y a m - c a v N a › E N .. a ,_ c c E ' Z
aS n i C Q E d a t 6 7 u u3 v v T ;.4,<
44 C , a n -7 "" o w
u B U m a
2 42kd . _c O
rh
,a 4444 oa I
P La
a$000 c
` ,', � o "It
m u a 00 a a u c2 th
ett r I 3 x x x I x x n cet
v� 0.
AI x x x x x x
I :: :?p!owp's x x —
x x x x x X X x x x I ,
x x x x x x x x
031416.6
-° na -o m oa np
1 v c v c c o c 3
o l o 0 y
r 9 w Z na z
O O p O O O
Hi E E r°°o bD o o c O o a
I4,i k 1 t u
ti't N Y _ u _ C
E E a. O
i u
a a E a L a a 3 © 5
-
b E i ° v o ❑ o -° v 6 o 0 a v
` c ° v v a N 0 a Cl o o a
t °
c O
}° •.0 L a o c ] m s 0 0 1' 3- - i c - cc
n 4 3m o m o m , o Q
o
E a u O m 5 v2, p o d < °
bra G E w v a w , 0 w a ∎ u 2 2 a °
a a
q C! " a E ❑ p n d (D u w O E = 0 0 " 0 20 0
'
A. fl - ° O a O y -
m =c T. T. o s c c c E E 20 c u Q
p a) v N « N al X ='i 0 W O « -. V1 x" vv, ■d E' _ aE C C `X T o
ad c w 0 E ❑ v' W O O = > W o O ■ W 0 w = W c w ■ w a
1 f;p- O -"
S vii
G G G C
Iw+
E E E E E
v 2
T g ? C ro a s C m C a C v C v C E
"s -'P., U A !o c.a aJ U 0 U c U 0 U U m 8 `^27 Ln i>;p (> W N C yv, N -�D v N E N 'E N 'C ar+ ca oc
-O N r Ina 2 - E c E C E C E .3' 3 C E -_ c O
N u
N
C `;) v E v 0 v o v o v o w o v o v W In
C 1. t''1 0 O w O 1 u [] U M U M U [] U 00 d a Li.;
C , w ■
0
(d L o o - '°
U4 O _ m y v v r
H .. N m ro C y d W • �- O v N O 6 W T O
]. ° O O O q -p r m 0_ C'
i' _W ] - ° a N N O
j T . 'fl v a a! m C W j 3
a a A Y o .41 I2 C A Y _O C Y° O a _ F o E t „E v c n °'al
v i c = a v G 's v v c m
E Ln
a C Z O . i , w .E
, o w r o a c L o u ° n j E «
fLU
` `- C -a a S ° c 7. o , • v C ian 0 V a p O C a % O O - CL aJ C E C
� " a+ Q W C O ry a u ry O C O O m 4 A d v O A a_ Z y q u ° A . v " N 3 v ° v , • d Y a a) u
C v ° � 3 a c °V t„ f 1 ▪ c a ,. u m . m • C a c ° ° ° « i
2 n 5 eo - ra n,10 E m a •-:_ N v v 2 CO
t o cu,E Y Q " ,- t, ,0 V ? 8 W a c n C o = E -0 " w w o n ; Z O
N -o W in C t H U A 2 2 w 8E % 0 -% R Q d m Q N ? /
C W
v 0
U t
O O. _
u O
s°C p
, -4
tlo ari
1d E '� °o
N u Cr u u m ett
641 v rJ o n
dui!�N ma x 0 W W W K LL M. W. W N Q.,
$I `$ x x x x
x x x
r ouo,7f��}aY x x x
Moe x x x
x x x x x
t
m m m m
C c C
o
2 C C C
O 0 0 0
L 4'I,1 rr,i. r
y -r3 `v c .c
. ° r m m m
c m c c c
-c c 0 0 0
L
N 4.. N v .- a _ N QI
'.3 aE �c ¢ a Y a a v
E 2 , , c a a v .0 C ., T o T E
c E
1r"v a ` W■ v E v 0 7 v E o a E° v E PP n N ,..„.0. E p v, o d > v Y v E
_ y a vai 8 o u ., ❑ u w E cum
N~ v ❑ C y p o LL EE O Y , b ,, o W p y U O E T 7 w u u 2 11 o a 0 u o a LL Q
W o a 8 j T. E c ' C m c :4 c u,EL= -8E6 ,3 ° x c a , a c ,- a > a)E trr w a v B. O r a ,B ,E 4 w Pr. w N °
N'
a. a ❑ ❑ S w LL 5 V c v n w S urn w 0; o
N
y a)E
_ W
I Q 0 N
x ° . v o
5 H .. c c O
o
u y t E u v
0 o r�
v v v E -o i
C , q'N�',_ ❑ aEa 0 O w ❑ a` ❑ u° N a` ^
u
C -0 c 11'' c 0O O
O ■ d eq o ,n MI
r C 6, N -0 -n v -o N ' Z
U w 'd a .N m N 0 ',0 -tea N a ❑ m C
C c w o ., w -a p ¢" ,,,,,, ,,,-: ,7 v H 3 -o
C i 4:1 4i rrt t'...) °u in c a '° c E 'c° c v a
W r o r E 5 E o v m o 7 v o c •
C y ar':p; o• o c o 7,- � T a « c o. c c O
O : ' 3 w -a a E '' E c o a as a - a o Y .a^u E J]
E W
T.) ° N # -o o -o - u -0 - c0aN
o E 3 a, 4 c � m .v w m ro -o a u
E c E r c E N v c « c v '—° -0 c c �O
• 0 O a o o o
a ,0 -N m : 1
c .._ @ o ._
=v c
w m a m a. v 0)
" a on n a E o d F-o ro 0 a , o n u ',1,_' -=' a a m -p r.G G CO O 8 N ' C ' ,_ ', = FL
NW
N T ai ? � a 7 Q d v Y7 3 � N CO O t '=p ?+E.
t ,' n Ci7
V N
Q
7 Y, ,r.#i" u O
w O
0 v-)v a a
Ic r., m v u u G.0 rh ' n ° a H 3 3 3 ,
_
�e
i1 }' �AS, x x X
x x x
sold tf x x x
puoo
X x x
x x x
C C C i'
o
C C C
O O O
- CM W m
❑ 0 0
'.'14 P a°
c
h _ E c
ro
n n V. ci, u A a 0 01 E
` w E v 8= C C d
r °: ° U 2
r�t o 0
S N c S 0 p {i C z v U C a y
} " v
0 P c u ' E p N ❑ D . m E u = ,,,
d s a o :. :: c a_ Q 7,--Z N o C O T N ` ` C 4 C U 6 5 y � E n O ❑ ❑ v _O
0 ❑ 3 .2
W
a,
.1*,}'i . v
W
a. g
i . 2 j . ? 2
' 1 U
H U CU
w W
Q 4A U H
C -' E oN cV o
❑
P a^ a ❑ ,n c m
ti
Q O v n C y y c a
@
E V ' -' a c eL o Ol ti a v v E C a
a o v w 0 u v
v q }' O E DO E o P-
E, a a p w E VD C
u ❑ m 0 Pe
�, 1 n 'VF,� p E a 3 E c .. E O
, m u ;- o v
GC
4N Z 00 ' .- -j C C w N
Eg U v ' ❑ -2 �_
d9 c v c c 'E. « 2
d c d a t 0 c q ° Z
U° v ,,' u° E u co = l
7 W
° '
v ON
u El tn y
Up
i hl
ul 01
SECTION 4:
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE
The Plan Implementation and Maintenance section details the formal process that will
ensure that the MNHMP remains an active and relevant document. The Plan implementation
and maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating
the Plan semi---annually, as well as producing an updated plan every five years. Finally, this
section describes how the county will integrate public participation throughout the Plan
maintenance and implementation process.
Implementing the Plan
The success of the Deschutes County NHMP depends on how well the outlined action items
are implemented. In an effort to ensure that the activities identified are implemented, the
following steps will be taken. The Plan will be formally adopted, a coordinating body will be
assigned, a convener shall be designated, the identified activities will be prioritized and
evaluated, and finally, the Plan will be implemented through existing plans, programs, and
policies.
Plan Adoption
The Deschutes County NHMP was developed and will be implemented through a
collaborative process. After the Plan is locally reviewed and deemed complete, the
Deschutes County Emergency Services Manager submits it to the State Hazard Mitigation
Officer (SHMO) at the Oregon Military Department -- Office of Emergency Management
(OEM). OEM submits the plan to FEMA---Region X for review. This review addresses the
federal criteria outlined in the FEMA Interim Final Rule 44 CFR Part 201. Upon acceptance
by FEMA, the County will adopt the plan via resolution. At that point the County will gain
eligibility for the Pre---Disaster Mitigation Grant Program, the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program funds, and Flood Mitigation Assistance program funds. Following adoption by the
county, the participating jurisdictions should convene local decision makers and adopt the
Deschutes County Multijurisdictional NHMP.
Convener
The Deschut es County Emergency Services Manager will take responsibility for plan
implementation and will facilitate the Hazard Mitigation Coordinating Body meetings and
will assign tasks such as updating and presenting the Plan to the rest of the members of the
Coordinating Body. Plan implementation and evaluation will be a shared responsibility
among all of the assigned Hazard Coordinating Body Members. The Convener's
responsibilities include:
• Coordinate Steering Committee meeting dates, times, locations, agendas, and
member notification;
• Documenting the discussions and outcomes of committee meetings;
Page 53 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Servin g as a communication conduit between the Steering Committee and the
public/stakeholders;
• Identifying emergency management---related funding sources for natural hazard
mitigation projects; and
• Utilizing the Risk Assessment as a tool for prioritizing proposed natural hazard risk
reduction projects.
Coordinating Body
The Deschutes County Convener will form a Natural Hazard Coordinating Body for updating
and implementing the NHMP. The Coordinating Body responsibilities include:
• Attending future Plan maintenance and Plan update meetings (or designating a
representative to serve in your place);
• Serving as the local evaluation committee for funding programs such as the Pre---
Disaster Mitigation Grant Program, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds, and
Flood Mitigation Assistance program funds;
• Prioritizing and recommending funding for natural hazard risk reduction projects;
• Evaluating and updating the NHMP in accordance with the prescribed maintenance
schedule;
• Developing and coordinating ad hoc and/or standing subcommittees as needed; and
• Coordinating public involvement activities.
Members
The following jurisdictions, agencies, and/ or organizations were represented and served on
the Steering Committee during the development of the Deschutes County NHMP (for a list
of individuals see the Acknowledgements section of this NHMP):
• Deschutes County
• City of Bend
• City of La Pine
• City of Redmond
• City of Sisters
• American Red Cross
• Bend Park and Recreation District
• Deschutes County Sheriff's Office Search and Rescue
• Oregon Department of Forestry
• Oregon State University---Cascades
• Oregon Water Resources
• Sisters/ Camp Sherman Fire
To make the coordination and review of the Deschutes County NHMP as broad and useful as
possible, the Coordinating Body will engage additional stakeholders and other relevant
hazard mitigation organizations and agencies to implement the identified action items.
Specific organizations have been identified as either internal or external partners on the
individual action item forms found in Appendix A.
Page 54 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Implementation through Existing Programs
The NHMP includes a range of action items that, when implemented, will reduce loss from
hazard events in the county. Within the Plan, FEMA requires the identification of existing
programs that might be used to implement these action items. Deschutes County, and the
participating cities, currently addresses statewide planning goals and legislative
requirements through their comprehensive land use plans, capital improvement plans,
mandated standards and building codes. To the extent possible, Deschutes County, and
participating cities, will work to incorporate the recommended mitigation action items into
existing programs and procedures.
Many of the recommendations contained in the NHMP are consistent with the goals and
objectives of the participating cities and county's existing plans and policies. Where
possible, Deschutes County, and participating cities, should implement the recommended
actions contained in the NHMP through existing plans and policies. Plans and policies
already in existence often have support from local residents, businesses, and policy makers.
Many land---use, comprehensive, and strategic plans get updated regularly, and can adapt
easily to changing conditions and needs. Implementing the action items contained in the
NHMP through such plans and policies increases their likelihood of being supported and
implemented.
Examples of plans, programs or agencies that may be used to implement mitigation
activities include:
• City and County Budgets
• Community Wildfire Protection Plans
• Comprehensive Land Use Plans
• Economic Development Action Plans
• Zoning Ordinances & Building Codes
For additional examples of plans, programs o r agencies that may be used to implement
mitigation activities refer to list of plans in Appendix C, Community Profile.
Plan Maintenance
Plan maintenance is a critical component of the NHMP. Proper maintenance of the Plan
ensures that this Plan will maximize the county and participating city's efforts to reduce the
risks posed by natural hazards. This section was developed by OPDR and includes a process
to ensure that a regular review and update of the Plan occurs. The coordinating body and
local staff are responsible for implementing this process, in addition to maintaining and
updating the Plan through a series of meetings outlined in the maintenance schedule below.
Meetings
The Coordinating Body will meet on a semi--annual basis (twice per year) to complete the
following tasks. During the first meeting, prior to the wildfire/ irrigation season, the
Coordinating Body will:
• Review existing action items to determine appropriateness for funding;
• Educate and train new members on the Plan and mitigation in general;
Page 55 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Identify issues that may not have been identified when the Plan was developed; and
• Prioritize potential mitigation projects using the methodology described below.
The second meeting of the year will take place in early fall, following the wildfire/ irrigation
season. During the second meeting the Coordinating Body will:
• Review existing and new risk assessment data;
• Discuss methods for continued public involvement; and
• Document successes and lessons learned during the year.
These meetings are an opportunity for the cities to report back to the county on progress
that has been made towards their components of the NHMP.
The convener will be responsible for documenting the outcome of the semi---annual meetings
in Appendix B. The process the Coordinating Body will use to prioritize mitigation projects is
detailed in the section below. The Plan's format allows the county and participating
jurisdictions to review and update sections when new data becomes available. New data can
be easily incorporated, resulting in a NHMP that remains current and relevant to the
participating jurisdictions.
Project Prioritization Process
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires that jurisdictions identify a process for
prioritizing potential actions. Potential mitigation activities often come from a variety of
sources; therefore the project prioritization process needs to be flexible. Committee
members, local government staff, other planning documents, or the risk assessment may be
the source to identify projects. Figure 4---1 illustrates the project development and
prioritization process.
Note: Deschutes County has not identified highest priority action items at this time;In
addition to following the identified project prioritization process described below the
Steering Committee will identify prioritized actions during one of their semi---annual meetings
following adoption and approval of the NHMP.
Page 56 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 4-1 Action Item and Project Review Process
STEP I:
taminc fitndim;rcrluiremems
CO
w
0 w
0
Cr STEP 2:
Cutnpkin risk ,tM c:..vtncFtt evaluation
0
I-
U
STEP 3:
W St enntr.Coin111itte'rccuntnteudatiun
for fundin,p and iniplctttentatiun
0
w
STEP 4:
4 Complerc Liu;tntilativn.qualitative.
and cost bcnetit un,tivci
?u"
PROJECT FUNDING & IMPLEMENTATION
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience,2008.
Step I: Examine funding requirements
The first step in prioritizing the Plan's action items is to determine which funding sources are
open for application. Several funding sources may be appropriate for the county's proposed
mitigation projects. Examples of mitigation funding sources include but are not limited to:
FEMA's Pre---Disaster Mitigation competitive grant program (PDM), Flood Mitigation
Assistance (FMA) program, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), National Fire Plan
(NFP), Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), local general funds, and private
foundations, among others. Please see Appendix E, Grant Programs and Resources for a
more comprehensive list of potential grant programs.
Because grant programs open and close on differing schedules, the Coordinating Body will
examine upcoming funding streams' requirements to determine which mitigation activities
would be eligible. The Coordinating Body may consult with the funding entity, Oregon
Military Department — Office of Emergency Management (OEM), or other appropriate state
or regional organizations about project eligibility requirements. This examination of funding
sources and requirements will happen during the Coordinating Body's semi---annual Plan
maintenance meetings.
Step 2: Complete risk assessment evaluation
The second step in prioritizing the Plan's action items is to examine which hazards the
selected actions are associated with and where these hazards rank in terms of community
risk. The Coordinating Body will determine whether or not the Plan's risk assessment
supports the implementation of eligible mitigation activities. This determination will be
Page 57 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
based on the location of the potential activities, their proximity to known hazard areas, and
whether community assets are at risk. The Coordinating Body will additionally consider
whether the selected actions mitigate hazards that are likely to occur in the future, or are
likely to result in severe / catastrophic damages.
Step 3: Coordinating Body Recommendation
Based on the steps above, the Coordinating Body will recommend which mitigation activities
should be moved forward. If the Coordinating Body decides to move forward with an
action, the coordinating organization designated on the action item form will be responsible
for taking further action and, if applicable, documenting success upon project completion.
The Coordinating Body will convene a meeting to review the issues surrounding grant
applications and to share knowledge and/or resources. This process will afford greater
coordination and less competition for limited funds.
Step 4: Complete quantitative and qualitative assessment, and economic
analysis
The fourth step is to identify the costs and benefits associated with the selected natural
hazard mitigation strategies, measures or projects. Two categories of analysis that are used
in this step are: (1) benefit/cost analysis, and (2) cost---effectiveness analysis. Conducting
benefit/cost analysis for a mitigation activity assists in determining whether a project is
worth undertaking now, in order to avoid disaster---related damages later. Cost---effectiveness
analysis evaluates how best to spend a given amount of money to achieve a specific goal.
Determining the economic feasibility of mitigating natural hazards provides decision makers
with an understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis
upon which to compare alternative projects. Figure 4.2 shows decision criteria for selecting
the appropriate method of analysis.
Page 58 of469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 4-2 Benefit Cost Decision Criteria
PROPOSED ACTION
Is funding available?
Na Yes
Holding pattern until FEMA or OEM funded?
funding available No Yes
Cost-effectiveness Benefit-Cost Analysis
analysis evaluating: rotio<l ratio>1
Social
Technical
Administrative Seek alternate Pursue$
Political funding source
Legal
Economic Implement
Environmental Action
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience,2010.
If the activity requires federal funding for a structural project, the Coordinating Body will use
a FEMA---approved cost---benefit analysis tool to evaluate the appropriateness of the activity.
A project must have a benefit/cost ratio of greater than one in order to be eligible for FEMA
grant funding.
For non---federally funded or nonstructural projects, a qualitative assessment will be
completed to determine the project's cost effectiveness. The Coordinating Body will use a
multivariable assessment technique called STAPLE/E to prioritize these actions. STAPLE/E
stands for Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic, and Environmental.
Assessing projects based upon these seven variables can help define a project's qualitative
cost effectiveness. OPDR at the University of Oregon's Community Service Center has
tailored the STAPLE/E technique for use in natural hazard action item prioritization
Continued Public Involvement and Participation
The participating jurisdictions are dedicated to involving the public directly in the continual
reshaping and updating of the Deschutes County NHMP. Although members of the
Coordinating Body represent the public to some extent, the public will also have the
opportunity to continue to provide feedback about the Plan.
To ensure that these opportunities will continue, the County and participating jurisdictions
will:
• Post copies of their plans on corresponding websites;
• Place articles in the local newspaper directing the public where to view and provide
feedback; and
Page 59 of 469- EXHII3I'I' 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Use existing newsletters such as schools and utility bills to inform the public where
to view and provide feedback.
In addition to the involvement activities listed above, Deschutes County will ensure
continued public involvement by posting the Deschutes County NHMP on the County's
website (http://www.deschutes.org/). The Plan will also be archived and posted on the
University of Oregon Libraries' Scholar's Bank Digital Archive
(https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu).
Five-Year Review of Plan
This plan will be updated every five years in accordance with the update schedule outlined
in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The Deschutes County NHMP is due to be updated
by May xx, 2020. The Convener will be responsible for organizing the coordinating body to
address plan update needs. The Coordinating Body will be responsible for updating any
deficiencies found in the Plan, and for ultimately meeting the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000's Plan update requirements.
The following 'toolkit' can assist the Convener in determining which Plan update activities
can be discussed during regularly---scheduled Plan maintenance meetings, and which
activities require additional meeting time and/or the formation of sub---committees.
Page 60 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 4-I Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update Toolkit
Modify this section to include a description of the plan
update process. Document how the planning team
Is the planning process description still relevant? reviewed and analyzed each section of the plan,and
whether each section was revised as part of the update
process. (This toolkit will help you do that).
Decide how the public will be involved in the plan
Do you have a public involvement strategy for update process. Allow the public an opportunity to
the plan update process? comment on the plan process and prior to plan
approval.
Have public involvement activities taken place Document activities in the"planning process"section
since the plan was adopted? of the plan update
Are there new hazards that should be Add new hazards to the risk assessment section
addressed?
Have there been hazard events in the Document hazard history in the risk assessment
community since the plan was adopted? section
Have new studies or previous events identified Document changes in location and extent in the risk
changes in any hazard's location or extent? assessment section
Document changes in vulnerability in the risk
Has vulnerability to any hazard changed? assessment section
Have development patterns changed?Is there Document changes in vulnerability in the risk
more development in hazard prone areas? assessment section
Do future annexations include hazard prone Document changes in vulnerability in the risk
areas? assessment section
Document changes in vulnerability in the risk
Are there new high risk populations? assessment section
Are there completed mitigation actions that Document changes in vulnerability in the risk
have decreased overall vulnerability? assessment section
Did the plan document and/or address National
Flood Insurance Program repetitive flood loss Document any changes to flood loss property status
properties?
1)Update existing data in risk assessment section,or
Did the plan identify the number and type of 2)determine whether adequate data exists. If so,add
existing and future buildings,infrastructure,and information to plan. It not,describe why this could riot
critical facilities in hazards areas? be done at the time of the plan update
If yes,the plan update must address them:either state
how deficiencies were overcome or why they couldn't
Did the plan identify data limitations? be addressed
1)Update existing data in risk assessment section,or
2)determine whether adequate data exists. If so,add
Did the plan identify potential dollar losses for information to plan. If not,describe why this could not
vulnerable structures? be done at the time of the plan update
Are the plan goals still relevant? Document any updates in the plan goal section
Document whether each action is completed or
pending. For those that remain pending explain why.
What is the status of each mitigation action? For completed actions,provide a'success'story.
Add new actions to the plan. Make sure that the
mitigation plan includes actions that reduce the effects
Are there new actions that should be added? of hazards on both new and existing buildings.
Is there an action dealing with continued If not,add this action to meet minimum NFIP planning
compliance with the National Flood Insurance requirements
Program?
Are changes to the action item prioritization,
Document these changes in the plan implementation
implementation,and/or administration
and maintenance section
processes needed?
Do you need to make any changes to the plan Document these changes in the plan implementation
maintenance schedule? and maintenance section
Is mitigation being implemented through
If the community has not made progress on process of
existing planning mechanisms(such as implementing mitigation into existing mechanisms,
comprehensive plans,or capital improvement further refine the process and document in the plan.
plans)?
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience,2010.
Page 61 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Volume II:
Hazard Annexes
Page 62 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
VOLUME II:
HAZARD ANNEXES
Introduction
Deschutes County and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters are subject to the
following natural hazards:
• Drought
• Earthquake
• Flood
• Landslide
• Volcano
• Wildfire
• Windstorm
• Winter Storm
The following sections identify and profile the location, extent, previous occurrences,
vulnerability, and probability of the hazards listed above. Additional information about each
hazard can be found in the Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan — Regional Risk Assessment---
Region 6: Central Oregon' and within this NI-IMP: Volume I, Section 2 — Risk Assessment.
1 Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD),2015.DRAFT Oregon Natural Hazards
Mitigation Plan.
Page 65 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
DROUGHT
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
The Drought Hazard was not assessed in the 2010 Plan, therefore, this
section provides new content to the Deschutes County NHMP.
Causes and Characteristics of the Hazard
Drought can be defined in several ways. The American Heritage Dictionary defines drought as "a
long period with no rain, especially during a planting season." Another definition of drought is a
deficiency in surface and sub---surface water supplies. In socioeconomic terms, drought is present
when a physical water shortage begins to affect people, individually and collectively, and the
area's economy.
Drought is typically measured in terms of water availability in a defined geographical area. It is
common to express drought with a numerical index that ranks severity. The Oregon Drought
Severity Index is the most commonly used drought measurement in the state because it
incorporates both local conditions and mountain snow pack. The Oregon Drought Severity Index
categorizes droughts as mild, moderate, severe, and extreme.
Meteorological or Climatological Droughts
Meteorological droughts are defined in terms of the departure from a normal precipitation
pattern and the duration of the event.These droughts are a slow---onset phenomenon that can
take at least three months to develop and may last for several seasons or years.
Agricultural Droughts
Agricultural droughts link the various characteristics of meteorological drought to agricultural
impacts. The focus is on precipitation shortages and soil---water deficits. Agricultural drought is
largely the result of a deficit of soil moisture. A plant's demand for water is dependent on
prevailing weather conditions, biological characteristics of the specific plant, its stage of growth,
and the physical and biological properties of the soil.
Hydrological Droughts
Hydrological droughts refer to deficiencies in surface water and sub---surface water supplies. It is
measured as stream flow, and as lake, reservoir, and ground water levels. Hydrological
measurements are not the earliest indicators of drought. When precipitation is reduced or
deficient over an extended period of time, the shortage will be reflected in declining surface and
sub---surface water levels.
Drought is typically measured in terms of water availability in a defined geographical area. It is
common to express drought with a numerical index that ranks severity. The Oregon Drought
Severity Index is the most commonly used drought measurement in the state because it
incorporates local conditions and mountain snowpack. The Oregon Drought Severity Index
categorizes droughts as mild, moderate, severe, and extreme.
Page 67 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
History of Drought in Deschutes County
Oregon records, dating back to the late 1800s, clearly associate drought with a departure from
expected rainfall. Concern for mountain snowpack, which feeds the streams and rivers, came
later. Droughts were particularly noteworthy during the following years:
Table II-I History of Droughts
Date ��t Gk1r,"ri Chara 'tIcs
1904%1905 Statewide A state%wide drought period of about 18 months
1917%1931 Statewide A very dry period puncuated by brief wet spells in 1920%21 and 1927
A significant drought affected all of Oregon from 1928 to 1941.The
1928%1941 Statewide prolonged statewide drought created significant problems for the
agricultural industry. Punctuated by a three%year intense drought period
from 1938%1941.
1959%1964 Eastern Streamflows were low throughout eastern Oregon.
Oregon
A dry period lasting from 1985 to 1994 caused significant problems
statewide. The peak year was 1992,when the state declared a drought
emergency. Malheur Lake declined in area over a six%year period from
1985%1994 Statewide 175,000 acres to 400 acres(this was following abnormally large snow
accumulations in the years preceeding the drought period which increased
the size of the lake).
Southern, Klamath drought intensifies; low snowpack in mountains worsens
2000%2001 Eastern conditions. Draw down at Detroit Lake, all but curtails lake recreation.
Oregon Harney County Drought Declaration by Executive Order 01%12
Southern,
2001%2002 Eastern Extreme drought conditions in the region; Deschutes County decleared state
Oregon of emergency promting Drought Declaration by Executive Order 01%17
February 2005 was the driest February on record since 1977,surpassing
2001's conditions. Above normal temperatures contributed to decreased
2005 Region 5, 6, water availability for the summer. Stream and river levels dropped
and 7 significantly and watermasters regulated live flow use by irrigators. Drought
conditions also led to the use of stored water,when it was available.
Sources:DRAFT Oregon State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015;George and Ray Hatton,The Oregon Weather
Book(1999),and Oregon Secretary of State's Office,Archives Division
The Water Availability Committee utilizes the Surface Water Supply Index (SWSI) from the
Natural Resources Conservation Service to derive the Oregon Drought Severity Index that is
reported to the Drought Council2. The SWSI is an index of current water conditions throughout
the state. The index utilizes parameters derived from snow, precipitation, reservoir and stream
flow data. The data is gathered each month from key stations in each basin. The lowest SWSI
value, ---4.1, indicates extreme drought conditions. The highest SWSI value, +4.1, indicates
extreme wet conditions.The mid---point is 0.0, which indicates a normal water supply.'The table
below shows the monthly history of SWSI values from 1982 to 2015. Research shows that the
periods of drought have fluctuated; a severe drought period occurred from about 1987 to 1996
2 State Emergency Operations Plan,Drought Annex,(2002)
a Barry Norris,"Planning for Drought,"Water Resources Department(2001).
Page 68 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
(with short periods of non---drought), between 2001 and 2006 a period of moderate drought
occurred. Since about 2006, conditions in the Upper Deschutes Basin have been near normal or
wet, except for a few shorter periods of mild drought conditions (including from mid---2013 to
2015).
Figure II-I SWSI Values for the Upper Deschutes Basin (1982-2015)
•Surface Water Supply Index
4
3
2
0
tin., h.
,z
,3
14
1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015
Source:Department of Agriculture---Natural Resources Conservation Service,"Surface Water Supply Index,Upper
Deschutes Basin"www.or.nres.usda.gov.Accessed March 2015.
The figure below shows the county's current drought conditions monitor according to the
National Drought Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. The measurement
shown displays the percent area of drought severity conditions. It indicates that the majority of
Deschutes County is currently registering D2 Severe drought. The possible impacts of a serve
drought are: likely crop or pasture losses, water shortages, and imposed water restrictions.4
4 USDM"U.S.Drought Monitor Classification Scheme"
Page 69 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-2 U.S. Drought Monitor — Oregon
U.S.Drought Monitor March 17,2015
Oregon (Released Thursday,Mar.19,2015)
Valid 7 a.m.EST
Drought Cnndilons(Percent Arne)
None L10-C4 01-D4 02.34 •3•D4 04
Current 14.22 80./8 04 30 47,03 33 r? f:00
Last Week 1215 8780 02.3U 44.90 33 72 0 O
3 Months Ago 1 1 75 88?4 8 1 0 2 53 21 34.88 U.UU raj ...-ry•Stan or r.f Nr 3
Calendar Mons Year 8e 30 80.10 49.?9 34.11 0.00
—Stan 01
Water Year 1.58 98.44 f9 51 0G.1G 0.30 0 00
NT
Ono Yesi Ado n]] 99 23 95.14 49.08 0 0 0 0
VILIIPI1110111."—
Intenso1oMO4erale�
malty ory U3 Cxtremc Crrvughl
rough I-Da Cxvevlvai Der++y14
Urnr11r1eMrrcir ro/<,„'i•,x r,rr lriJ-a:r/i ii„rJi(rrr5.
' .rirrrlilinir;rn:iy v;iry.3,..r. rrir..rrrvrr)text s✓r+i n+ary
4 Pr
rrrr rrr ::,•;r•;1.nrr,rrr1.,.
k ii Author:
Chris Fenimore
NCDC/NbSDIS/NOAH
USDA .,..., k? ii X19
http://droughtmonitor.unLedu/
Source:National Drought Mitigation Center,University of Nebraska,Lincoln.Droughtmonitor.unl.edu,Accessed
March 18,2015.
Hazard Identification
Deschutes County frequently experiences drought conditions, however, due to water availability
the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters are rarely affected. At the time the plan was
developed, no data existed to assist in identifying the location or extent of the drought hazard in
Deschutes County. Typically, droughts occur as regional events and often affect more than one
county. In severe droughts, environmental and economic consequences can be significant. In
recent years, the State has addressed drought emergencies through the Oregon Drought
Council. This interagency (state/federal) council meets to discuss climate outlooks, water and
soil conditions, and advise the Governor as the need arises.
Probability Assessment
Droughts are not uncommon in the State of Oregon, nor are they just an "east of the
mountains” phenomenon. They occur in all parts of the state, in both summer and winter.
Oregon's drought history reveals many short---term and a few long---term events.The average
recurrence interval for severe droughts in Oregon is somewhere between 8 and 12 years.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a drought is "high," meaning one incident is likely within the next
Page 70 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201.5-087
10—35 year period. Oregon has yet to undertake a statewide comprehensive risk analysis for
drought, to determine probability or vulnerability for a given community. However, based upon
available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this probability
rating for Deschutes County.5
Vulnerability Assessment
Deschutes County is less vulnerable to drought impacts than other counties in the Region, but
droughts can still be problematic. Potential impacts to community water supplies are the
greatest threat. Long---term drought periods of more than a year can impact forest conditions
and set the stage for potentially destructive wildfires. Additional impacts are described in the
Community Hazard Issues section. The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee
rated Deschutes County as having a "low" vulnerability to drought hazards, meaning less than
1% of the region's population or assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster.
Oregon has yet to undertake a statewide comprehensive risk analysis for drought, to determine
probability or vulnerability for a given community. However, based upon available information
the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes
County.
Risk. Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores each hazard
and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the
occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the drought hazard is rated #6, out of 9
rated hazards, with a total score of 149.
Future Climate Variability
One of the main aspects of the probability of future occurrences is its reliance on historic
climate trends in order to predict future climate trends. Many counties in eastern Oregon are
experiencing more frequent and severe droughts than is historically the norm, and many climate
predictions see this trend continuing into the future. Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest
region increased in the 20th Century by about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit and are projected to
increasingly rise by an average of 0.2 degrees to 1.0 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. Average
temperature change by 2040 is projected to be 3.2 degrees Fahrenheit, and by 2080, 5.3
degrees Fahrenheit. Temperature increases will occur throughout all seasons, with the greatest
variation occurring during summer months!
5 2015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
6 Ibid.
7 Climate Impacts Group,"Climate Change,"http://cses.washington.edu
Page 71 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Community Hazard Issues
Drought is frequently an "incremental" hazard, meaning both the onset and end are often
difficult to determine. Also, its effects may accumulate slowly over a considerable period of time
and may linger for years after the termination of the event.
Droughts are not just a summer---time phenomenon;winter droughts can have a profound
impact on agriculture, particularly east of the Cascade Mountains. Also, below average snowfall
in higher elevations has far---reaching effects,especially in terms of hydro---electric power,
irrigation, recreational opportunities and a variety of industrial uses.
Drought can affect all segments of a jurisdiction's population, particularly those employed in
water---dependent activities (e.g., agriculture, hydroelectric generation, recreation, etc.). Also,
domestic water---users may be subject to stringent conservation measures (e.g., rationing) and
could be faced with significant increases in electricity rates. In addition,water---borne
transportation systems (e.g., ferries, barges, etc.) could be impacted by periods of low water.
There also are environmental consequences. A prolonged drought in forests promotes an
increase of insect pests, which in turn, damage trees already weakened by a lack of water. A
moisture---deficient forest constitutes a significant fire hazard (see the Wildfire summary). In
addition, drought and water scarcity add another dimension of stress to species listed pursuant
to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973.
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
County and Cities
Deschutes County currently addresses the drought hazard through water conservation
measures and water monitoring.
State
Drought Council
The Drought Council is responsible for assessing the impact of drought conditions and making
recommendations to the Governor's senior advisors. The Water Availability Committee, a
subcommittee of technical people who monitor conditions throughout the state and report
these conditions monthly, advises the Drought Council. In this manner the Drought Council
keeps up---to---date on water conditions.
Page 72 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Federal
Natural Resources Conservation Service
The United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has
a regional service center located in Redmond (another is located in Warm Springs). The NRCS is
dedicated to three main priorities involving resource preservation one among them is water
quantity and quality. The NRCS incorporates a conservation implementation strategy to
preserve natural resources into the future.°
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are no identified Drought action items for Deschutes County; however, several of the
Multi---Hazard action items affect the Drought hazard.An action item matrix is provided within
Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A. To
view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
a NRCS—Deschutes County"Information for Partners and Participants,"http://www.or.nres.usda.gov
Page 73 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
EARTHQUAKE
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
There are no significant changes in the potential for earthquakes to occur in
Deschutes County since 2010, therefore, there are no significant changes in
this section from the 2010 Plan. However, the format of the section and
minor content changes has occurred.
Causes and Characteristics of the Hazard
Seismic events were once thought to pose little or no threat to Oregon communities. However,
recent earthquakes and scientific evidence indicate that the risk to people and property is much
greater than previously thought. Oregon and the Pacific Northwest in general are susceptible to
earthquakes from four sources: 1) the offshore Cascadia Subduction Zone; 2) deep intraplate
events within the subducting Juan de Fuca Plate; 3) shallow crustal events within the North
American Plate, and 4) earthquakes associated with volcanic activity.
All types of earthquakes in the region have some tie to the subducting, or diving, of the dense,
oceanic Juan de Fuca Plate under the lighter, continental North American Plate. There is also a
link between the subducting plate and the formation of volcanoes some distance inland from
the offshore subduction zone.
Central Oregon includes portions of five physiographic provinces including the High Cascades,
Blue Mountains, Basin and Range, High Lava Plains, and Deschutes---Columbia Plateau.
Consequently, its geology and earthquake susceptibility varies considerably. There have been
several significant earthquakes in the region; however all have been located in Klamath and Lake
Counties. Additionally, faults have been located in Deschutes, Klamath, and Lake Counties. The
region has also been shaken historically by crustal and intraplate earthquakes and prehistorically
by subduction zone earthquakes centered outside Central Oregon. All considered, there is good
reason to believe that the most devastating future earthquakes would probably originate along
shallow crustal faults in the region, or along the offshore Cascadia Subduction Zone.
Subduction Zone Earthquakes
The Pacific Northwest is located at a convergent plate boundary, where the Juan de Fuca and
North American tectonic plates meet. The two plates are converging at a rate of about 1.5
inches per years. This boundary is called the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ, see Figure II---3). It
extends from British Columbia to northern California. Earthquakes are caused by the abrupt
release of slowly accumulated stress.
'Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team.2012.Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.Salem,OR:Oregon Military
Department—Office of Emergency Management
Page 74 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-3 Cascadia Subduction Zone
y�S��``" British Columbia \
�. Avan""e` North Ameriican\yam___ t( _,1 Plate
P9ci late S',.,6 r7111p
•late � Washington
Juan de Fuca�rib '
Plate ,. —.�
°'Crustal
i
_... -____.----.
Z Juan de Fuca f'\-'
1 ��
�"`�Plake 0 �'''\
" Oregon
`-
Pacific !\
Plate _- Wirth American --
+y-lt. "Plate
■ — sk
' r
` '—•, q C
alifornia
��, 'fir
Source:Shoreland Solutions.Chronic Coastal Natural Hazards Model Overlay Zone.Salem,OR:Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development(1998)Technical Guide---3.
Although there have been no large historical earthquakes along the offshore Cascadia
Subduction Zone, similar subduction zones worldwide produce large "megathrust" earthquakes
with magnitudes of 8 or larger. They occur because the oceanic crust "sticks" as it is being
pushed beneath the continent, rather than sliding smoothly. Over hundreds of years, large
stresses build up, which are released suddenly in "megathrust" earthquakes. Such earthquakes
typically have a minute or more of strong ground shaking, and are quickly followed by numerous
large aftershocks.
Subduction zones similar to the Cascadia Subduction Zone have produced earthquakes with
magnitudes of 8.0 or larger. Historic subduction zone earthquakes include the 1960 Chile
earthquake (magnitude 9.5), the 1964 southern Alaska earthquake (magnitude 9.2), the 2004
Indian Ocean earthquake (magnitude 9.0) and the 2011 Tohoku earthquake (magnitude 9.0).
Geologic evidence shows that the Cascadia Subduction Zone has generated great earthquakes of
similar magnitude, most recently about 300 years ago.10
Deep Intraplate Earthquakes
Deep intraplate earthquakes occur at depths of 18 to 60 miles below the earth's surface in the
subducting oceanic crust and can reach magnitude 7.5.11 This type of earthquake is more
common in the Puget Sound region; in Oregon these earthquakes occur at lower rates and none
have occurred at damaging magnitudes.12 The February 28, 2001 Nisqually earthquake
10 Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team.2012.Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.Salem,OR:Oregon Military
Department—Office of Emergency Management
" Planning for Natural Hazards:Oregon Technical Resource Guide,Community Planning Workshop, (July 2000), p. 8---8.
12 Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team.2012.Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.Salem,OR:Oregon Military
Department—Office of Emergency Management
Page 75 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
(magnitude 6.8) in Washington State was a deep intraplate earthquake. It produced a rolling
motion that was felt from Vancouver, British Columbia to Coos Bay, Oregon and east to Salt Lake
City, Utah.13
Shallow Crustal Earthquakes
These are the most common earthquakes "Due to the amount of faulting in the area
and occur in the North American Plate at [the 1993 Klamath Falls earthquake] is just
relatively shallow depths of 6---12 miles business as usual for such a geologically
below the surface.14 When crustal faults active region. Historic evidence, combined
with geologic evidence for large numbers of
slip, they can produce earthquakes of
magnitudes up to 7.0. Although most earthquakes in the prehistoric past, suggest
crustal fault earthquakes are smaller than that one or more earthquakes capable of
4.0 and generally create little or no damage(magnitude 4—6) hit south---central
Oregon every few decades, so it pays to be
damage, some of them can cause
prepared."
extensive damage. The 1993 Klamath
Falls earthquakes (magnitude 6.0 and 5.9) James Roddey, DOGAMI
were crustal earthquakes.
Volcanic Earthquakes
Volcanic earthquakes are usually smaller than magnitude 2.5, roughly the threshold for shaking
felt by observers close to the event. Swarms of small earthquakes may persist for weeks to
months before eruptions, but little or no earthquake damage would occur to buildings in
surrounding communities. Some volcanic related swarms may include earthquakes as large as
about magnitude 5. For the communities of Bend, La Pine, and Sunriver, shallow earthquakes in
the magnitude 4---5 range that are located beneath Newberry volcano would cause walls to rattle
or windows and dishes to vibrate. Both Newberry and the Three Sisters volcanoes routinely
experience small magnitude earthquakes that are not felt.
While all four types of earthquakes have the potential to cause major damage, subduction zone
earthquakes pose the greatest danger. A major CSZ event could generate an earthquake with a
magnitude of 9.0 or greater resulting in devastating damage and loss of life. Such earthquakes
may cause great damage to the coastal area of Oregon as well as inland areas in western
Oregon; damage to Deschutes County will be less severe, however, it is expected that the
impact of such an event will greatly affect eastern Oregon.
The specific hazards associated with earthquakes are explained below:
Ground Shaking
Ground shaking is the motion felt on the earth's surface caused by seismic waves generated by
the earthquake. Ground shaking is the primary cause of earthquake damage. The strength of
ground shaking depends on the magnitude of the earthquake, the type of fault that is slipping,
distance from the epicenter (where the earthquake originates), and local geology. Buildings on
"Hill,Richard."Geo Watch Warning Quake Shook Portland 40 Years Ago."The Oregonian.October 30,2002.
"Madin,Ian P.and Zhenming Wang,Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps Report,DOGAMI,1999.
Page 76 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RF,SOLIJTION 20I5-087
poorly consolidated and thick soils will typically see more damage than buildings on
consolidated soils and bedrock.
Ground Shaking Amplification
Ground shaking amplification refers to the soils and soft sedimentary rocks near the surface that
can modify ground shaking from an earthquake. Such factors can increase or decrease the
amplification (i.e., strength) as well as the frequency of the shaking. The thickness of the
geologic materials and their physical properties determine how much amplification will occur.
Ground motion amplification increases the risk for buildings and structures built on soft and
unconsolidated soils.
Surface Faulting
Surface faulting are planes or surfaces in Earth materials along which failure occurs. Such faults
can be found deep within the earth or on the surface. Earthquakes occurring from deep lying
faults usually create only ground shaking.
Liquefaction and Subsidence
Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking causes wet, granular soils to change from a solid state
into a liquid state. This results in the loss of soil strength and the soil's ability to support weight.
When the ground can no longer support buildings and structures (subsidence), buildings and
their occupants are at risk.
Earthquake-Induced Landslides and Rockfalls
Earthquake---induced landslides are secondary hazards that occur from ground shaking and can
destroy roads, buildings, utilities and critical facilities necessary to recovery efforts after an
earthquake. Some Deschutes County communities are built in areas with steep slopes. These
areas often have a higher risk of landslides and rockfalls triggered by earthquakes.
Page 77 of 469- EXHIBIT C3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
History of Earthquakes in Deschutes County
A summary of significant earthquake events in the Deschutes County region is found in the table
below.
Table 11-2 Selected Earthquakes, M 5.0+ (1971-2014)
Rattt IG8t19tt' ** s 1pf'nt'nents
Approximateyears:1400 Based on studies of earthquakes and tsunamis in
BCE,1050,BCE 600 BCE Offshore,Cascadia Probably Willapa Bay,WA.These are the midpoints of the
400,750,900 subduction zone 8.0G9.0 age ranges for these six events.
Generated a tsunami that struck Oregon,
Offshore,Cascadia Approximately Washington and a an;destroyed Native
January 1700 90 g p y-
Subductionzone American villages along the coast.
April 1906 North of Lakeview,
OR
5.0 Three felt aftershocks.
April 1920 Crater Lake 5.0
January1923 Lakeview,OR 6.0
Southeast of Adel,
March 1958
OR 4.5 Damage unknown
Damage to homes.20 earthquakes of M4 or
1968 Adel 4.7G5.1 greater were recorded between 5/28/68&
6/24/68.
September 20,1993 Klamath County 5.9 and 6.0 Two deaths,$10 million damage,including county
p y courthouse;rockfalls induced by ground motion.
Source:Ivan Wong and others,"A Look Back at Oregon's Earthquake History,1841---1994,"in Oregon Geology,(1995),
125---139;Niewendrop and others,"Map of Selected Earthquakes fore Oregon,1841 through 2002,"DOGAMI,(2003).
The Klamath County earthquakes on September 21, 1993, caused two deaths and approximately
7.5 million dollars in damage. One person was killed when a boulder crushed the car he was
driving in an earthquake---induced rock fall, and another person died of a heart attack. More than
1,000 homes and commercial buildings were damaged. 15
Deschutes County routinely has small earthquake events. The earthquakes shown in the figure
below are relatively insignificant events below M 5.0. The larger events may have been slightly
felt but little to no structural/property damage resulted. There is no historic record of significant
crustal earthquakes centered in the Deschutes County in the past 150 years, although Oregon
has experienced crustal earthquakes that originated outside the county. Recent earthquake
events in Deschutes County include a two---day swam of 100 to 200 small, unfelt earthquakes in
the Three Sisters region (shown below on the left side of the map) in April 2004. Additionally, a
seismic network on Newberry volcano has recorded numerous small, unfelt earthquakes since
its installation in 2011.
15 USGS,Earthquake Hazards Program,Historic Earthquakes
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/historical.php?
Page 78 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-4 Earthquake Epicenters (1971-2008)
Magnitude Earthquake Epicenter(1971-200s)
An earthquake epicenter is the point on the Earth's
Q 3 5 surface*that is directly above the location where an
,+..;; earthquake orininates.
* 12
• Ui
Source:Oregon HazVu:Statewide Geohazards Viewer(HazVu),accessed March 18,2015
Hazard Identification
The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI), in partnership with other
state and federal agencies, has undertaken a rigorous program in Oregon to identify seismic
hazards, including active fault identification, bedrock shaking, tsunami inundation zones, ground
motion amplification, liquefaction, and earthquake induced landslides. DOGAMI has published a
number of seismic hazard maps
maps that are available for Oregon communities to use. The ma
p g p
show liquefaction, ground motion amplification, landslide susceptibility, and relative earthquake
hazards. OPDR used the DOGAMI Statewide Geohazards Viewer to present visual maps of recent
earthquake activity(Figure II 4), liquefaction(soft soils, Figure II 5),and expected ground
shaking for combined earthquake events (Figure II---6; see vulnerability assessment for more
information on the combined events). The severity of an earthquake is dependent upon a
number of factors including: 1) the distance from the earthquake's source (or epicenter); 2) the
ability of the soil and rock to conduct the earthquake's seismic energy; 3) the degree (i.e., angle)
of slope materials; 4) the composition of slope materials; 5) the magnitude of the earthquake;
and 6) the type of earthquake.
Page 79 of 469- EXIIIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-5 Earthquake Liquefaction (Soft Soil) Hazard
H gh Earthquake Liquefaction(Soft soil)Haoard
•
Morfe rnie the ntense shalom m of an narri.ttu.tkt t.at cause sot
lqucfactton ::here m erely per k.co mater logged
'■ i nw :r•(nmt'n':r or tq,n',frpmcd,rih a.oh:d;mr,lhurt acts.
,kr a Lqu::1 fig.ra n'r,Oro:a!reyn urnrn rating nn
the,'roll reels arr I..rly to dnnmgrd m nn
ea rh qu.ve
Source:Oregon HazVu:Statewide Geohazards Viewer(HazVu),accessed March 18,2015
Figure 11-6 Combined Earthquake Events Expected Shaking and Active Faults
■ Violent Expected Earthquake Shaking
These data show the strongest shaking expected to
Severe occur cluing an earthquake In a 500-year period he
EVery Strong stronger the amount of shaking,the more structural
strong marriage.vile occur.
ErAoderate
LT Light
-- 1 Active Faults
Potentially hazardous faults are those that have been identified by the
115 Geofogtedl Survey as having rnrrved to the l05t 1.8 million years,These
faults may be the source cot future damaging earthquakes,and severe
ground disruption is possible within the buffer cones.
•
Source:Oregon HazVu:Statewide Geohazards Viewer(HazVu),accessed March 18,2015
The maps indicate the predominant risks for the county lie in the southwestern portion of the
county in the La Pine and Sunriver region; it also shows greater risk in the Sisters region.
Page 80 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Probability Assessment
The Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) generates an earthquake on average every 500---600 years.
However, as with any natural processes the average time between events can be misleading.
Some of the earthquakes may have been 150 years apart while some closer to 1,000 years
apart.16 Establishing a probability for crustal earthquakes is difficult given the small number of
historic events in the region. Earthquakes generated by volcanic activity in Oregon's Cascade
Range are possible, but likewise unpredictable. Mitigation action calls for study of the
probability of earthquake events specific to Deschutes County.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a crustal earthquake is "low", meaning one incident is likely within
the next 75 — 100 year period; the committee believes that the County's probability of
experiencing a Cascadia earthquake is "moderate", meaning one incident is likely within the
next 35 — 75 year period. Based upon available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk
Assessment supports this probability rating for Deschutes County."
Vulnerability Assessment
The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) has developed two
earthquake loss models for Oregon based on the two most likely sources of seismic events: 1)
the CSZ, and 2) combined earthquake events. Both models are based on HAZUS, a computerized
program, currently used by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as a means of
determining potential losses from earthquakes.
The CSZ event is based on a potential 8.5 earthquake generated off the Oregon coast. The
model does not take into account a tsunami, which probably would develop from the event (but
not affect Deschutes County). The 500---year crustal model does not look at a single earthquake
(as in the CSZ model); it encompasses many faults, each with a 10% chance of producing an
earthquake in the next 50 years. The model assumes that each fault will produce a single
"average" earthquake during this time. Neither model takes unreinforced masonry building into
consideration. DOGAMI investigators caution that the models contain a high degree of
uncertainty and should be used only for general planning purposes. Despite their limitations, the
models do provide some approximate estimates of damage. Further mention is made of
potential for possible flooding in the event of an earthquake in the area of the South Sister
uplift. Current research being conducted of this area will determine potential impact and
flooding potential.
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"low" vulnerability to the crustal earthquake hazard, meaning less than 1% of the region's
population or assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster; the committee rated
the County as having a "high" vulnerability to the Cascadia earthquake hazard, meaning more
than 10% of the region's population or assets would be affected by a major emergency or
16 Y.Wang&J.L.Clark,Special Paper 29,Earthquake Damage in Oregon:Preliminary Estimates of Future Earthquake
Losses.1999.DOGAMI.
17 2015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
Page 8I of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
disaster. Based upon available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment
supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes County.18
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
i through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
of the harm that may result, defined t ou t e
Y g Y (
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I, Section 2) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores
each hazard and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict
the occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the Cascadia earthquake hazard is
rated #3, out of 9 rated hazards, with a total score of 191; while the crustal earthquake hazard
is rated #8, out of 9 rated hazards, with a total score of 94.
Community Hazard Issues
The effects of earthquakes span a large area. The degree to which earthquakes are felt,
however, and the damages associated with them may vary. At risk from earthquake damage are
unreinforced masonry buildings, bridges built before earthquake standards were incorporated
into building codes, sewer, water, and natural gas pipelines, petroleum pipelines, and other
critical facilities and private property located within the county. The areas that are particularly
vulnerable to potential earthquakes in the county have been identified as those with soft,
alluvial sediments and lands along stream channels.
Earthquake damage to roads and bridges can be particularly serious by hampering or cutting off
the movement of people and goods and disrupting the provision of emergency response
services. Such effects in turn can produce serious impacts on the local and regional economy by
disconnecting people from work, home, food, school and needed commercial, medical and
social services. A major earthquake can separate businesses and other employers from their
employees, customers, and suppliers thereby further hurting the economy. Deschutes County is
less susceptible to being isolated, unlike other areas of Oregon, due to its location along major
highways, which run through multiple locations in the county. Finally, following an earthquake
event, the cleanup of debris can be a huge challenge for the community.
Death and Injury
Death and injury can occur both inside and outside of buildings due to falling equipment,
furniture, debris, and structural materials. Likewise, downed power lines or broken water and
gas lines endanger human life. Death and injury are highest in the afternoon when damage
occurs to commercial and residential buildings and during the evening hours in residential
settings.19
18 Ibid.
19 Planning for Natural Hazards:Oregon Technical Resource Guide,Community Planning Workshop,(July 2000).
Page 82 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Disruption of Critical Facilities
Critical facilities are police stations, fire stations, hospitals, and shelters. These are facilities that
provide services to the community and need to be functional after an earthquake event. The
earthquake effects outlined above can all cause emergency response to be disrupted after a
significant event.20 Tables II---3 and II-•--4(below)and tables in the city addenda,display damage
and collapse potential for structures including critical and essential facilities.
Economic Loss
Seismic activity can cause great loss to businesses, either a large---scale corporation or a small
retail shop. Losses not only result in rebuilding cost, but fragile inventory and equipment can be
destroyed. When a company is forced to stop production for just a day, business loss can be
tremendous. Residents, businesses, and industry all suffer temporary loss of income when their
source of finances are damaged or disrupted.
The potential losses from an earthquake in Deschutes County extend beyond those to human
life, homes, property and the landscape. A recent earthquake damage model has not been
conducted for Deschutes County, however, based upon data from a 1999 DOGAMI report rough
loss estimates are available. The economic base in Deschutes County is estimated at
$4,676,000,000 (in 1999 dollars); it is expected that the county will incur total direct losses
valuing $5,000,000 (in 1999 dollars) for the Cascadia model and $71,000,000 (in 1999 dollars)
for the 500---year model; both amount to a loss ratio of less than one---percent.21 While the
expected losses have increased due to increased development in the county, as well as inflation,
the loss ratio and relative damage for the county is expected to be similar. See table on the
following page for more information on expected losses.
Local business economies are at substantial risk if an earthquake damages or otherwise
necessitates the closure of any of the major transportation routes in Deschutes County. As such,
the economic loss to the region can exceed $3.5 million per day in the County.
20Y.Wang&J.L.Clark,Special Paper 29,Earthquake Damage in Oregon:Preliminary Estimates of Future Earthquake
Losses.1999.DOGAML
21 Ibid.The loss ratio is determined as a percentage of the expected losses to the county's economic base.
Page 83 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-3 Deschutes County Earthquake Damage Summary
Deschutes County 8.5 Cascadia subduclton zone event 500 year model
Injuries 1 17
Deaths 0 0
Displaced households 0 5
Short term shelter needs 0 3
Economic losses for buildings 55 million 571 million
Operating the day after the quake:
Fire stations 11X1"6 NA
Police stations '91% NA
_.-....,............._..
•
Schools _..mm 99% NA �
Bridges 1(XP NA
Economic losses to:
These figures Highways 517,000 5572,000
have a high
degree of Airports S10,000 52 million
uncertginjry Communication systems:
and shauki be
used only for ( Economic losses $2,000 51 million
general
planning Operating the day of the quake 99% NA
purposes. ..........---- --.............._ ............,...._....
Because of Debris generated(thousands of tons) 3 47
roundlnq, -
numbers may
not add up to 8.5 Cascadia event Percentage of buildings in damage categories
I00%.
Building type None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
Because the
500 year Agriculture 93 1 0 0 0
model includes
several Commercial 91 1 0 0 11
ecxihquakes,
the number of Education 89 I 0 0 0
facilities Government 98 1 0 .. 0 0
operational
the "day Industrial 93 2 0 0 0
after cannot __ —........._. ........__—_...._...,.....1
be Calculated. Residential 98 I 0 0 0
500 year model Percentage of buildings in damage categories
Building type None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
1
Agriculture 75 10 7 : 0
Commercial 72 11 9 3.w.y_T.. 11 1
Education 71�W �_m 10 7 2 0
Government 75 12 9 3 1
industrial 69 12 10 3 1
Residential 83 10 5 I 0
Source:Y.Wang&J.L.Clark,Special Paper 29,Earthquake Damage in Oregon:Preliminary Estimates of Future
Earthquake Losses.1999.DOGAMI.
Page 84 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Bridge Damage
All bridges can sustain damage during earthquakes, leaving them unsafe for use. More rarely,
some bridges have failed completely due to strong ground motion. Bridges are a vital
transportation link — damage to them can make some areas inaccessible.
Because bridges vary in size, materials,
siting, and design, earthquakes will affect
2001 Nisqually Earthquake
each bridge differently. Bridges built
before the mid 1970's often do not have A 6.8 magnitude earthquake centered
proper seismic reinforcements. These southwest of Seattle struck on February 28,
bridges have a significantly higher risk of 2001, followed by a mild aftershock the next
suffering structural damage during a morning, and caused more than $1 billion
moderate to large earthquake. Bridges worth of damage. Despite this significant
built in the 1980's and after are more loss, the region escaped with relatively little
likely to have the structural components damage for two reasons: the depth of the
necessary to withstand a large quake center and preparations by its
earthquake.22 residents. Washington initiated a
retrofitting program in 1990 to strengthen
Damage to Lifelines bridges, while regional building codes
mandated new structures withstand certain
Lifelines are the connections between amounts of movement. Likewise, historic
communities and critical services. They buildings have been voluntarily retrofitted
include water and gas lines, with earthquake---protection reinforcements.
transportation systems, electricity, and
communication networks. Ground
shaking and amplification can cause pipes to break open, power lines to fall, roads and railways
to crack or move, and radio or telephone communication to cease. Disruption to transportation
makes it especially difficult to bring in supplies or services. All lifelines need to be usable after an
earthquake to allow for rescue, recovery, and rebuilding efforts and to relay important
information to the public.
Fire
Downed power lines or broken gas mains can trigger fires. When fire stations suffer building or
lifeline damage, quick response to quench fires is less likely.
Debris
After damage occurs to a variety of structures, much time is spent cleaning up brick, glass,
wood, steel or concrete building elements, office and home contents, and other materials.
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
22 University of Washington website:www.geophys.washington.edu/SETS/PNSN/INFO_GENERAL/faq.htmi#3.
Page 85 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Building and Home Damage
Wood structures tend to withstand earthquakes better than structures made of brick or
unreinforced masonry buildings.23 Building construction and design play a vital role in the
survival of a structure during earthquakes. Damage can be quite severe if structures are not
designed with seismic reinforcements or if structures are located atop soils that liquefy or
amplify shaking. Whole buildings can collapse or be displaced. For an approximation of buildings
at risk of collapse by year built see Appendix C.
In 2007, DOGAMI completed a rapid visual screening (RVS) of educational and emergency
facilities in communities across Oregon, as directed by the Oregon Legislature in Senate Bill 2
(2005). RVS is a technique used by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), known
as FEMA 154, to identify, inventory, and rank buildings that are potentially vulnerable to seismic
events. DOGAMI surveyed 78 facilities in Deschutes County; of these seven are within county
jurisdiction (see City addenda for facilities within city jurisdiction).
DOGAMI scored each building with a 'low,' 'moderate,' 'high,' or 'very high' potential of collapse
in the event of an earthquake. It is important to note that these rankings represent a probability
of collapse based on limited observed and analytical data and are, therefore approximate
rankings.24To fully assess a building's potential of collapse, a more detailed engineering study
completed by a qualified professional is required, but the RVS study can help to prioritize which
buildings to retrofit.
The table below displays the rankings of all facilities within the county's jurisdiction; each "X"
represents one building within that ranking category. Of the buildings evaluated by DOGAMI
using RVS, none have very high (100% chance) collapse potential, and two buildings have high
(greater than 10% chance) collapse potential. The county and cities have opted to create one
action item for all the facilities that have a "high" or "very high" rating (see Appendix A). The
buildings with 'high' or 'very high' collapse potential include multiple public safety and
education facilities located throughout the county all of which can play a key role in during
disasters events or during long---term recovery. Please see the city addenda for a list of facilities
within each jurisdiction (note: some county facilities are located within city jurisdiction, as such
they are represented in the applicable addendum table).
23 Wolfe,Myer,et al.Land Use Planning for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation:A Handbook for Planners,Special
Publication 14,Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center.
24 State of Oregon Department of Geologic and Mineral Industries, "Implementation of 2005 Senate Bill 2 Relating to
Public Safety,Seismic Safety and Seismic Rehabilitation of Public Building", May 22,2007,Open File Report 0---07---02.
Page 86 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-4 Rapid Visual Survey Scores
^"a td is�o �f��c#�� � : ( ' d7 Pi �"!�."�; w N w ♦��C!(� �, I ti
, r} t `"a. 8 7 p Y }}, '7. (2u 9ah ®e 1'� 9s 91 !t
r ( ir+ 4 air �� }lI"! r 'h. �C1W� T C # .(, n i 170
I i a "4,lrn(al,i "i4al4 ,,,idr �w 1%) 4 w� m i dl Ifi.,N NM
Schools
-Three Rivers Elementary School
(56900 Enterprise Dr,Sunriver) X
Terrebonne Community School
(1199 B Ave,Terrebonne) X X
Public Safety
Cloverdale RFPD
(68787 George Cyrus Rd, Cloverdale) X X
Cloverdale RFPD
X
(67433 Cloverdale Rd, Cloverdale)
Sunriver Police Department X
(57455 Abbot Dr, Sunriver)
Sunriver Fire Department
X
(57475 Abbot Dr, Sunriver)
Deschutes County Sheriffs Office P Terrebonne
X
(8222 Hwy 97,Terrebonne)
Source:DOGAMI 2007.Open File Report 0---07---02.Statewide Seismic Needs Assessment Using Rapid Visual
Assessment.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
County and Cities
At an individual level, preparedness for an earthquake is minimal as perception and awareness
of earthquake hazards are low. Strapping down heavy furniture, water heaters and expensive
personal property as well as having earthquake insurance are steps toward earthquake
mitigation.
City and county building officials enforce building codes for new construction and can
coordinate inspection activities in the event of an earthquake. Deschutes County has also
mapped critical facilities and major public buildings and inspections of these facilities can be
assigned quickly when an earthquake occurs.
State
The Oregon State Building Codes Division adopts statewide standards for building construction
that are administered by the state, cities and counties throughout Oregon. The codes apply to
new construction and to the alteration of, or addition to, existing structures. Within these
standards are six levels of design and engineering specifications for seismic safety that are
applied to areas according to the expected degree of ground motion and site conditions. The
Page 87 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLI.JTION 2015-087
structural code requires a site---specific seismic hazard report for critical facilities such as
hospitals, fire and police stations, emergency response facilities, and special occupancy
structures, such as schools and prisons. The seismic hazard report required by the structural
code for essential facilities and special occupancy structures considers factors such as the
seismic zone, soil characteristics including amplification and liquefaction potential, any known
faults, and potential landslides. The findings of the seismic hazard report must be considered in
the design of the building. The residential code incorporates prescriptive requirements for
foundation reinforcement and framing connections based on the applicable seismic zone for the
area
Retrofitting of existing buildings may be required when such buildings are altered or their
occupancy is changed. Requirements vary depending on the type and size of the alteration and
whether there is a change in the use of the building that is considered more hazardous.
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are two identified Earthquake action items for Deschutes County; in addition, several of
the Multi---Hazard action items affect the earthquake hazard. An action item matrix is provided
within Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A.
To view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
Page 88 of 469- EXHIBIT F3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
FLOOD
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
Significant changes to this section include the addition of national flood
insurance program information incorporating reporting on any repetitive
flood loss or severe repetitive flood loss properties. In addition, the format of
the section and minor content changes has occurred.
Causes and Characteristics of the Hazard
Flooding results when rain and snowmelt creates water flow that exceed the carrying capacity of
rivers, streams, channels, ditches, and other watercourses. In Oregon, flooding is most common
from October through April when storms from the Pacific Ocean bring intense rainfall. Most of
Oregon's destructive natural disasters have been floods.' Flooding can be aggravated when rain
is accompanied by snowmelt and frozen ground; the spring cycle of melting snow is the most
common source of flood in the region.
Anticipating and planning for flood events is an important activity for Deschutes County. Federal
programs provide insurance and funding to communities engaging in flood hazard mitigation.
The Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) manages the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). The NFIP provides flood
insurance and pays claims to policyholders who have suffered losses from floods. The HMGP
provides grants to help mitigate flood hazards by elevating structures or relocating or removing
them from flood hazard areas. These programs provide grant money to owners of properties
who have suffered losses from floods, and in some cases, suffered losses from other natural
hazard events.
Flood Sources
The principal flood sources in Deschutes County include: Deschutes River, Little Deschutes River,
Paulina Creek, Whychus Creek, and Spring River.25
Flood Types
The principal types of flood that occur in Deschutes County include:
• Rain---on---Snow(warm winter)flooding
• Spring/Snowmelt flooding
• Ice jams/ Frazil Ice
• Flash floods
• Dam failure
25 Taylor,George H.and Chris Hannan.The Oregon Weather Book.Corvallis,OR Oregon State University Press.1999
26 FEMA,Deschutes County Flood Insurance Study,revised September 28,2007.
Page 89 of 469- EXHIBIT 1-3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The most common of these potential flooding events in Deschutes County is a rain---on---snow
event."
Rain-on-Snow
The weather pattern that produces these floods occurs during the winter months and has come
to be associated with La Nina events, a three to seven year cycle of cool, wet weather. Brief,
cool, moist weather conditions are followed by a system of warm, moist air from tropical
latitudes. The intense warm rain associated with this system quickly melts foothill and mountain
snow. Above---freezing temperatures may occur well above pass levels in the Cascade Mountains
(4,000---5,000 feet),28
Spring/ Snowmelt Flooding
Snowmelt floods occur in the spring and early summer when temperatures rise rapidly, causing
rapid melting of accumulated snow. Spring runoff has caused significant riverine flooding in the
County, resulting in damage along the Deschutes, Little Deschutes and Spring rivers, in addition
to Paulina and Whychus Creeks, and several smaller rivers and creeks. Most spring flooding has
been precipitated by a particular combination of factors: ground saturation followed by a heavy
ground freeze, a heavy snowpack in higher elevations, and then spring rains and winds causing
sudden snow melt.
Ice Jams
Ice jams on the Deschutes River have created flood conditions in the past and will continue to
do so due to local topography. This type of flood is also associated with Frazil Ice, which
contributes to jamming (particularly upstream of the former log pond formed by Shevlin Dam).
Ice jams commonly happen during the winter and early spring, while the river is still frozen.
Sudden warming at higher altitudes can melt waters resulting in increased runoff of water and
ice into large reaches of frozen river below. On the way downstream, the ice can `jam" in
narrow places on the river or against a road crossing, effectively damming the river, sometimes
followed by a sudden breach and release of the water and ice.
Flash Floods
Flash floods usually result from intense storms dropping large amounts of rain within a brief
period. They usually occur in the summer during thunderstorm season, appear with little or no
warning and can reach full peak in only a few minutes.They are most common in arid and semi---
arid areas of Oregon like Deschutes County where there is often steep topography, little
vegetation and intense but short---duration rainfall. This situation would be typified by the
eastern part of Deschutes County and areas without permanent streams such as the dry canyon
west of Redmond.
27 Ibid.
78 Ibid.
Page 90 of 469- EXI IIB1"I' B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Dam Failure (Natural or man-made)
Major flooding could also result from partial or complete failure of natural dams (mountain
streams that begin in glacial lakes behind dams of ice or moraines can occasionally be emptied
g g Y p
rapidly and result in flash floods with accompanying mud flows) or man---made structures,
constructed to restrict the flow of water on the county's waterways, either impounding
reservoirs or diversion dams.
These types of floods are often associated with flash floods. In such situations, waters not only
rise rapidly, but also generally move at high velocities and often carry large amounts of debris.
In these instances a flash flood may arrive as a fast moving wall of debris, mud, water or ice.
Such material can accumulate at a natural or man---made obstruction and restrict the flow of
water. Water held back in such a manner can cause flooding both upstream and then later
downstream if the obstruction is removed or breaks free.
Another area of heightened concern focuses on the potential of flooding related to the failure of
glacial moraine dams that impound high---altitude lakes around the Three Sisters and Broken Top.
In the event of volcanic eruption, earthquake or a large avalanche of rock or ice into the lakes,
these dams could release floods of water and debris whose major impact could inundate parts
local areas. A moraine dam impounding a small unnamed lake high on the east side of Broken
Top failed in October, 1966, generating a debris flow that traveled down the Soda Creek
drainage, across Highway 46 (Cascade Lakes Highway), and spread out over the broad meadow
near Sparks Lake. The debris flow buried the road and covered about 250,000 square meters
(about 2,700,000 square feet) of the meadow with sand and silt.29
Carver Lake, which lies in the headwaters of the South Fork of Whychus Creek, is judged the
most likely of lakes to generate future floods or debris flows large enough to affect areas
beyond the immediate hazard zone. Lesser hazards include several small lakes at the
headwaters of Whychus Creek and the basin (currently with no lake) below Collier Glacier at the
head of White Branch, and the unnamed lake on the east side of Broken Top which could trigger
floods or debris flows in the Soda Creek drainage or the Tumalo Creek drainage.30
History of Floods in Deschutes County31
Generally, river flooding has not historically been a serious problem in Deschutes County. This is
mostly due to the porous nature of the underlying volcanic rock that has a large capacity for
water storage, irrigation diversion canals and reservoir retention. Consequently, the discharge
rate for the Deschutes River is very low considering the size of its basins. Regular flooding events
have occurred however near the headwaters of Tumalo Creek and in the Tumalo community.
29 O'Connor,J.E.,J.H.Hardison and J.E.Costa.2001.Debris flows from failures of Neoglacial---Age moraine dams in the
I hree Sisters and Mount Jefferson wilderness areas,Oregon.US Geological Survey Professional Paper 1606.
30
Hydrologic Hazards Along Whychus Creek From a Hypothetical Failure of the Glacial Moraine Impacting Carver Lake
NearSisters,Oregon—USGSOpen File Report87---41
31 FEMA,Deschutes County Flood Insurance Study,revised September 28,2007.Most of the information in this
section was obtained from the FIS,additional footnotes are provided as applicable.
Page 91 of 469- EXI IIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Along Whychus Creek, the city of Sisters frequently experiences flooding, with the most
significant event occurring in 1964.
The flood season on the Deschutes River extends from November through July (larger floods
downstream of the Little Deschutes River typically occur in November and December). The flood
of record on the Deschutes River upstream of the Little Deschutes River occurred on July 30,
1956 (discharge of 2,280 cfs, approximately a 40---year event); the flood of record on the
Deschutes River downstream of the Little Deschutes River occurred on November 27, 1909
(discharge of 5,000 cfs at Benham Falls stream gage). The largest flood since 1958 occurred
downstream of the Little Deschutes River in December 1964 (discharge of 3,470 cfs at Benham
Falls stream gage,approximately a 175---year event).
The flood season on the Little Deschutes River extends from October through June (majority
occur from April to June). Generally there are more days above bankfull stage during the spring
(during spring snowmelt floods) than winter. The flood of record occurred in December 1964
(discharge of 3,660 cfs at RM 28.1 north of La Pine, greater than a 500---year event).There are
ten bridges within the FIS study area for the Little Deschutes River, of those only the Ranch
Bridge(RM 15.1)may be overtopped by the 1---percent---annual---chance flood(100---yearflood
event); however the Vandervert Ranch Bridge (RM 3.1), Lazy River South Ranch Bridge (RM
16.6), Stearns Ranch Bridge (RM 28.1), and the Masten Bridge (RM 39.9) and their approaches
may also be overtopped bythe 0.2---percent---annual---chance flood(500 year flood event).
The flood season on Whychus Creek extends from November through April (larger events occur
November and December). The flood of record occurred in December 25, 1980 (discharge of
2,000 cfs at RM 26.6, approximately a 80---year event). Debris deposition on agricultural land
damaging irrigation diversion works, bank erosion, and property damage in Sisters are the
principle flood concerns. There are 12 bridges within the FIS study area for Whychus Creek, of
those only the ranch bridge (RM 16.3) and the Elm Street Bridge (RM 21.8 in Sisters) may be
overtopped by the 1---percent---annual---chance flood(100---yearflood event);howeverthe ranch
bridges at RM 19.3 and RM 19.4 and their approaches may also be over topped by the 0.2---
percent---annual---chance flood(500---year flood event).
The Whychus Creek stream corridor is particularly vulnerable to obstructions to floodflows due
to unconsolidated volcanic deposits that make up the streambed and banks that are prone to
erosion. This concern is exacerbated in areas that are at, or below, the elevation of the
streambank (see Sisters Addendum for more information). In addition, there is the potential for
the moraine dam at Carver Lake to fail during an earthquake, volcanic event, or avalanche/
landslide (the lake contains approximately 740 acre feet of water). There have been three
observed failures of the dam in the recent past.
More information on the history of the flood hazard can be found in the Regional Risk
Assessment for Region 6 of the 2015 Draft Oregon NHMP.
Hazard Identification
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and the accompanying Flood Boundary and Floodway
maps are the most comprehensive resource for identifying areas subject to flood hazards in
Deschutes County. FIRMs and Floodway maps delineate the boundaries of areas subject to
inundation by the "base flood.' The base flood is defined as an event having a 100---year
Page 92 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
recurrence interval or a 1% probability of occurring in any year. The maps also provide, in areas
of detailed study, projected water surface elevations for the base flood. In general, based on
experience with the flood events of the past several decades, Deschutes County's FIRM maps
have proven to be fairly accurate in depicting areas subject to riverine flooding. There have been
no large flood events since the FIRMs were issued in the mid---1980s so the accuracy of the maps
in relation to large flood events is untested. The special flood hazard area is depicted in the map
below, for more detailed information visit the Oregon Risk MAP website and click on the
"Mapping Tools" tab: http://www.oregonriskmap.com/.
Figure 11-7 Special Flood Hazard Area
r
- Yc.. f . Flood Hazard
•, w�'� "'� Sp.,lsl Flood Hurd A'. 1 'j f/ 1 d 1 47:
•
•
r1 S..qr arnI t . Y+t
t ,
y:.
Source:Oregon HazVu:Statewide Geohazards Viewer(HazVu),accessed March 18,2015
The county's FIRMs were modernized in 2007, however, there is a concern that sediment
accumulation may be occurring within the Deschutes River (and other waterways) that may
impact the special flood hazard area. The county has included an action to update the flood
insurance study and flood insurance rate maps utilizing existing Lidar. The figure below shows
the extent of collected Lidar within Deschutes County, it shows that the areas of the mapped
special flood hazard areas are included within the collected Lidar. Although the county is not
currently slated to undergo a flood study/ mapping project, the existing Lidar data may be useful
in conducting future projects.
Page 93 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-8 Shaded Relief of Collected Lidar
i
11, 3,�} -
re /t r
s
r*
Yea ^ "Pc
,e4ter• .
*w .„ U r a
�r f
Fo.cen••a nln•�.e on �r.nel be ,,eie'e ne numese-helD rww .e q ;en,09.,Drq.sue a.m,e Hn nee.,nr„rue :•,i i•
Source:DOGAMI Lidar Data Viewer,accessed March 24,2015
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
The Deschutes County Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) were modernized in September 2007.
The table below shows that as of November 2014, Deschutes County (including the incorporated
cities) has 267 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policies (90 of these are for properties
developed before the initial FIRM) in force and five paid claims. The last Community Assistance
Visit (CAV) for Deschutes County was on July 22, 1994 (the most recent CAV was in Sisters on
April 26, 2004). The county and cities are not members of the Community Rating System (CRS).
The table displays the number of policies by building type and shows that the majority of
residential structures that have flood insurance policies are single---family homes and that there
are 14 non---residential structures with flood insurance policies. According to data from 2012, the
proportion of single---family homes (excluding condominiums) within the special flood hazard
area (SFHA, floodplain) that have flood insurance (the market penetration rate) for Deschutes
County is 15.3% (105 out of 688).
The Community Repetitive Loss record for Deschutes County, Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and
Sisters identifies zero repetitive loss buildings, zero severe repetitive loss buildings, and zero
total repetitive loss claims.
Page 94 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-5 Flood Insurance Detail
it ligr r I" , P i i;'; P i �k1 ",pJa�d ' f 1 10#40,j,5
'I' L " tt t iiiti"ai Total l' i I r t 00" qth ; litirrs 0'4,0*,
.
J�rf didlpa,,,'„ t"i 1p,Ote .FIRM Data Pgiicie '� 1 I . ""140111 'SOW. rte Idl sitl. n l° .' . '
Deschutes ) ) 267 90 244 7 2 14 14
County* 9/28/07 9/29/86 171 66 158 1 0 12 11
Bend 9/28/07 9/4/87 57 21 48 5 2 2 1
La Pine 9/28/07 9/28/07 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Redmond 9/28/07 9/28/07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sisters 9/28/07 9/29/86 38 2 37 1 0 0 2
d ' ' ,,,,,,A1:!:;61,2'
`;:rail '',1'11,",7 z h r "" " i " SCr }a'M @i2, i^ iC i, tJ, ,
s� , , `1e44 ' 9r$tflRM;'". ttstarrtlai Repatlttive ,;RepetttNe
Iry urainre Total Raid tlairnE parBag : Luta Lass rr�tatlpaiktr ! a,0,,, tact
Juri,dleilo1,i,a,,:j,i', fit+,� ,Claims " Paid. Clalirhr Buildings Buildings ,Amount, �irig"" CAV,,,,,,.
'DeschutesCounty $76,039,700 8 5 0 0 0 $63,794 ) )
County* $46,890,300 3 1 0 0 0 513,400 NP 7/22/94
Bend $17,290,600 5 4 0 0 0 550,393 NP 7/2.0/94
La Pine 5280,000 0 0 0 0 0 $0 NP NA
Redmond 50 0 0 0 0 0 $o NP NA
Sitters 511,578,800 0 0 0 0 0 $0 NP 4/26/04
*Portion of entire county under county jurisdiction
NP)Not Participating NA)Information not Available/Not Applicable
Source:Information compiled by Department of Land Conservation and Development,November 2014.
Probability Assessment
USGS scientists and US Army Corps of Engineers studies indicate the county is at a low level of
risk for catastrophic flooding. USGS studies of Carver Lake estimate the probability of a lake flash
flood to be approximately 1---5% annually.32 Potentially, the Little Deschutes and Whychus Creek
are most vulnerable; however greater risks are related to future volcanic eruptions (see Volcano
annex).
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has mapped the 10, 50, 100, and 500---year
floodplains in the Region 6 counties. This corresponds to a 10%, 2%, 1% and 0.2% chance of a
certain magnitude flood in any given year. In addition, FEMA has mapped the 100---year
floodplain (i.e., 1%flood) in the incorporated cities. The 100---year flood is the benchmark upon
which the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is based.
As such, Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the
County's probability of experiencing a flood is "high", meaning one incident is likely within the
next 10 — 35 year period. Based upon available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk
Assessment supports this probability rating for Deschutes County.33
Vulnerability Assessment
Growth rates described in the Community Profile section of this Plan project a continued growth
pattern that will place additional development, business and human life at risk.
32
Hydrologic Hazards Along Whychus Creek From a Hypothetical Failure of the Glacial Moraine Impacting Carver Lake
NearSisters,Oregon—USGSOpen File Report 87---41
332015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
Page 95 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"low" vulnerability to the flood hazard, meaning less than 1% of the region's population or
assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster. Based upon available information
the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes
County.34
Sisters is particularly vulnerable to economic loss in the event of road closures. According to
USGS Open File Report 87---41, locally high velocities, damming, erosion and sediment deposit
could cause considerable property damage and possible loss of life. The stream would be
especially dangerous at road crossings where bridges may fail or sections could wash away.
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I, Section 2) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores
each hazard and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict
the occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the flood hazard is rated #7, out of 9
rated hazards, with a total score of 191.
Community Hazard Issues
The extent of the damage and risk to people caused by flood events is primarily dependent on
the depth and velocity of floodwaters. Fast moving floodwaters can wash buildings off their
foundations and sweep vehicles downstream. Roads, bridges, other infrastructure and lifelines
(pipelines, utility, water, sewer, communications systems, etc.) can be seriously damaged when
high water combines with flood debris, mud and ice. Extensive flood damage to residences and
other structures also results from basement flooding and landslide damage related to soil
saturation. Surface water entering into crawlspaces, basements and daylight basements is
common during flood events not only in or near flooded areas but also on hillsides and other
areas far removed from floodplains. Most damage is caused by water saturating materials
susceptible to loss (e.g., wood, insulation, wallboard, fabric, furnishings, floor coverings and
appliances.)
If not properly protected from the entry of flood waters, mechanical, electrical and similar
equipment can also be damaged or destroyed by flooding.
Older, pre---FIRM manufactured homes are particularly susceptible to flood damage, as many
have a lower level of structural stability than "stick---built" (standard wood frame construction)
homes. Current regulations require manufactured homes in floodplain zones to be both
elevated and anchored to provide structural stability during flood events comparable to site
built homes.
34 Ibid.
Page 96 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Flood events impact businesses by damaging property and interrupting commerce. Flood events
can cut off customer access and close businesses for repairs. A quick response to the needs of
businesses affected by flood events can help a community maintain economic viability in the
face of flood damage.
Bridges are a major concern during flood events as they provide critical links in road networks by
crossing water courses and other significant natural features. However bridges and their
supporting structures can also be obstructions in flood---swollen watercourses and can be
damaged by debris jams and erosion scour,
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
County and Cities
Current initiatives to mitigate the effects of potential flooding in Deschutes County are many.
These actions are varied from projects initiated by homeowners and neighborhood associations
to county policies and procedures aligned with the National Flood Insurance Program.
Home and business owners and neighborhood associations in and around the County's
floodplains continue to address mitigation activities for flooding. Riparian zones have been
established to reduce erosion, review of building plans/codes and emergency strategies to
mitigate damage from floods are being developed.
Regardless of future investigative studies, some early warning, zoning, and planning studies are
needed to prevent loss of life and property damage in areas downstream of Carver Lake. In
Sisters, the potential breakout of Carver Lake represents several times the magnitude flood for
which county and city governments presently plan. The flood could occur with little or no
warning.
The city of Sisters is currently engaged in discussions about potential flooding from the Carver
Lake scenario described above and other flooding potential. The current belief by city planners
is that a rain---on---snow event is more likely to occur than a breach at Carver Lake.Therefore,the
City of Sisters will continue to pursue mitigation policies that address local flooding of Whychus
Creek.
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and Development Code
Deschutes County has enacted a Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is implementing land use
regulations in compliance with ORS 197 and the Statewide Planning Goals. The County has
enacted and enforces a flood hazard ordinance, which is applied to all areas mapped as subject
to inundation by the base flood. The regulations are designed to reduce the risk of flood damage
to new and substantially improved structures within known flood hazard areas.
Page 97 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLU'T'ION 2015-087
Note: The University of Oregon's Community Planning Workshop (CPW) is working with the
Deschutes County Community Development Department (CDD) to review sections of the
Deschutes County Development Code consistent with direction provided in Comprehensive Plan
Section 3.5 (Rural Growth/Natural Hazards). The review will focus on improving development
regulations that address wildfire, flood, and other natural hazards.
Deschutes County Public Works
Deschutes County annually visually inspects and cleans culverts on county roads. Culverts
needing replaced are identified and targeted for replacement. Culverts during past flooding
events that could not handle the flow are looked at for replacement with a larger culvert.
Bridges are likewise routinely inspected and during flood events crews keep a visual check on
bridges for debris buildup. After a major flood, crews are dispatched to recheck bridges for flood
damage.
Federal
National Flood Insurance Program
Deschutes County participates in the National Flood Insurance Program, which enables property
and business owners to qualify for federally underwritten flood insurance. Flood insurance
policies in effect in the County and the coverage provided by these policies are depicted above.
The County's flood ordinance, discussed above, comprises the county's NFIP qualifying flood
plain regulation. These standards require all new development to be elevated above the
projected level of the base flood, along with a number of other building design and construction
standards intended to reduce the risk of flood damage. Strict enforcement of these regulations is
required to maintain eligibility for participation in the NFIP; the Community Development
Department is charged with this responsibility.
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are seven identified Flood action items for Deschutes County; in addition, several of the
Multi---Hazard action items affect the Flood hazard.An action item matrix is provided within
Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A. To
view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
Page 98 of 469- EXHIBIT f I3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
LANDSLIDE
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
The Landslide hazard was not assessed in the 2010 Plan, therefore, this
section provides new content to the Deschutes County NHMP.
Causes and Characteristics of the Hazard
Landslides are a major geologic threat in almost every state in the United States. In Oregon, a
significant number of locations are at risk from dangerous landslides and debris flows. While not
all landslides result in property damage, many landslides do pose serious risk to people and
property. Increasing population in Oregon and the resultant growth in home ownership has
caused the siting of more development in or near landslide areas. Often these areas are highly
desirable to prospective homeowners owing to their location along the coast, rivers and on
hillsides.
Landslides are fairly common, naturally occurring events in various parts of Oregon. In simplest
terms, a landslide is any detached mass of soil, rock, or debris that falls, slides or flows down a
slope or a stream channel. Landslides are classified according to the type and rate of movement
and the type of materials that are transported.
In a landslide, two forces are at work: 1) the driving forces that cause the material to move
down slope, and 2) the friction forces and strength of materials that act to retard the movement
and stabilize the slope. When the driving forces exceed the resisting forces, a landslide occurs.
Landslides can be grouped as"on---site"and"off---site"hazards.An"on---site"slide is one that
occurs on or near a development site and is usually relatively slow moving. Slow moving slides
cause the most property damage in developed areas. On---site landslide hazards include features
called slumps, earthflows and block slides. "Off---site" slides typically are rapidly moving and
begin on steep slopes at a distance from homes and development. A 1996 "off---site" slide in
southern Oregon began a long distance away from homes and roads, traveled at a high velocity
and resulted in five fatalities and a number of injuries, in addition to substantial property
damage.
Landslides are classified based on causal factors and conditions and exist in three basic
categories.
Falls
This type of landslide involves the movement of rock and soil which detaches from a steep slope
or cliff and falls through the air and/or bounces or rolls down the slope. This type of slide is
termed a rock fall and is very common along Oregon highways where they have been cut
through bedrock in steep canyons and along the coast.
Page 99 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Slides
This type of landslide exists where the slide material moves in contact with the underlying
surface. Here the slide moves along a plane and either slumps by moving along a curved surface
(called a rotational slide) or along a flat surface (called a translational slide). While slow---moving
slides can occur on relatively gentle slopes and are less likely to cause serious injuries or
fatalities, they can result in significant property damages.
Flows
Flow landslides are characterized as plastic or liquid in nature where the slide material breaks up
and flows during movement. A flow occurs when a landslide moves down slope as a semi---fluid
mass scouring or partially scouring rock and soils from the slope along its path. A flow landslide
is typically rapidly moving and tends to increase in volume as it moves down slope and scours
out its channel.
Rapidly moving flow landslides are often referred to a debris flows. Other terms given to debris
flows are mudslides, mudflows, or debris avalanches. Debris flows frequently take place during
or following an intense rainfall event on previously saturated soil. Debris flows usually start on
steep hillsides as slumps or slides that liquefy, accelerate to speeds as high as 35 miles per hour
or more, and travel down slopes and channels onto gentle sloping or flat ground. Most slopes
steeper than 70 percent are risk from debris flows.
The consistency of a debris flow ranges from watery mud to thick, rocky, mud---like, wet cement
which is dense enough to carry boulders, trees and cars. Separate debris flows from different
starting points sometimes combine in canyons and channels where their destructive energy is
greatly increased. Debris flows are difficult for people to outrun or escape from and present the
greatest risk to human life. Debris flows have caused most of their damage in rural areas and
were responsible for most of landslide---related deaths and injuries during the 1996 storm in
Oregon.
Conditions Affecting Landslides
Natural conditions and human activities can both play a role in causing landslides. Certain
geologic formations are more susceptible to landslides than others. Locations with steep slopes
are at the greatest risk of slides. However, the incidence of landslides and their impact on
people and property can be accelerated by development. Developers who are uninformed
about geologic conditions and processes may create conditions that can increase the risk of or
even trigger landslides.
There are four principal factors that affect or increase the likelihood of landslides:
1. Natural conditions and processes including the geology of the site, rainfall,
wave and water action and seismic tremors, including earthquakes and
volcanic activity.
2. Excavation and grading on sloping ground for homes, roads and other
structures.
3. Drainage and groundwater alterations that are natural or human---caused can
trigger landslides. Human activities that may cause slides include broken or
Page 100 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
leaking water or sewer lines, water retention facilities, irrigation and stream
alterations, ineffective storm water management and excess runoff due to
increased impervious surfaces.
4. Change or removal of vegetation on very steep slopes due to timber
harvesting, land clearing and wildfire.
History of Landslides in Deschutes County
Although most landslides occur in the undeveloped forested areas of the county, landslides may
also occur in more developed areas. The fatalities and losses resulting from the 1996 statewide
landslide events brought about the passage of Oregon Senate Bill 12, which set site
development standards, authorized the mapping of areas subject to rapidly moving landslides
and the development of model landslide (steep slope) ordinances.
There is no history of major landslides in Deschutes County within developed areas. At times
small debris falls have occurred, however, these have typically not caused major disruptions of
normal activity (see figure below). In undeveloped areas the risk of landslides and avalanches is
highest within the forested areas and in the Three Sisters Wilderness. There have been recorded
landslides that affected the Carver Lake moraine dam and other rural areas; however, this
activity has not led to major disruptions of normal activity.
DOGAMI maps the State Landslide Information Layer for Oregon (SLIDO); Figure II---9 relies on the
2012 SLIDO data and shows Deschutes County landslides that have been identified on published
maps. The database contains only landslides that have been located on these maps. Many
landslides have not yet been located or are not on these maps and therefore are not in this
database. This database does not contain information about relative hazards35 The map show
that the history of landslide events is sparse, and where they do occur they are in non---
populated areas.
35DOGAMI.Statewide Landslide Information Database for Oregon(SLIDO---2).
http://www.oregongeology.org/sub/slido/index.htm
Page 101 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-9 Mapped Landslides and Landslide Susceptibility
•
kir
•
er
Source:DOGAMI Lidar Data Viewer,accessed March 24,2015
Hazard Identification
Geologic and geographic factors are important in identifying landslide---prone areas. Stream
channels, for example, have major influences on landslides, due to undercutting of slopes by
stream erosion and long---term hillside processes.
The Oregon Department of Forestry (ODE) Storm Impacts Study conducted after the 1996---97
landslide events found that the highest probability for the initiation of shallow, rapidly moving
landslides was on slopes of 70 to 80 percent steepness. A moderate hazard of shallow rapid
landslide initiation can exist on slopes between 50 and 70 percent.36
In general, areas at risk to landslides have steep slopes (25 percent or greater,) or a history of
nearby landslides. In otherwise gently sloped areas, landslides can occur along steep river and
creek banks. At natural slopes under 30 percent, most landslide hazards are related to
excavation and drainage practices, or the reactivation of preexisting landslide hazards.37
The severity or extent of landslides is typically a function of geology and the landslide triggering
mechanism. Rainfall initiated landslides tend to be smaller, and earthquake induced landslides
may be very large. Even small slides can cause property damage, result in injuries, or take lives-
Geo---engineers with the Oregon Department of Forestry estimate widespread landslide activity
about every 20 years.
36 Storm Impacts and Landslides of 1996 Final Report.(1999)Oregon Department of Forestry.
;'Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Landslide Chapter.The Interagency Hazards Mitigation 1 earn,(2012)
Oregon Military Department---Office of Emergency Management.
Page 102 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) requires local governments to
address geologically unstable areas as part of their comprehensive plans through Statewide
Land Use Planning Goal 7 (Areas Subject to Natural Hazards). In Deschutes County, little
planning has been done concerning landslide hazards due to the lack of risk. Goal 7 envisions a
process whereby new hazard inventory information generated by federal and state agencies is
first reviewed by DLCD. DLCD then notifies the County of the new information, and the County
has three years to respond to the information by evaluating the risk, obtaining citizen input, and
adopting or amending implementation measures to address the risk. Deschutes County has not
received notice of new inventory information concerning landslides.
Probability Assessment
The probability of rapidly moving landslides occurring depends on a number of factors; these
include steepness of slope, slope materials, local geology, vegetative cover, human activity, and
water. There is a strong correlation between intensive winter rainstorms and the occurrence of
rapidly moving landslides (debris flows); consequently, the Oregon Department of Forestry
tracks storms during the rainy season, monitors rain gages and snow melt, and issues warnings
as conditions warrant. Given the correlation between precipitation / snow melt and rapidly
moving landslides, it would be feasible to construct a probability curve. Many slower moving
slides present in developed areas have been identified and mapped; however the probability
and timing of their movement is difficult to quantify. The installation of slope indicators or the
use of more advanced measuring techniques could provide information on these slower moving
slides.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a landslide is "low," meaning one incident is likely within the next
75 — 100 year period. Based upon available information the Oregon NHMP5 Regional Risk
Assessment supports this probability rating for Deschutes County.38
Vulnerability Assessment
To a large degree, landslides are very difficult to predict. Both location and extent of landslide
hazard are affected by a variety of variables. Many people are unaware of their exposure to
landslide risk. Therefore there are a large number of structures, infrastructure, and other
community assets within Deschutes County potentially vulnerable to landslides. New private
development is subject to regulations which are intended to reduce risk from known landslide
hazards. However, there is substantial private development in the county, which pre---dates land
use or building code regulations and is therefore subject to increased risk.
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"low" vulnerability to landslide hazards; meaning less than 1% of the region's population or
assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster. Based upon available information
the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes
County_39
38 2015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
39Ibid.
Page 103 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores each hazard
and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the
occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the landslide hazard is rated #9, out of 9
rated hazards, with a total score of 54.
Community Hazard Issues
Depending upon the type, location, severity and area affected, severe property damage, injuries
and loss of life can be caused by landslide hazards. Landslides can damage or temporarily disrupt
utility services, roads and other transportation systems and critical lifeline services such as
police, fire, medical, utility and communication systems, and emergency response. In additional
to the immediate damage and loss of services, serious disruption of roads, infrastructure and
critical facilities and services may also have longer term impacts on the economy of the
community and surrounding area.
Increasing the risk to people and property from the effects of landslides are the following five
factors:
1. Improper excavation practices, sometimes aggravated by drainage issues, can reduce
the stability of otherwise stable slopes.
2. Allowing development on or adjacent to existing landslides or known landslide---prone
areas raises the risk of future slides regardless of excavation and drainage practices.
Homeowners and developers should understand that in many potential landslide
settings that there are no development practices that can completely assure slope
stability from future slide events.
3. Building on fairly gentle slopes can still be subject to landslides that begin a long
distance away from the development. Sites at greatest risk are those situated against
the base of very steep slopes, in confined stream channels (small canyons), and on fans
(rises) at the mouth of these confined channels. Home siting practices do not cause
these landslides, but rather put residents and property at risk of landslide impacts. In
these cases, the simplest way to avoid such potential effects is to locate development
out of the impact area, or construct debris flow diversions for the structures that are at
risk.
4. Certain forest practices can contribute to increased risk of landslides. Forest practices
may alter the physical landscape and its vegetation, which can affect the stability of
steep slopes. Physical alterations can include slope steepening, slope---water effects, and
changes in soil strength. Of all forest management activities, roads have the greatest
effects on slope stability, although changing road construction and maintenance
practices are reducing the effects of forest roads on landslides.
5. Deschutes County is susceptible to extreme winter storms and rainfall. High rainfall
accumulation in a short period of time increases the probability of landslide.
Page 104 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
State
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF)
The Oregon Department of Forestry has provided a preliminary indication of debris flows
(rapidly moving landslides) in Western Oregon. Their debris flow maps include locations subject
to naturally occurring debris flows and include the initiation sites and locations along the paths
of potential debris flows (confined stream channels and locations below steep slopes). These
maps neither consider the effects of management---related slope alterations (drainage and
excavation) that can increase the hazard, nor do they consider very large landslides that could
possibly be triggered by volcanic or earthquake activity. Areas identified in these maps are not
to be considered "further review areas" as defined by Senate Bill 12 (1999).4° Information used
to develop the ODF Debris Flow maps include:
• Digital elevation models at 30---meter resolution, based on U.S. Geological Survey data,
were used to derive slope steepness and then to develop polygons for assigned hazards.
Note that actual slopes are steeper than these digitally elevated models.
• Mapped locations of Tyee soil formation and similar sedimentary geologic units.
• Oregon Department of Forestry Storm Impacts and Landslides of 1996 study; debris flow
initiation and path location data.
• Stream channel confinement near steep hill slopes based on U.S. Geological Survey
Digital Raster Graphics.
• Historical information on debris flow occurrence in western Oregon (from Oregon Dept.
of Forestry, U.S. Forest Service, DOGAMI, Bureau of Land Management, and the Oregon
Department of Transportation).
• Fan---shaped land formations below long, steep slopes.
• Areas of highest intensity precipitation do not appear to be correlated with known areas
of high and extreme debris flow hazard, so precipitation intensity was not used to
develop risk (hazard) ratings.41
Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI)
The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) conducted field
investigations and consolidated data on Oregon landslides associated with three flood events in
1996 and 1997. They collected evidence of over 9,000 landslide and slope failure locations in the
▪ Western Oregon Debris Flow Hazard Maps:Methodology and Guidance for Map Use.(1999).
• Ibid.
Page 105 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
state. The generation of a statewide landslide inventory is intended to provide a means for
developing and verifying hazard models as well as to facilitate various local efforts aimed at
minimizing risk and damage in future storm events. The database includes a digital Geographic
Information System file with landslide locations, a digital database with details on each
landslide, and an accompanying report.42
In addition to the slope failures report, DOGAMI is identifying and mapping further review areas.
The further review areas identify where landslides have occurred and where landslides are likely
to occur.43
Debris Flow Warning System
The debris flow warning system was initiated in 1997 and involves collaboration between the
Department of Forestry, DOGAMI, the Department of Transportation, local law enforcement,
and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Weather Radio and other media.
Since 2008, ODF meteorologists have not issued Debris Flow Warning for Oregon since they do
not have sufficient resources. However, information is provided by the National Weather
Service (NWS) and broadcast via the NOAA Weather Radio, and on the Law Enforcement Data
System. The information provided does not include the Debris Flow Warning system as originally
designed since the NWS does not have the geologic and geomorphology expertise. Instead they
provide the following language in their flood watches that highlights the potential for landslides
and debris flows':
A flood watch means there is a potential for flooding based on current forecasts. Landslides and
debris flows are possible during this flood event. People, structures and roads located below
steep slopes, in canyons and near the mouths of canyons may be at serious risk from rapidly
moving landslides.
DOGAMI provides additional information on debris flows through the media. The Department of
Transportation provides warning signs to motorists in landslide prone areas during high---risk
periods.45
Landslide Brochure
The Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) developed a landslide public
outreach brochure in cooperation with several other state agencies. Forty thousand copies were
printed in November 1997 and were distributed widely through building code officials, county
planners, local emergency managers, natural resource agency field offices, banks, real estate
companies, insurance companies, and other outlets. Landslide brochures are available from
42 Database of Slope Failures in Oregon for Three 1996/1997 Storm Events.Hofmeister,R.J.(2000).Oregon
Department of Geology and Mineral Industries—Special Paper 34.
43 Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team.2012.Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.Salem,OR:Oregon Military
Department—Office of Emergency Management
4n NOAA,NWS.Letter dated December 20,2010 from Stephen K.Todd,Meteorologist---in---Charge.
45 Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team.2012.Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.Salem,OR:Oregon Military
Department—Office of Emergency Management
Page 106 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
DOGAMI, the Office of Emergency Management (OEM), Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF),
and the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD).4s
Oregon State Building Code Standards
The Oregon Building Codes Division adopts statewide standards for building construction that
are administered by the state and local municipalities throughout Oregon.The One--- and Two---
Family Dwelling Code and the Structural Specialty Code contain provisions for lot grading and
site preparation for the construction of building foundations.
Both codes contain requirements for cut, fill and sloping of the lot in relationship to the location
of the foundation. There are also building setback requirements from the top and bottom of
slopes. The codes specify foundation design requirements to accommodate the type of soils, the
soil bearing pressure, and the compaction and lateral loads from soil and ground water on
sloped lots. The building official has the authority to require a soils analysis for any project
where it appears the site conditions do not meet the requirements of the code, or that special
design considerations must be taken. ORS 455.447 and the Structural Code require a seismic site
hazard report for projects that include essential facilities such as hospitals, fire and police
stations and emergency response facilities, and special occupancy structures, such as large
schools and prisons. This report includes consideration of any potentially unstable soils and
landslides.47
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are no identified Landslide action items for Deschutes County; however, several of the
Multi---Hazard action items affect the Landslide hazard. An action item matrix is provided within
Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A. To
view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
"'Ibid.
47 Planning for Natural Hazards:Oregon Technical Resource Guide.Community Planning Workshop.(July 2000).
Chapter 5.
Page 107 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
VOLCANO
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
New information on the hazard and hazard identification was added to this
section. As such, some sections utilize modified text from the Central
Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan, particularly Appendix B: Volcanic
Hazards in the Central Cascades. In addition, the format of the section and
minor content changes has occurred.
Causes and Characteristics of Volcanic Eruption
Deschutes County, and the Pacific Northwest, lie within the "ring of fire," an area of very active
volcanic activity surrounding the Pacific Basin. Volcanic eruptions occur regularly along the ring
of fire, in part because of the movement of the Earth's tectonic plates. The Earth's outermost
shell, the lithosphere, is broken into a series of slabs known as tectonic plates. These plates are
rigid, but they float on a hotter, softer layer in the Earth's mantle. As the plates move about on
the layer beneath them, they spread apart, collide, or slide past each other. Volcanoes occur
most frequently at the boundaries of these plates and volcanic eruptions occur when molten
material, or magma, rises to the surface.
The primary threat to lives and property from active volcanoes is from violent eruptions that
unleash tremendous blast forces, generate mud and debris flows, or produce flying debris and
ash clouds. The immediate danger area in a volcanic eruption generally lies within a 20---mile
radius of the blast site. The following section outlines the specific hazards posed by volcanoes.
Volcanoes are commonly, but not always, conical hills or mountains built around a vent that
connects with reservoirs of molten rock below the surface of the earth.48 Volcanoes are built up
by an accumulation of their own eruptive products: lava or ash flows and airborne ash and
rocks. When pressure from gases or molten rock becomes strong enough to cause an upsurge,
eruptions occur. Gases and rocks are pushed through the vent and spill over, or fill the air with
lava fragments. Figure II---10 diagrams the basic features of a volcano.
ad Tilling,Robert I.,Volcanoes,USG5 General Interest Publication,(1985).
Page 108 of 469- LXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-10 Volcanic Hazard from a Composite Type Volcano
a r �
Eruption Cloud ` Prevailing Wind
$ Ash (Tephra) Fall ,',A4 .ql ' Eruption Column
)
( p
Landslide
Acid Rain
(Debris Avalanche)
Bombs
" �;t Pyroclastic Flow
Lava Dome Collapse Lava Dome• p'
Pyroclastic Flow a� u
Lahar(Mud or Debris Flow) rgp � -fi Fumaroles
Lava Flow
Magma
•
Source: Walder et al, "Volcano Hazards in the Mount Jefferson Region," 1999; W.E. Scott, R.M. Iverson, S.P. Schilling,
and B.J. Fischer,Volcano Hazards in the Three Sisters Region,Oregon:U.S.Geological Survey Open---File Report 99---
437, 14p., 200.,
Related Hazards
Ash / Tephra
Tephra is fragmented volcanic rock of any size ejected from a volcano. It consists of volcanic ash
(sand---sized or finer particles) and larger fragments. During explosive eruptions, tephra together
with a mixture of hot volcanic gas are ejected rapidly into the air from volcanic vents. Larger
fragments fall down near the volcanic vent while finer particles drift downwind as a large cloud.
When ash particles fall to the ground, they can form a blanket---like deposit,with finer grains
carried further away from the volcano. In general, the thickness of tephra deposits decreases in
the downwind direction. Tephra hazards include impact of falling fragments, respiratory
problems, damage to crops and other vegetation, contamination of drinking water, roof
Page 109 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
collapse, burial of transportation routes, and mechanical or electrical failure of car and jet
engines.
During an eruption that emits tephra, deposition is controlled by the prevailing wind direction. 49
The predominant wind pattern over the Cascades is from the west, and previous eruptions seen
in the geologic record have resulted in most ash fall drifting to the east of the volcanoes.50
Lava flows
Lava flows are streams of molten rock that erupt relatively non---explosively from a volcano and
move downslope, causing extensive damage or total destruction by burning, crushing, or
burying everything in their path. Secondary effects can include forest fires, flooding, and
permanent reconfiguration of stream channels. 51
Pyroclastic flows and surges
Pyroclastic flows are avalanches of ash, rocks, and gas at temperatures of 600 to 1500 degrees
Fahrenheit. They typically sweep down the flanks of volcanoes at speeds of up to 150 miles per
hour. Pyroclastic surges are a more dilute mixture of gas and ash. They can move even more
rapidly than a pyroclastic flow and are more mobile. Both generally follow valleys, but surges
sometimes have enough momentum to overtop hills or ridges in their paths. Because of their
high speed, pyroclastic flows and surges are difficult or impossible to escape. If it is expected
that they will occur, evacuation orders should be issued as soon as possible for the hazardous
areas. Objects and structures in the path of a pyroclastic flow are generally destroyed or swept
away by the impact of debris or by accompanying hurricane---force winds. Wood and other
combustible materials are commonly burned. People and animals may also be burned or killed
by inhaling hot ash and gases. The deposit that results from pyroclastic flows is a combination of
rock and ash and is termed ignimbrite or welded tuff. These deposits may accumulate to
hundreds of feet thick and can harden to resistant rock.52
Lahars and debris flows
Lahar is an Indonesian term that describes a hot or cold mixture of water and rock fragments
flowing down the slopes of a volcano or river valley.53 Lahars typically begin when floods related
to volcanism are produced by melting snow and ice during eruptions of ice---clad volcanoes like
South Sister, Mt. Hood, Mt. Rainier, or Mount Shasta. Heavy rains can also generate lahars or
melting snow on steep, unconsolidated slopes of volcanoes, even if no eruption occurs. Floods
and debris flows can be generated by the displacement of water from volcanic lakes, which can
overtop dams or move down outlet streams.
49oregon State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan.2012."Volcanic Hazards Chapter,"
http://csc.uoregon.edu/opdr/sites/csc.uoregon.edu.opdr/files/dots/ORN HM P/OR---SNHM P_volcano_chapter.pdf
'c Ibid.
51
Oregon State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan.2012."Volcanic Hazards Chapter,"
http://csc.uoregon.edu/opdr/sites/csc.uoregon.edu.opdr/files/dots/ORNHM P/OR---SNHMP_volcano_chapter.pdf
52 Ibid.
531)5 05 website:http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/Lahars/lahars.html
Page 110 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Lahars and debris flows react much like flash flood events in that a rapidly moving mass moves
downstream, picking up more sediment and debris as it scours out a channel. This initial flow
can also incorporate water from rivers, melting snow, and ice. By eroding rock debris and
incorporating additional water, lahars and debris flows can easily grow to more than ten times
their initial size, but as they move farther away from the volcano they eventually begin to lose
sediment load and decrease in size.5'
Lahars and debris flows often cause serious economic and environmental damage. The direct
impact of the turbulent flow front, along with impacts from boulders, logs, and other debris
incorporated in the flow, can easily crush, abrade, or shear off at ground level just about
anything in the flow path. Even if not crushed or carried away by the force of the flow, buildings
and valuable land may become partially or completely buried by one or more cement---like layers
of rock debris. By destroying bridges and roads, lahars and debris flows can also trap people in
areas vulnerable to other volcanic hazards, especially if the debris deposits are too deep, too
soft, or too hot to cross.55
Volcanic Landslides (debris avalanches)y6
Landslides and debris avalanches are a rapid downhill movement of rocky material, snow, and
(or) ice. Volcanic landslides range in size from small movements of loose debris on the surface of
a volcano to massive collapses of the entire summit or sides of a volcano. Steep volcanoes are
susceptible to landslides because they are built up partly of layers of loose volcanic rock
fragments. Landslides on volcano slopes are triggered not only by eruptions, but also by heavy
rainfall or large earthquakes that can cause materials to break free and move downhill.
Earthquakes
Earthquakes are another potentially hazardous event associated with volcanic eruptions.
Volcanic earthquakes are commonly smaller than magnitude 2.5, roughly the threshold for felt
shaking by observers close to the event. Swarms of small earthquakes may persist for weeks to
months before eruptions, but little or no damage would occur to buildings in surrounding
communities. Some volcanic related swarms may include earthquakes as large as about
magnitude 5. For the communities of Bend, La Pine, and Sunriver, shallow earthquakes in the
magnitude 4---5 range that are located beneath Newberry Volcano would cause walls to rattle or
windows and dishes to vibrate.
History of Volcanic Events in Deschutes County
No eruptions have occurred in Deschutes County during the past 1,000 years, however the
millennium before experienced numerous eruptions, including several at Three Sisters, and one
eruption at Newberry Volcano. The most devastating effects of these events were restricted to
what is now Wilderness or largely undeveloped areas, but ashfall from these eruptions probably
54 Ibid.
55 Ibid.
56 Wright and Pierson,Living With Volcanoes,USGS Volcano Hazards Program Circular 1973,(1992).
Page I 1 I of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
deposited less than one---quarter inch to one---half inch of gritty ash in areas that are now densely
populated.
Although there have been no recent volcanic events in the Deschutes County area, it is important
to note the area is active and susceptible to eruptive events since the region is a part
of the active Cascade Volcanic Range. The figure below displays volcanoes of the western United
States.
Figure II-I I Potentially Active Volcanoes of the Western United States
6eRingham A Mount Baker
Seattle • Glacier Peak
Spokane
Great Palls
• Mount Rainier
Mount St.Helens A, Mount Adams
Portland
A Mount Flood Billings
Three Sisters A Mount Jefferson
A Bend
Eugene A Yellowstone
• Dewberry Crater
A Crater I ake
Boise a Craters of the Moon
Casper
Mount Shasta A A Medicine Lake Pocatello
Cheyenne
Lassen Peak•
Reno
Clear Lake❑ Salt Lake City Denver
Sacramento
san Francisco
•Long Valley Caldera
Coso A Las Vegas
•anta Fe
Volcano active during
A San Francisco Field
A past 2,000 years Los Angeles Albuquerque
Other poleltially active A Randera Field
A volcanic aleao San Diego Phoenix
0 100 200 kilometers
I t i—t Tucson
p 100 miles
USGS
Toriara u56,5/CVO.7999 Mwlfie0!teen;Brantley.1994 Volcanoes of tree United States:UJSCS Genre fntereal Pudffedtion
Source:USGS.http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/maps.cfm#usa
Volcanoes in Central Oregon have been erupting for hundreds of thousands of years. Newberry
Volcano, for example, has had many eruptions in the last 15,000 years as shown in the table
below. The Three Sisters region has also had eruptions during this time, and the last major
eruptive activity at Mt. Mazama occurred approximately 7,700 years ago, forming Crater Lake.
Some of the most recent events include tephra and lava from the Big Obsidian Flow eruption at
Newberry Volcano, multiple eruptions of tephra and lava from South Sister, and multiple cinder
cone eruptions and lava flows in the McKenzie Pass area. All of the Cascade volcanoes are
characterized by long periods of quiescence and intermittent activity. These characteristics
Page 112 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
•
make predictions, recurrence intervals, and probability of future eruptions very difficult to
ascertain.
Much larger eruptions than those of the past few thousand years have occurred in the region in
recent geologic time, but, although their hazards are potentially much more widespread and
severe, they occur much less frequently than smaller eruptions. Such potential hazards include
extensive lava flows from Newberry Volcano that pose a threat to Bend and Redmond, large---
scale explosive eruptions of Newberry or the Three Sisters that deposit one foot or more of
pumice and ash in developed areas; or eruptions in the Three Sisters region that swiftly melt
significant quantities of snow and ice to generate lahars that affect areas such as Whychus Creek
and the City of Sisters.
Figure 11-12 Eruptive and major debris-flow and flood events in the central Cascades
of Oregon during the past 14,000 years.
Mafic volcanoes north and
Mount Jefferson area Three Sisters south of Three Sisters Newberry Volcano
0 —Floods and debris Mows from Flood::trod debris tlows Vorn
rnurarne-derrrtied lakes morarno dammod lakr:
Lava flows s C no and tephra T,spfoo pyrex:la:11k:flow and Big
horn Belknap Crate sod
numerous vents Obsidian Flow in naldera
2,000— Tephra falls.pyronlastin Anwn lava in MnKonrio and santiam Rnnn ar0a
dnmon and lava flown from South`,inter
flank vents Lava floss rorria ur.irrr, Large flood alorlp Pauline Creak
tinny hanry Mnontain vnnr.,and I.nn t.rslor. Tophra folio and Font I aka nbnidian flow,
4.000— Older lava Mown.n,olio cone,and in naldcna
toot ra fall::in sand Mountain area
I arm flows a.nri coons,and Inphra falls
° 6,000— in Daws Lake area I aoa flows.soonia Conn and lcphra folio
WLave flows,scoria cores and tephra falls from 00010 on north and sum Aankn
!roll Forked Butte and other Heathy fronts Central I'untrce cone,tephra lalls.and
l
Maram%,e'phro lull
several obsidian Mown in caldera
›-
8,000— 1loaf lava Rom:a and lephr
h
lull all,Modal wonfo,nr volr:anir chair, I an:,f/nw.v::,r r ,rid lopram!Min
from vnnt,on 00rth';orrth,and n:,.cl flanks
10,000—
Lave flows,5ccr'la cons,and tephra tolls
v:,flow,:r.ria ono:,antl lonhra
burn Sure:!]ulrtr and Cayman and I n fans from East RH,I saran vents
rnrrin rrarra.�
12,000—
Lava flow::,acuria cones,and teFrhra!6115
ava lbws and tephra falls from Middle I ava flow.•;':c r,, r,,)to„hra lal)s from vans on north,anulll,and east flash,:
&ate, <1
rs,ry tats;ragas or rdnunr Elarheror
14,000— voloara,;ulrarrr
Source:Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan.The events printed in italics are poorly dated,so their ages are
less well known than those in normal font.The Mazama tephra fall was produced by the cataclysmic eruption of
Mount Mazama that created Crater Lake 7,700 years ago.
Active volcanic areas in the Cascades that have the most potential to impact Deschutes County
and the broader region include Mt. Saint Helens, Mt. Hood, Newbery Volcano, Mt. Bachelor, the
Three Sisters and Broken Top, and Mt. Mazama/ Crater Lake.
Page 113 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-6 Regional Volcanic History
Va1cairr9 Comment
Mount St. Helens, located in southwestern Washington. It is fifty
thousand years old.Over the past 521 years it has produced four major
explosive eruptions and dozens of smaller eruptions.On May 18th, 1980,
Mount St. Helens exploded violently after two months of intense
Mount Saint earthquake activity and intermittent,relatively weak eruptions,causing
Helens the worst volcanic disaster in the recorded history of the United States.
Mount St. Helens continued to be active,on March 8,2005,a plume of
ash and steam spewed nearly seven miles high into the air.Ten small
earthquakes were measured in the area leading up to the eruption.The
largest appeared to be a magnitude 2.5,according to the USGS.
The Three Sisters are located just west of Bend.South Sister had a very
small ongoing uplift,which began in 1996 and became undetectable by
Three Sisters& 2003.This uplift was about one inch a year and likely indicated
Broken Top movement of a small amount of magma.There is no immediate danger
of a volcanic eruption or other hazardous activity.The potential exists,
however,that further activity could increase danger.
Newberry Volcano is located east of the Cascade Range and about 20
miles south east of Bend. It is about 600,000 years old and has had
thousands of eruptions both from the central vent area and along its
Newberry flanks.The most recent eruption was 1,300 years ago. Future eruptions
Volcano are likely to include lava flows, pyroclastic flows, lahars,and ashfall. Most
effects from these activities would be felt within,or up to a few miles
beyond,the existing caldera.Ash could fall a few dozen miles from the
eruptive center.
Crater Lake is located in the southYcentral region of Oregon.About 7,700
years ago,the ancient Mount Mazama erupted with great violence,
Mount leaving the caldera that Crater Lake now occupies.The most recent
Mazama/ volcanic eruption was about 5,000 years ago and occurred within the
Crater Lake caldera. No eruptions have occurred outside the caldera since 10,000
years ago.The probability of another calderaYforming eruption is very
low,as is the probability of eruptions occurring outside the caldera.
Source:Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
Mount St. Helens Case Study
On May 18, 1980, following two months of earthquakes and minor eruptions and a century of
dormancy, Mount St. Helens, Washington, exploded in one of the most devastating volcanic
eruptions of the 20th century. Approximately 0.67 cubic miles of volume was removed (lowering
the mountain 1,314 feet), 57 people died, lahars damaged 27 bridges and nearly 200 homes, 4
billion board feet of timber was blown down, and damage exceeded 1.2 billion dollars.57
Brantley,Steve and Bobbie Myers. Mount St. Helens—From the 1980 Eruption to 2000. USGS Fact Sheet 036---00
Online Version 1.0. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2000/fs036---00/
Page 114 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Fortunately, most people in the area were able to evacuate safely before the eruption because
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and other scientists had alerted public officials to the danger.
As early as 1975, USGS researchers had warned that Mount St. Helens might soon erupt. Coming
more than 60 years after the last major eruption in the Cascades (Lassen Peak, 1915), the
explosion of St. Helens was a spectacular reminder that the millions of residents of the Pacific
Northwest share the region with live volcanoes.58
Hazard Identification
Western Deschutes County is on the east slope of the Cascade Range. Volcanic activity in the
Cascades will continue, but questions regarding how, to what extent, and when, remain. Many
volcano---associated hazards affect local areas within 5 to 10 miles (e.g., explosions, lava flows,
pyroclastic flows and debris avalanches). However, lahars, or volcanic mudflows can travel
considerable distances downstream valleys and wind---borne tephra (ash) can blanket areas many
miles from the source.
Deschutes County is therefore at risk from volcanic events and should consider the impact of
volcano---related activity on communities, dams that create reservoirs, tourist destinations (e.g.,
Sunriver, Mt. Bachelor, Crater Lake), agriculture, highways and railroads. Deschutes County
should also consider probable impacts on the local economy should a volcano---related hazard
occur.
Two long---lived volcanic centers, Three Sisters to the west and Newberry Volcano to the south,
and many tens of smaller volcanoes have hosted numerous eruptions in geologically recent
times that range widely in size and character. Some covered sizable, currently developed areas
with lava flows or swiftly moving flows of searing ash and pumice. Others only managed to
produce small volumes of ash that blew downwind and were barely detectable in the geologic
record, or they produced lava flows in areas now protected as Wilderness. Similar eruptions will
occur in the future and, depending on their location and scale, will have minor to catastrophic
effects on the County. In addition, an eruption of any one of the major Cascade volcanoes could
affect the county and the region with ashfall if the wind direction is favorable.
Geologic hazard maps have been created for most of the volcanoes in the Cascade Range by the
USGS Volcano Program at the Cascade Volcano Observatory in Vancouver, WA and are available
at http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Publications/hazards reports.html.
58 Dzurisin,Dan,Peter H.Stauffer,and James W.Hendley II,Living With Volcanic Risk in the Cascades,USGS Fact
Sheet 165---97,(2000).
Page 115 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-13 Volcanic Hazards in Central Oregon
tlr Ttv 911
PG, K ti t ',: ry °*y? • ✓-r y-,l18 L 4 .rl i tw
r �.;km '4.; ,..t. I ' �M�(sc Qw sal*,-
s 4.1 ; ..zlw>� Yard LI r _ .. W1 tM�s r xM l tr
,h„.r -" 11✓ r " INDIAN',',l -r r
I5
7
�, /> k. -r, � , ,,, r.,, !:\ * `fir
r �y
0 . . ° ,. ,,0'.,
Y
'1-L,,_,],-.t '-' 1,++Tyy 1 r ;. ' Jeffe..-r-1. ra' ![T,rt-'tt. +C�,IL
r„t 1
-',';',4,-,,,,,'"N.•, IP r°Y *,�C .,,t+.. " .. _....- 4 :,gin� � y "/ A'i� i"1i Ar
1 .,,,,,.....,;,„ „. , „,,...„4,44,,,,„4,94,4„ ,,,....„, 11 , , , , 1- --„,, _,'_4, -,
s , _._,..
, ,,i„,,, a ,,,,a.r.".4..1,!,14 oa,ft,2;,_,ief.Str,.4-a— - ' ''''' ,, ,. ' Redmonri --- — ; , \
0 a'1 rfrii,"t x': s, y -• „ m=, °°' DESCMLTes
eu to - " rys�„food''` r ., , .7-;-, (stem a... r° i_ I„« n
'
'� ( p\ ��L .�'' �/i.�` ,. NATIONAL F(MESr �\
�; t y ,, '„ a:. Sun fiver ,
/ j r e_,, i ,/ —^ Newberr�'
'
Proximal Hazard Zone ;� , ,a,>{ Icano
Areas on upper flanks of sae'.•„,,,tr -e) !,
composite volcanoes that 't i
s -� '
are subject to a variety of hazards ]F ` Pike "`-' —NLm�wr u ,
i Distal Lahar Hazard Zone-Area ': `”
NATIONAL cANIC
along valleys hvading on compos toW i Mcx111MFNT.
volcanoes that are subject to l Far, ,r.' ' V �'+.,KLAMATHL 1 •"
Lava-Flow Hazard Zone on :m. ', 'Tl..... g r
Newberry Volcano •" �"' - '� -ti 0
r .r� LAKE ' N
Reg Iona!Lava-Flow Hazard Zone S� .W
Area Subject to lava flows front maf[ L r it S ? r er 2rr_
vents in the Cascade Range and from -,a , ,,,��� *WO.
-
^— far-rraveled lava flows from Newberry UMPOUA r NATIONAL NAria 0 10/111115
Volcano V,'SATIONAL FOREST 12 ,FOIST '.
Source:Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan
Although the hazard map shows sharp boundaries for hazard zones, the degree of hazard does
not change abruptly at these boundaries. Rather, the hazard decreases gradually as distance
from the volcano increases, and decreases more rapidly as elevation above valley floors
increases. Areas immediately beyond outer hazard zones should not be regarded as hazard free,
because the boundaries can only be located approximately, especially in areas of low relief. Too
many uncertainties exist about the source, size, and mobility of future events to locate the
boundaries of zero---hazard zones precisely. Additionally, tephra (ash) hazard zones are not
shown on the map, but tephra can impact large areas and the entire map region should be
regarded as within the tephra hazard zone.
The proximal hazard zone includes areas immediately surrounding the volcanoes. This zone,
which extends outward from summits for as little as 2 to as many as 10 kilometers (six miles)
depending on local topography, is subject to several types of rapidly moving, devastating flows
Page 116 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
including pyroclastic flows, debris avalanches, lahars, and dam---break floods. Slower moving lava
flows could also affect these zones.59
The distal hazard zone lies beyond the proximal hazard zone and is concentrated in the
surrounding valleys that head on the volcanoes. Debris avalanches and lahars will tend to funnel
into these valleys as they leave the slopes of the large volcanoes within the proximal hazard
zone.
The regional lava---flow hazard zone outlines the area of the Three Sisters and Newberry Volcano
region subject to lava flows from eruptions of mafic volcanoes. The zone is defined by the
distribution of mafic volcanoes that erupted during roughly the past one million years. Hazards
from thick tephra fall, ballistic projectiles, and small to medium pyroclastic flows would be
restricted to within a few kilometers of vents, but lava flows could travel much farther. The
hazard zone covers a broad area in Central Oregon, including Bend, Sisters, and areas on the
lower flanks of Newberry Volcano in La Pine.
Scientists also use wind direction to predict areas that might be affected by volcanic ash; during
an eruption that emits ash, the ash fall deposition is controlled by the prevailing wind direction.
The predominant wind pattern over the Cascades originates from the west, and previous
eruptions seen in the geologic record have resulted in most ash fall drifting to the east of the
volcanoes. Regional tephra fall shows the annual probability of ten centimeters or more of ash
accumulation from Pacific Northwest volcanoes. Figure II---14 depicts the potential and
geographical extent of volcanic ash fall in excess of ten centimeters from a large eruption of Mt.
St. Helens.
Figure 11-14 Regional Tephra-fall Maps
/
1 _»a., ... ,,,'_ '..'.'...`
a
-',.‘,..\„..4
.!..7.,..1.1....1 AL'
Py_ f. .. ,
4, l■
L4e
4
Source:USGS"Volcano Hazards in the Mount Jefferson Region,Oregon"
59 Scott,W.E.,Iverson,R.M.,Schilling,5.P.,and Fisher,B.J.,1999,Volcano hazards in the Three Sisters region,Oregon:
U.S.GeologicalSurveyOpen---FileReport99---437.
Page 117 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Note: The following sections include information that has been modified from the DRAFT Central
Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan, Appendix B: Volcanic Hazards in the Central Cascades.
Three Sisters Volcanoes
Large snow---covered volcanoes of the Three Sisters volcanic center dominate Central Oregon's
landscape between Santiam Pass in the north and Willamette Pass in the south. Rapidly
developing areas in Deschutes County occupy the eastern border of the region, and westward
several small communities dot the McKenzie River valley along its course to the Eugene—
Springfield metropolitan area.6°
The following photograph depicts an aerial view from southeast of the Three Sisters volcanic
center (South, Middle, and North Sister left of center; Broken Top right of center). Light colored
areas on the south flank of South Sister are 2,000---year---old lava flows.
Figure 11-15 Three Sisters and Broken Top
,Z::1■1t$1:40rli ,;■7: , ■:;t:y
Ci d i^�+ lal k
° I1'i !.%
'G s,. a
� 1
tl
yr.
�t.FbFF„k$ 6ptiykN ”
Photo by William E.Scott,USGS
Unlike other major Cascade volcanic centers, the Three Sisters center contains two young
composite volcanoes, South Sister and Middle Sister, rather than one. The third sister, North
Sister, and other nearby conspicuous volcanoes such as Mount Bachelor are large mafic
volcanoes. Broken Top is a composite volcano that has not erupted for tens of thousands of
years. Eruptions about 2,000 years ago from vents on South Sister produced blocky lava flows,
such as Rock Mesa. These eruptions also produced a modest amount of pumice and ash that
blanketed downwind areas. Probably no more than 1 or 2 centimeters (less than one inch) of
ash fell in the area now occupied by Bend. Similar, but larger, eruptions occurred during the last
ice age, which ended about 12,000 years ago, and had more widespread effects. Such eruptions
occurred from both Middle Sister and South Sister. Three eruptions during the past one---half
million years have been significantly larger and produced pyroclastic flows that swept over
present---day Bend and Sisters. Fortunately such eruptions are rare—the last one occurred more
than 200,000 years ago—and there is no sign that the Three Sisters system is capable of
60 Ibid.
Page 118 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to R1-:SOLIJ'I'ION 2015-087
producing such an eruption during our lifetimes. The figure below demonstrates the volcanic
hazards associated with the Three Sisters.
Figure 11-16 Volcanic Hazards of the Three Sisters
J; t 7' fzwX I� rXXr,
Lebman r r' a
r. _t I '.
2fi 1'e.re, '�
!'"„1„:" J•rrrtit Sar is Ki•rr ,. .. r1 C'"
.. .
Caecedir
S W...,, X27, \''
Hweet one `sH Toredreneey
ru ia1
.. Y 5rrten� !Woo'
edeXOr+d�.
McKee/4 ( soma" 7 ,
t `'''
y4y 3ry „
, Yad
Yids fifer Rref
Three L fe$
...,..... �... t{!u r4:ti' . . VO!CarE Hard Zore� ' - F11 ,rfb .
rau ai,nw n a °
Sprirgtieid t r;t;rc twa
rr
Y
IAA? , a u � !
vw, IT r•,, tnlc r ; el P.,n.rnro 1
Lowrll .•. 9 i� '! n u0.s' + v r a..r■!
v..r
r.,,C"° ,• ,r;.f,... ''C �.My Ire
ay X i r Fplrvr }- r Y
r G:47 s''Rr .•rr.r X r ,!
dw.w.-..m,...."..m.-..>..w..,am......A��n n
Source:Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan.Hazard zones are simplified from the USGS hazard assessment
for the Three Sisters volcanic area,Tephra(ash)hazard zones are not shown,but tephra can impact large areas and
the entire map region should be regarded as within the tephra hazard zone.
Owing to the prevailing westerly winds in central Oregon, areas east of the Three Sisters have
the greatest probability of being affected by tephra falls from future eruptions. Eruptions that
produce higher eruption clouds and greater volumes of tephra will affect progressively larger
areas. Although seldom life threatening, ash fall can greatly disrupt life. Darkness and swirling
clouds of ash limit visibility and affect transportation. Ash contributes to slippery conditions on
wet roads. Ash is also electrically conductive, especially if wet, and abrasive, so it can severely
affect electrical and mechanical systems. Ash is also extremely dangerous to aircraft in flight.
Eruptions that disrupt watersheds by removing vegetation and adding large quantities of
sediment from tephra fall, pyroclastic flows, debris avalanches, and lahars, typically initiate a
period of years to decades during which streams carry increased sediment loads and channels
become unstable and migrate. Such effects propagate downstream and can disrupt channels
and flood plains far from where direct impacts of eruptions end. The Eugene--Springfield area
along the lower McKenzie River and Sunriver and Bend along the Deschutes River below Wickiup
Reservoir could be vulnerable to such events in the years following eruptions. Similarly the
Tumalo Creek watershed that supplies part of Bend's municipal water, although not likely to be
affected directly by volcanic flows, is likely to receive ash fall from any eruption in the Three
Sisters area.
Page 119 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
South, Middle, and North Sister as well as Broken Top are high, steep---sided peaks that could
also produce debris flows and avalanches without volcanic activity. Avalanches of modest
volume (less than about 10 million cubic meters) are the most probable and would affect areas
primarily within the proximal hazard zone. Nevertheless, even modest---sized avalanches that
contain sufficient water could transform into debris flows that travel well into distal hazard
zones. Very large avalanches, those involving hundreds of millions of cubic meters of rock debris
would likely be preceded by pronounced volcano deformation driven by intrusion of magma.
Such activity would be detectable by seismometers and volcano surveys, and thus would elicit
advance warning. Drainage systems that originate in the Three Sisters area are all potentially at
risk from lahars, debris flows, floods, and avalanches. The location and size of these events will
depend on the triggering mechanism and its character.
• Separation Creek and White Branch lead to several small communities in the McKenzie
valley, including McKenzie Bridge and Blue River, which could be in the paths of lahars
flowing westward. Large---volume lahars could reach communities farther west. Oregon
Highway 126 and municipal water and hydroelectric facilities could be affected by lahars
and excess sediment in the McKenzie River.
• The Sisters area represents the largest concentration of residents and development in a
lahar--hazard zone.The city lies less than 30 kilometers (19 miles) downstream from
Middle and South Sisters along Whychus Creek. Below Sisters, Whychus Creek flows into
a deep canyon and joins the Deschutes River. Whychus Creek and its tributaries drain
the east flanks of North, Middle, and South Sister and the north flank of Broken Top. The
broad fan of Whychus Creek around Sisters is of particular concern with regard to
potential lahar or debris flow inundation because Whychus Creek drains a large sector of
the major volcanoes and the distance to Sisters is relatively short (about 30
kilometers or 20 miles). Typical flow velocities for lahars and debris flows through
terrain along Whychus Creek yield travel times to Sisters of as little as 30 minutes to one
hour, depending on lahar size and point of origin.
• Tumalo Creek drains the area east of Broken Top and is unlikely to experience large
lahars owing to lack of much volcano mass in its headwaters. Nevertheless, small lahars
or debris flows might descend Tumalo Creek if rapid sedimentation in Crater Creek
diverted debris over a low divide into Tumalo Creek. A moraine dam impounding a small
unnamed lake on the east side of Broken Top could be a potential source for such a lahar
or debris flow. This dam failed in October of 1966, generating a debris flow that
traveled down the Soda Creek drainage, across Highway 46 (Cascade Lakes Highway),
and spread out over the broad meadow near Sparks Lake. The debris flow buried the
road and covered about 250,000 m2 (about 2,700,000 ft2) of the meadow with sand and
silt.'
• Broad basins in the upper Deschutes valley, such as those occupied by Sparks, Elk, and
Lava lakes, provide traps for lahars and sediment moving south, as do Wickiup and
Crane Prairie Reservoirs.
61 0,Connor,J.E.,J.H.Hardison and J.E.Costa.2001.Debris flows from failures of Neoglacial---Age moraine dams in the
Three Sisters and Mount Jefferson wilderness areas,Oregon.US Geological Survey Professional Paper 1606.
Page 120 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Newberry Volcano
Overview—Newberry Volcano is among the largest and most voluminous of Cascade volcanoes.
Although it is not of great height, it is very broad. Newberry lavas extend about 120 kilometers
(75 miles) north to south and 43 kilometers (27 miles) east to west. The edifice covers more
than 3,000 square kilometers (1,200 square miles), making it by area the largest volcano of the
Cascades volcanic chain. Beyond the edifice, Newberry lava flows cover an additional 700 square
kilometers (270 square miles), and reach about 25 kilometers (16 miles) north of Redmond.
Hundreds of volcanic vents exist on the flanks of Newberry, many arranged in linear arrays, or
rift zones, that extend far down the flanks.The youngest rift---zone eruption occurred about
7,000 years ago.At that time,a 32---kilometer long(20---mile long)fissure system opened
extending northwest from the caldera. On this Northwest Rift Zone, lava fountains and small
explosive eruptions created cinder cones,such as 150—meter high (500---foot high) Lava Butte,
and wind spread blankets of cinders and ash downwind, often preceding lava flows. Lava flows
from Lava Butte traveled more than 8 kilometers (5 miles) from the vent and temporarily
dammed the Deschutes River.
Lava flows—Most of the City of Bend east of the Deschutes River is built on lava flows from
Newberry Volcano. Potential future eruptions from rift zones on the north flank of Newberry
represent the most credible lava---flow threat to a large settled area in the United States outside
of Hawai'i. Lava flows advance relatively slowly compared to rapid flows such as lahars and
pyroclastic flows, so they rarely threaten human life. But advancing lava flows ensure almost
total destruction from burial and incineration. Lava flows can crush or bury structures, roads,
railroads, power lines, gas lines, and other important infrastructure. They can also dam rivers
and streams, causing floods and contamination of drinking water, and they can ignite fires. Once
lava begins to flow from a vent, scientists are typically able to forecast which areas down slope
are at greatest risk.
Explosive eruptions—Newberry has also produced notable explosive eruptions. Most of these
originated from vents located in the broad depression, or caldera, that forms the summit of the
volcano. The most recent eruption in the caldera occurred 1,300 years ago. It generated ash
clouds that deposited tephra as far east as the Oregon---Idaho border, small pyroclastic flows, and
lava of the Big Obsidian Flow. Larger events occurred in the more distant geologic past at
Newberry, including some that transported tephra over broad areas of the western United
States and sent pyroclastic flows down the volcano's flanks.
During potential future explosive eruptions, cinder cone eruptions on the volcano's flanks could
generate modest amounts of tephra that would accumulate near the erupting vent. Explosive
eruptions from Newberry caldera could send large amounts of ash several kilometers in to the
atmosphere where it could be blown by wind to populated regions and become a hazard to
aviation. Close to the vents, the ash deposits could be several meters thick, but would typically
thin quickly with distance from the vents.
Page 121 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-17 Volcanic Hazards of Newberry Volcano
0,0,
5
Yurdwnne d? e,
�
Prin.
evle ,,"
4 Redmond u
,
5 4SiWn yy isbi N 1
. '
h'N..4.N a r+ n I tv Y,w
Harare `.vf
bop
Bend y
h. .y4 i?I{.PYC gIaP i 2J
saerirrr o. Newberry J
-.. 1
H dd., / .. f a
Volcano
1 n6.• f yrdtA I; lw,8w..,
1 irl,imp 7 `�s !:"~r- —r. l 'v t,ICdl o Ma j
Resew.tra La pint,,. :let'A Ya,Hpw Prdt I nea DIC2,C
'''C,..z. Davis ' ,r t ti
7 .,t / .7
56 1 Lw ,�, �r ShieWl Ymlmeno 1a— / y...„ iv r nil v,1 t r �r ‘,ttr r�V�����{��e\/��/WW���\� JJ, C.C,^iEnt dr3 4ragt.is:.Grrr-it as O.,.SbiCC.i a I
Source:Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan. Hazard zones are simplified from the USGS hazard assessment
for the Three Sisters volcanic area.Tephra (ash) hazard zones are not shown, but tephra can impact large areas and
the entire map region should be regarded as within the tephra hazard zone.
Volcanic gases—The presence of the summit caldera and closed basins within it create
conditions favorable for accumulation of heavier---than---air volcanic gases,notably carbon
dioxide, which could lead to dangerous conditions if increased emission of gas occurs during
volcanic unrest or an eruption. Heavier---than---air gases could result in asphyxiation for anyone
within the caldera.
Geothermal—Several lines of evidence indicate that an active magma system exists beneath
Newberry Volcano. Currently, both lakes within the caldera, Paulina and East Lake, contain hot
springs with temperatures as high as 135 degrees F. A USGS drill hole made in 1981 found
temperatures higher than 500—degrees at a depth of 3,000 feet. Several areas on the flanks of
Newberry Volcano are being explored as potential sources for geothermal energy. High
temperatures encountered now by hot spring users, and by geothermal drillers could become
elevated during volcanic reawakening. Additionally, if a volcanic vent opened beneath the
caldera lakes or through groundwater, the eruption would almost certainly be highly explosive
and would deposit wet, muddy tephra over the immediate area.
Hydrologic hazards—As has happened in the past, rapid release of water from Paulina Lake or
from rapid snowmelt could produce lahars, debris flows, or floods that descend Paulina Creek
and inundate the Paulina Prairie area north of La Pine.
Page 122 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RIISOMTION 2015-087
Fields of Mafic Volcanoes
Hundreds of geologically young volcanoes composed of cinders, ash, and lava flows dot the
Central Oregon landscape among the major volcanic centers. Many, such as Collier Cone on the
north flank of North Sister, occur on or near larger composite volcanoes; others occur many
miles from larger volcanoes. Some of these, such as Pilot Butte cinder cone in Bend, occur within
densely populated areas. Some of these volcanoes are cinder cones (e.g. Collier Cone, Pilot
Butte, Lava Butte); others, such as Mount Bachelor, are large shield volcanoes that stand more
than 1,000 meters (3,300 feet) above their bases and can be more than 10 kilometers (6 miles)
wide. The figure below shows how common these vents are in the Central Oregon landscape.
Figure 11-18 Geologically Young Vents in the Three Sisters Area
Quaternary age Vents in the Three Sisters Area
izria
Slralnvolaano•15;•yr, +
o ,). �.r ' Si,':iWvolrr no.15.110,;)'non
° I n Raaaln<4'.ate.IS/'''.can
• I Q']"' °. •rixnatrir venfa.I5 00!y.a.r.
■ • 0 0 •, e -5115,1c V.d.,po.ne,F[oaw a 151:
M 0, Q n -'Sil:..lc 4'cntr,Ilomea,Flna++t�K
loo , 1U \X1'....n.err.u.Middle,cnly nor rh.++n
11 on narrke Middle and lomB,Stater)
t{.] al,raultr
F 0 ctiannr.n li 1I
• x D D° _([ Jo(Ire.t KILOMETERS •
A'I5'— I • tl�° SIS
0, TEI `•` : -
d 0 °�� o
■
s • ° oc? gc' \.\ % -11
0 1 ' o. . G A A. ,,,)
0 V O ' a:_.. 0 ,,
O �60
``X BEN
s o
Qojr !
�
nnr,R nt ° gb •,p n
n Ir o \
n ._q,
°• c!.cg ° n°'"b. o
4 s' ° °
09-,1 0 U 0 -4a
° .r o 0 A 6 0° o \ °Cn
a
Y c 1'
°I 0 • U °0 v °14,1 n
a:1'A6' i 0 ° (5 5•t`-^ Lai*nnr.h..r.•f K. e
ID DU r�rMMrsb
.:It 1 i< L,APINE n° (13
aa l • y U 0 c
,Pa 01 1 ..
■ZUSGS ,^^prnkn UsviVC C 1r97.Afeefolef a..,211:. 20..:ra?'o,.r.111
Source:USGS.Blue circles show fields of mafic vents scattered throughout the Central Oregon Cascades.Solid circles
indicate vents younger than 15,000 years,open circles indicate vents older than 15,000 years.
The youngest mafic volcano in the region is Belknap Crater, north of McKenzie Pass, which
formed about 1,500 years ago. Geologic evidence suggests that the eruptions forming mafic
volcanoes may have lasted for centuries in the case of the largest cones, to weeks to months for
Page 123 of 469- PXI IIRIT 1-3 to RPSOI..U'I'ION 2015-087
more likely to be the site of flank vents or to be covered by lava, including the caldera. Zone LB
includes two main areas: (1) areas on the lower flanks of Newberry that have relatively few flank
vents and are chiefly covered by large lava flows from vents farther upslope and (2) lava flows
from vents elsewhere in the Cascade Range or Basin and Range.
The outer boundary of lava flow hazard zone LA is determined by encircling the part of the
volcano with greatest density of vents as determined by geologic mapping. As shown on the
hazard map, the outline of zone LA broadly defines the elongate shape of Newberry Volcano
itself, consistent with the idea that the volcano has grown by the repeated eruption of lava from
vents preferentially located on the north and south flanks and in the summit region. The
probability that a flank eruption will affect a given area in zone LA can be estimated only
approximately because the frequency of such eruptions prior to the last ones about 7,000 years
ago are poorly known. The U.S. Geological Survey infers that the annual probability of a flank
eruption occurring in zone LA is roughly 1 in 5,000 to 1 in 10,000.
Lava flow hazard zone LB encompasses the entire hazard map area beyond zone LA. Zone LB
includes areas on the lower flanks and down slope from Newberry Volcano and elsewhere in the
region that have been affected by lava flows less frequently than areas in zone LA. The U.S.
Geological Survey estimates that the annual probability of an eruption in this zone or of lava
flows invading this zone from vents in zone LA is roughly 1 in 100,000, or less, on the basis of the
frequency of lava flow coverage in the past one million years and the few, widely scattered
vents in the region.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a volcanic event is "low," meaning one incident is likely within the
next 75 — 100 year period (or longer). Based upon available information the Oregon NHMP5
Regional Risk Assessment supports this probability rating for Deschutes County.65
Vulnerability Assessment
All of the Pacific Northwest is vulnerable to impacts from volcanic activity. Like the rest of
Central Oregon, Deschutes County has some risk of being impacted by volcanic activity in the
Cascade Range. Figure II---13 shows the identified hazard zones for volcanic activity.
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"high" vulnerability to volcanic hazards; meaning more than 10% of the region's population or
assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster. Based upon available information
the Oregon NHMPS Regional Risk Assessment supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes
County 66 However, the communities of Bend, La Pine, and Sisters may be at greater risk since
they are located closer to the main volcanoes and are more at risk for inundation by lava and
pyroclastic flows, lahars and debris flows, or ash fall.
652015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAF 1.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015,
66Ibid.
Page 126 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores each hazard
and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the
occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the volcano hazard is rated #5, out of 9
rated hazards, with a total score of 173.
Community Hazard Issues
Volcanic eruptions can send ash airborne, spreading the ash for hundreds or even thousands of
miles. An erupting volcano can also trigger lahars, debris flows, floods, earthquakes, rockfalls,
and avalanches. Volcanic ash can cause respiratory problems, electrical storms, agricultural
damage, roof collapse, and can contaminate water supplies and severely disrupt
transportation.67 Lava flows can crush or bury everything in their path, including structures,
roads, railroads, power lines, gas lines, and other important infrastructure; lava flows can also
dam rivers and streams, causing floods and contamination of drinking water, and they can ignite
fires.
Businesses and individuals can make plans to respond to volcano emergencies. Planning is
prudent because once an emergency begins, public resources can often be overwhelmed, and
citizens may need to provide for themselves and make informed decisions. Knowledge of
volcano hazards can help citizens make a plan of action based on the relative safety of areas
around home, school, and work.66
Building and Infrastructure Damage
Ashfall of 0.4 inches is capable of creating serious although temporary disruptions of
transportation, operations, sewage disposal and water systems. The history associated with the
Mount St. Helens eruption in 1980 resulted in closed highways, airports and other
transportation systems for several days to, in some cases, weeks.
Ash can cause substantial problems for internal---combustion engines and other mechanical and
electrical equipment. Additionally, it can contaminate filters, oil systems and scratch surfaces.
Fine ash can cause short circuits in electrical transformers, which in turn cause power outages.
Specifically in Deschutes County, ash can cause problems for the hi---tech manufacturing industry
represented here.
The potential losses in Deschutes County extend beyond those to human life, homes, property
and the landscape. Lahars and flooding, resulting from eruptions that melt snow and ice can
result in severe damage to roads, bridges, pipelines and buildings. Highway 20 in Sisters, gas
67 Dzurisin,Dan,Peter H.Stauffer,and James W.Hendley II,Living With Volcanic Risk in the Cascades,USGS Fact
Sheet 165---97,(2000).
68 Scott,W.E.et al,Volcano Hazards in the Three Sisters Region,Oregon, USGS Open--File Report 99---437,(2001).
Page 127 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
pipelines and high---capacity power lines on the flanks of Newberry Volcano are especially
vulnerable.
Local business economies are at substantial risk if fallout from a volcanic event necessitates the
closure of any of the major transportation routes in Deschutes County. The estimated loss per
day is $3.5 million.99
Pollution and Visibility
Ash and tephra fallout from an eruption column can blanket areas within a few miles of the vent
with a thick layer of pumice and ash. High altitude winds may carry finer ash from tens to
hundreds of miles from the volcano, affecting downwind communities and posing a hazard to
aircraft. Fine ash in water supplies will cause brief muddiness and chemical contamination. Ash
suspended in the atmosphere is especially a concern for airports, where aircraft machinery
could be damaged or clogged. Additionally, ashfall decreases visibility and disrupts daily
activities.
Economic Impacts
Volcanic eruptions can disrupt the normal flow of commerce and daily human activity without
causing severe physical harm or damage. Ash a few millimeters thick can halt traffic, possibly up
to one week, and cause rapid wear of machinery, clog air filters, block drains and water intakes,
kill or damage agriculture and severely impact tourism and the economy of the region. The
interconnectedness of the region's economy can be disturbed after a volcanic eruption.
Infrastructure can be impacted, particularly in Sisters which is particularly vulnerable to lahars
and flooding. Transportation of goods between Deschutes County and nearby communities and
trade centers could be deterred or halted. Subsequent airport closures can disrupt airline
schedules for travelers. Fine ash can cause short circuits in electrical transformers, which in turn
cause electrical blackouts. Volcanic activity can also force nearby recreation areas to close for
safety precautions long before the activity ever culminates into an eruption. The
interconnectedness of the region's economy would be disturbed after a volcanic eruption due to
the interference of tephra fallout with transportation facilities such as the regional highways.
Death and Injury
Inhalation of volcanic ash can cause respiratory discomfort, damage or result in death for
sensitive individuals miles away from the volcano. Likewise, emitted volcanic gases such as
fluorine and sulfur dioxide can kill vegetation for livestock or cause a burning discomfort in the
lungs. Hazards to human life from debris flows are burial or impact by boulders and other
debris.
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
69 Stotler,J.Informal survey during B&B Complex Fire,2003.
Page 128 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
State
Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan, 2007
The purpose of this plan is to coordinate the actions that various agencies must take to minimize
the loss of life and damage to property before, during, and after hazardous geologic events at
Central Cascades volcanoes. OEM and the USGS are partnering to update the plan in 2015, the
first coordination meeting occurred on February 27, 2015.
State Natural Hazard Risk Assessment
The state risk assessment chapter on volcanic events provides a useful overview of volcanic risks
in Oregon and documents historic volcanic activity. It also recommends a multi---hazard
approach, given the uncertainty of most of Oregon being impacted by volcanic hazards in the
foreseeable future.
A major existing strategy to address volcanic hazards is to publicize and distribute volcanic
hazard maps through DOGAMI and USGS. The volcanoes most likely to constitute a hazard to
Oregon communities have been the subject of USGS research. Open---file reports (OFR) address
the geologic history of these volcanoes and lesser---known volcanoes in their immediate vicinity.
These reports also cover associated hazards and possible mitigation strategies. They are
available for volcanoes near Deschutes County including: Mount Saint Helens, Three Sisters,
Newberry Volcano, and Crater Lake.
Federal
Volcano Monitoring
USGS and Pacific Northwest Seismic Network at the University of Washington conduct seismic
monitoring of major Cascade volcanoes in Washington and Oregon. The USGS serves as the
primary dissemination agency for emergency information. As activity changes, USGS scientists
provide update advisories and meet with local, state, and federal officials to discuss the hazards
and appropriate levels of emergency response.70
Techniques for monitoring active or potentially active volcanoes focus on three areas—
earthquakes (seismicity), ground deformation, and volcanic gases. Magma intruding a volcanic
system breaks rock and causes slippage on faults, thereby creating earthquakes; it adds material
at depth and heats and pressurizes ground water, thereby bowing up the ground surface; and it
releases volcanic gases, mainly water vapor, carbon dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. Heat and
70 Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan,2007.
Page 129 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
volcanic gases from magma warm and add telltale chemicals to the ground water, which affects
the composition of spring water throughout the area
Some monitoring occurs in real---time or near real---time as data are telemetered from field sites
to base stations; other monitoring is done on a periodic basis and requires visits to the field or
gathering data from satellites.
Earthquakes in central Oregon are detected and located in real---time by the Pacific Northwest
Seismic Network (PNSN) at the University of Washington, a cooperative undertaking of the
university, USGS, and University of Oregon. Compared to areas that have frequent earthquakes,
the station spacing in central Oregon is relatively large, so only earthquakes greater than
magnitude (M) 1 or 2 are able to be located routinely. Six stations added in the Three Sisters
area since ongoing uplift was recognized in 2001 have reduced the magnitude threshold for
location there to about M 0.5 to 1, if all stations are operating. Eight stations were added in the
Newberry Volcano area in 2011. These stations, along with a very sensitive seismic array
installed by a geothermal energy company on the west flank of the volcano, have significantly
reduced the magnitude threshold for location of earthquakes on Newberry. In addition, a cache
of instruments at USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory is available to rapidly augment the
existing networks should conditions warrant.
Continuous Global Positioning System (CGPS) receivers are able to track ground deformation in
real time for a single point on Earth's surface. At present CGPS receivers at Redmond, Mount
Bachelor, and two near South Sister operate in real time. Such a sparse network is of limited use
in understanding the complex nature of ground deformation in a volcanic environment. Eight
CGPS receivers were installed at Newberry Volcano, along with seismometers, in 2011. This
network significantly improved monitoring capabilities at Newberry.
Broader regional coverage is afforded by periodic USGS surveys (typically annual or every few
years; more often if conditions warrant) of an array of benchmarks in the Three Sisters and
Newberry areas by temporary deployment of GPS instruments. Both areas also have a system of
precisely surveyed lines along roads or trails that are used for tilt leveling, a procedure that is
capable of measuring slight crustal movements. Another technique called InSAR uses satellite
radar data to detect crustal movements over broad areas.
USGS scientists measure output of volcanic gases by airborne surveys. Flights to central Oregon
volcanoes are made every few years in order to develop baseline information; additional flights
occur as conditions warrant. During times of increased concern, flights could occur as often as
atmospheric conditions allow. Annual sampling and chemical and isotopic analysis of spring
water from the area permit a broad regional view of how magmatic intrusion is affecting the
chemical composition of shallow ground water.
By combining the results of these and other techniques and an understanding of a volcano's
past behavior, the goal of volcano monitoring is to issue forecasts as accurately as possible
about the state of a volcanic system and the probability for the onset of potentially hazardous
conditions. Once an eruption has begun, monitoring information is used to forecast the
character and expected outcome of the eruption, as well as its end."
71 USGS---Volcano Hazards Program, http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/observatories/cvo/
469-Page 130 of 46) EXHIBIT i3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Emergency Coordination
During times of volcanic crisis, USGS scientists will monitor events closely and, together with
PNSN and the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, issue information
statements, alert warnings, updates, and briefing as necessary to keep public officials, the
media, and the public aware of potential hazards and other pertinent information. The USGS
and the National Weather Service will work together to provide warnings about lahars, floods,
and downwind ash---fall hazards.
Currently, agencies require information on hazards that affect nearby areas much like airlines
and the Federal Aviation Administration require information on tephra plumes that can be
hazardous to aircraft hundreds of miles from the source. The information required by these two
groups is not always the same, and therefore the USGS in cooperation with various agencies,
has developed two hierarchies of alert levels; one directed toward emergency response on the
ground and the other towards ash hazards to aircraft.
The USGS issues statements of ground---based hazards which are transmitted as appropriate to
state and federal agencies including FEMA and the National Weather Service. The counties
receive information from Oregon Emergency Management then transmit the notifications as
appropriate to local emergency management networks.72
Warning Systems
The best warning of a volcanic eruption is one that specifies when and where an eruption is
most likely to occur and what type and size eruption should be expected. Such accurate
predictions are sometimes possible but still warrant further research. The most accurate
warnings are those in which scientists indicate an eruption is probably hours to days away based
on significant changes in a volcano's earthquake activity, ground deformation and gas emission.
Experience from around the world has shown that most eruptions are preceded by such
changes over a period of days to weeks.
A volcano may begin to show signs of unrest several months to a few years before an eruption.
In these cases a warning that specifies when it might erupt months to years ahead of time are
extremely rare. The strategy that the USGS uses to provide volcano warnings in the Cascade
Range volcanoes in Washington and Oregon involves a series of alert levels that correspond
generally to increasing levels of volcanic activity. As a volcano becomes increasingly active or as
incoming data suggest that a given level of unrest is likely to lead to a significant eruption, the
USGS declares a corresponding higher alert level. This alert level ranking thus offers the public
and civil authorities a framework they can use to gauge and coordinate their response to a
developing volcano emergency.
Education and Outreach
General information on volcano hazards may be found on the USGS Volcano Hazards website:
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov.
72 Scott,W.E.et al,Volcano Hazards in the Three Sisters Region,Oregon, USGS Open File Report 99---437,(2001).
Page 131 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
USGS Open File Reports describe the geographic extent of impacts from volcanic activity
originating in the Cascades and can be found on the USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory
website: http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/observatories/cvo/.
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There is one identified Volcano action item for Deschutes County; in addition, several of the
Multi---Hazard action items affect the Volcano hazard. An action item matrix is provided within
Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A. To
view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
Page 132 of 469- BXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
WILDFIRE
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
There are no significant changes to this section; information has been
updated as needed to include new incidences of the hazard since 2010
(including large wildfires). In addition, the format of the section and minor
content changes has occurred.
Causes and Characteristics of the Hazard
Wildfire is a natural and necessary component of ecosystems across the country. Central Oregon
is no exception. Historically, wildland fires have shaped the forests and wildlands valued by
residents and visitors. These landscapes however, are now significantly altered due to fire
prevention efforts, modern suppression activities and a general lack of large scale fires, resulting
in overgrown forests with dense fuels that burn more intensely than in the past. In addition, the
recent explosion in population has led to increased residential development into forested land, in
the wildland urban interface (WUI). Assessment of wildfire vulnerability and the identification of
mitigation actions is largely dealt with at the community level through each of the County's
Community Wildfire Protection Plans; further information on the CWPPs is provided below
beginning on page II---80.
The impact on communities from wildfire can be huge. In 1990, Bend's Awbrey Hall Fire
destroyed 21 homes, caused $9 million in damage and cost more than $2 million to suppress.
The 1996 Skeleton fire in Bend burned over 17,000 acres and damaged or destroyed 30 homes
and structures. Statewide that same year, 218,000 acres burned, 600 homes were threatened
and 44 homes were lost. These wildfire events provided an impetus for addressing wildland
urban interface development and hazardous fuel mitigation statewide.
Wildfire can be divided into three categories: interface, wildland, and firestorms. Interface fires
are the most likely to happen in Deschutes County. Deschutes County experiences a large
interface fire occurring each summer that prompts at least one neighborhood evacuation.
Interface Fires
Essentially an interface fire occurs where wildland and developed areas meet. In these locations,
both vegetation and structural development combine to provide fuel. The wildland/urban
interface (sometimes called rural interface in small communities or outlying areas) can be
divided into three categories.
1. The classic wildland/urban interface exists where well---defined urban and suburban
development presses up against open expanses of wildland areas.
2. The mixed wildland/urban interface is more typical of the problems in areas of exurban
or rural development: isolated homes, subdivisions, resorts and small communities
situated in predominantly wildland settings.
3. The occluded wildland/urban interface where islands of wildland vegetation exist within
a largely urbanized area.
Page 133 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Wildland Fires
A wildland fire's main fuel source is natural vegetation. Often referred to as forest or rangeland
fires, these fires occur in national forests and parks, private timberland, and on public and
private rangeland. A wildland fire can become an interface fire if it encroaches on developed
areas.
Firestorms
Firestorms are events of such extreme intensity that effective suppression is virtually impossible.
Firestorms often occur during dry, windy weather and generally burn until
conditions change or the available fuel is consumed. These events typically produce their own
weather and wind events as well; as such, the high winds and dry weather are not just the
conditions that drive the fire behavior. The disastrous 1991 East Bay Fire in Oakland, California is
an example of an interface fire that developed into a firestorm.
Conditions Contributing to Wildfires
Ignition of a wildfire may occur naturally from lightning or from human causes such as debris
burns, arson, smoking, and recreational activities or from an industrial accident. Once started,
four main conditions affect the fire's behavior: fuel, topography, weather and development.
Fuel is the material that feeds a fire. Fuel is classified by volume and type. As a western state,
Oregon is prone to wildfires due to its prevalent conifer, brush and rangeland fuel types.
Topography influences the movement of air and directs a fire's course. Slope is a key factor in
fire behavior. Unfortunately, hillsides with steep topographic characteristics are also desirable
areas for residential development.
Weather is the most variable factor affecting wildfire behavior. High risk areas in Oregon share a
hot, dry season in the summer months and early fall with high temperatures and low humidity.
The increase in residential development in interface areas has resulted in greater wildfire risk.
Fire has historically been a natural wildland element and can sweep through vegetation that is
adjacent to a combustible home; additionally, fires at lower elevations historically have lower
intensity. Typically it is the embers/ fire brands that ignite homes rather than the flaming front;
as such, defensible space and fire resistant building materials are often the best mitigation
strategies. New residents in remote locations are often surprised to learn that in moving away
from built---up urban areas, they have also left behind readily available fire services providing
structural protection.
History of Wildfires in Deschutes County
Table II---7 lists the significant large wildland fires in the region including Crook, Deschutes and
Jefferson counties over the last decade. These fires required a substantial emergency
management response from the region.
Page 134 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-7 Large Wildfire History (1990 to present)
,� ar.,,. pg.
�J �
4✓�� .rti.i ,,,, ; ,�V��1rlr� ,.. A ¢r¢.I'r � ., I ,,� `w?dltd-Il�:d ,t�p..
2014 Two Bulls 6.908
2013 Burgess Road 168
2012 Pole Creek 26,795
2011 Shadow Lake 10,402
2010 Roster Rock 6,120
2009 Black Butte II 569
2008 Summit Springs Complex 1,973
2007 GW 8,570
2006 Lake George 5,652
Black Crater 9,412
2005 Park 139
2003 Davis 21,123
Link 3,716
18 Road Fire 3,811
B& B Complex 90,769
2002 Eyerly 23,573
Cache Mountain 4,451
2001 Crane Complex 713
2000 Hash Rock 18,500
1998 Elk Lake 252
McKay 1,150
1996 Little Cabin 2,400
Ashwood U Donnybrook 100,000+
Smith Rock 300
Skeleton 17,794
Evans West 4,231
1995 Cinder Butte 11,132
1994 Four Corners 1,524
1992 Sage Flat ODF 1,106
Horse Butte 1,629
1991 Stevens Canyon 1,080
1990 Awbrey Hall 3,032
Delicious 2,042
Finley Butte 1,320
Source:Deschutes County Forestry,2014.
The local structural and wildland fire organizations have significantly refined the coordinated
emergency response system for these types of destructive interface fires. Under the leadership
of the Central Oregon Fire Chiefs Association (COFCA), the pre---planned interface fire mutual aid
and task force system has effectively integrated the operational response process for structural
and wildland fire fighting resources from all three counties. This response system is recognized
Page 135 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOI,UTION 2015-087
as one of the most effective interagency efforts in the state. As is the case with the regional
focus of Table II---7, much of the wildland fire section of this plan is presented with a regional
focus on Crook, Deschutes and Jefferson counties. The scope and multi---jurisdictional nature of
local wildland fire demand has driven development of a regional approach that addresses: pre---
incident planning, training, initial and extended response during incidents, and recovery
activities. Fire service leadership broadly acknowledges the benefit of this type of coordinated
approach as essential to meeting the local wildfire challenge.
Page 136 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
._
=
I-
cc
. P " .-•,',„, 2
Milliallialliti101#1111111111M1- ...-
11411=11111101111111111111itO
II4
-
1 ,
L , ,
, A
1.0'1 Z
I ■ , 1
i
\.....' :i
aillii
r..c] .
. ,--• i
i
, I
,i
0 ^'
0 4
W 6,
CI t"7
ZI
=
r—,—
..44:,!:"AA,"-, ''''
1.1.1
u.t
iSNIMIIMINAINIE - ,1,,,.
iiteWU
, I "el'A,0,,, I
rt ,.....e
;"
1■10
4.31 ''„tr,41:114.',,,.■,4v"410
• 't. '..`',"' i'14' ",•''''
— ,,,,..-,
74.a fr:'■•••".
1■4
, '',1,,•I'' ,.1', v, .,',,,,,,i,,itiqr*k.+1 '
'_./
:."...)
. ! ,
'..,``a,.,',",":
41
';'4 ' ''X, "P''''' '' ■
'N^, ''i4e
,,,-.;.-_,0 ilvii,
........,
....0
,..•,..1
■
:...d
■ ti.41+::+1:: .' ,,,,,?.,' ",,,,,No■„.„,0., 1,IIII% '1^..°' ' ..
r
1..)
, '''4'41'.'"". ,i610 . ',,„ ;'.• ^ /"", s'4,, ,„..^
r.-"■ , 4,„ , ,, . ,),,v,%,''. i i ''',. ' '''''' '."..1 '
t l',,;',',,';;;',,""j,,tti:: , il iiiii:),i'it?i,':' .t,,,)','-''',';' ,;',..,,c,„.;:f.°, ''., ,•.,, tlf.'-,,',°'4,,',V"' ‘,„„,‘,-2,,,7
..,.':,,,,,,,,
sltrAVI;', .,.1.. .,,,,
i.'
W,',',..if., '' ''' ; ',, ' ', ' .., ,.,.. :' ,,. „,..' A '° . ,1A.,■.,rA",OA""" %a", ."
. ..,
=
',4ri,'"::,,V1:: ..:. I,\ ,,i1„,1,,,'1.N' "4.'"'L' '' u •
no
. , .
=
,p, g
&I
0.
iz
,
Another measure of the scope and impact of the wildland fire issue, particularly in the wildland---
urban interface (WUI) is illustrated by data developed in the Central Oregon Fire Atlas. The
Nature Conservancy produced the Fire Atlas as a part of their Fire Learning Network initiative.
The Fire Atlas focuses on 2.05 million acres in Klamath, Deschutes and Jefferson counties and
was used by stakeholders and community members to visualize wildfire risk in relation to
regional landscapes and vegetation regimes, their location in relation to communities, and the
history of past wildfires.73
Figure 11-20 Central Oregon Fire Atlas
a j
Ter
i
Prue END
,.COithYt Lek*
'A r 1
O anal
t 750 OCO
Source:Central Oregon Fire Atlas
'3See more at:https://www.conservationgateway.org/News/Pages/deschutes---fln---helps---
cornmu.aspxesthash.0k6rrEmA.dpuf
Page 138 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The tables below illustrate not only the escalating size of large wildland fires in Deschutes
County, but also the increasing impact on the citizens,values---at---risk and infrastructure of the
county.
Table 11-8 Acres Burned by Decade
eaf L 'Acres Burned
Burned
1900%1909 16,200
1910%1919 60,400
1920%1929 9,200
1930%1939 600
1940%1949 1,400
1950%1959 17,400
1960%1969 7,400
1970%1979 7,400
1980%1989 25,600
1990%1999 64,700
2000%2009 71,900
2010%2014 50,500
$0,11111 0 'i'
1900%1999 210,300
2000%present 122,400
Source:Deschutes County Forestry,2014
The significant story here is that central Oregon has experienced high intensity wildland fires on
37% more acreage in the last 15 years than in the previous 100 years combined. The following
table details the structures lost since 1981. The table shows that the majority of structures lost
occurred during events in 1990 and 1996; since 2003 there have been no homes lost in the
county due to wildland fire.
Table 11-9 Structures Lost to Wildland Fire
Year S' I "i wires test
2003 2
2001 5
1996 30
1990 22
1981 5
Tota I 64
Source:Central Oregon Interagency Dispatch Records,2009
The escalating size and intensity of these interface fires is the subject of continuing research in
several scientific disciplines. These include the arenas of forest health, hazardous fuels
treatment and community infrastructure protection; as well as studies of the impacts of climate
change. These issues are likewise the subject of significant public discourse. Over the last two
decades, community awareness and participation has developed substantially regarding the
Page I 39 of 469- EXHIRIT R to BFSfl1,11'I'ION 7015-0X7
Deschutes County NHMP May 2015 Page II-75
interface fire threat. Participation hazardous fuel reduction and wildfire preparedness activities
within neighborhoods in Deschutes County increases with each passing fire season.
Central Oregon population growth has become a companion issue. In 1980, Deschutes County
population was estimated to be 62,500. In 20 years, by 2000, it had nearly doubled to 115,367
and by 2013 it had increased another 41% to 162,525. The 2004 Coordinated Population
Forecast for Deschutes County (updated in 2009) estimates the 2025 county population to be
240,811. This trend of rapid population growth will have significant impacts on citizen exposure,
infrastructure vulnerability, and economic losses to the effects of wildland fire.
Deschutes County includes approximately 175,400 acres of unprotected lands (see Figure II- 21
for a map of the protected and unprotected lands within Deschutes County). Throughout
eastern Oregon approximately eight million acres of unprotected, privately owned wildland
areas exist. In Deschutes County there are several examples of residential development that do
not have structural or wildland fire protection. These include the Lower Bridge area east of
Sisters, and the Brothers and Hampton areas along Highway 20 on the eastern edge of the
county. In addition, there are approximately 100,000 acres of privately owned rangeland east of
Bend that do not have wildland fire protection. Alfalfa, a community located east of Bend,
recently passed a bond measure to fund a fire district that will provide fire protection to its
residents. The fire district is still in the planning phases and is not currently providing services;
however services are forecasted to be available as soon as 2016.
Because these types of areas have no fire protection organizations and because of the light,
flashy nature of the fuel types present in some areas, wildland fires have the potential to get
quite large often spreading to the point where they become a threat to protected areas. In
Deschutes County, county code 8.21 has been developed that outlines a system for landowners
to respond to the wildland fire threat with defensible space and fire breaks on private property
in the unprotected areas.
There are likewise substantial resource commitments and fiscal costs associated with
emergency response to wildland fire incidents. This impact on local organizations was
demonstrated by the multiple agency organizational response each fire season. Notable recent
incidents that exemplify the impact on local organizations are Pole Creek (2012), Burgess Road
(2013) and Two Bulls (2014). The costs associated with multiple day mobilization of law
enforcement, search and rescue, structural fire assets and state fire resources can quickly
deplete local and state agency budgets. Residential evacuation triggers American Red Cross
mobilization and when major transportation routes are impacted, Oregon Department of
Transportation and County Road Department personnel are also mobilized. Depending on the
scope and specifics of an individual fire, additional agency and non---governmental support
organizations may also be mobilized to help mitigate the impact on citizens and community
infrastructure.
Page 140 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
ti
a
o
n c m II
m 0 a
m a)
m '^ ti
c
m u_
r r e�,
q 7
U) n 0 i
a 41
co
km • ;
MI1 ft; „...43 .
■
ei it/ I-,
al L n '
r A
■
Q
u
4 ll
a r , •
LL
Lo Or
C N
C F N •i
V o u.
LL
7 MB
V1
O
ao
O ■
,
m 4a
z
N u 1 z
a
W Cl r c
L , A i N
00 7 a U
LL o co
a)
5
_c
U
N
Q
The rapid rates of spread and higher fire intensity observed in the recent past have raised the
awareness level of the public and local public safety officials. Public safety and structural
mobilization, at some level, occurs shortly after the initial smoke report for every wildland fire
with wildland urban interface threat potential in Deschutes County. In 2013, a human caused
wildfire burning in Klamath County, just south the city of La Pine, which is the southern most city
in Deschutes County prompted the mobilization of Deschutes County resources. The
Stagecoach Fire prompted the evacuation of a largely rural community and quickly grew to more
than 380 acres within one operational period. Due to the rapid rate of spread Klamath County
called for assistance from Deschutes County Sheriff, Search and Rescue, and Oregon State
Police. The Stagecoach Fire also impacted Highway 97, the most travelled highway in the state
of Oregon. These mobilization costs are incurred whether or not the fire directly impinges on
population concentrations and structural development. Impacts on state highways from smoke,
the fire front or the need to shut down a highway segment to facilitate an evacuation brings
Oregon Department of Transportation and Oregon State Police into the picture. In a similar
manner, even modest scale residential evacuations trigger sheltering and support activities from
the American Red Cross.
The Two Bulls fire, June 2014, led to the evacuation of more than 3,000 structures on the west
side of Bend. Millions of dollars in industrial timberland owned by Cascade Timber were burned
and many recreational events planned for early June were cancelled due to the health & public
safety implications. This incident occurred 10 miles northwest of Bend and involved a mixture of
private lands (protected by the Oregon Department of Forestry) and Deschutes National Forest.
Pole Creek, September 2012, primarily impacted Sisters and the surrounding area while burning
nearly 27,000 acres. The health and environmental impacts caused by the high intensity nature
of Pole Creek still echo through Central Oregon. Ash and hot embers from Pole Creek were
found in the Eagle Crest resort, which is more than 10 miles to the East.The Davis and Link fires
and the B&B Complex from 2003 illustrate this impact. The Davis Fire started in Klamath County
just to the southwest of La Pine, ultimately burning 21,181 acres. While this fire remained on
the Deschutes National Forest, the threat to downwind communities required a massive
mobilization of law enforcement, search and rescue, Oregon Department of Transportation and
structural fire resources from both Klamath and Deschutes Counties to address the potential
spread. Ash fell from this incident as far away as Prineville in Crook County, 60 miles to the
northeast.
The Link Fire started near Link Lake in Jefferson County to the northwest of Black Butte Ranch.
In 2002, the nearby Cache Mountain Fire quickly spread over six miles from its point of origin
into Black Butte Ranch leading to an expedited evacuation of the community and ultimately the
destruction of two residences. While the 2003 Link Fire did not spread out of the wildland area,
the lessons learned from the Cache Fire experience triggered public safety concerns and
preparation for another evacuation.
The B & B Complex, because of its size and duration, created a large---scale impact on local
government agencies, local community public safety and the regional economy in part due to
the closure of Highway 20 access over Santiam Pass for two weeks during the peak of the tourist
season. Economic losses suffered in Sisters, Camp Sherman and Black Butte Ranch triggered the
declaration of an economic disaster and businesses in these communities were able to take
advantage of the U.S. Small Business Administration Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program.
Page 142 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Much of the public policy discussion associated with the wildland urban interface at federal,
state and local levels have been focused on resources and public safety issues. While that will
continue to be an important component of future initiatives, these examples of rapidly moving,
high intensity fires with long---range spotting demonstrate the need for coordinated fuels
treatment strategies and public education efforts that address fire behavior and preparedness
issues for several miles beyond private and public land boundaries.
Hazard Identification
Deschutes County is generally considered within two vegetative ecosystems:
• the "high desert" dominated by Western juniper, sagebrush and a variety of grass
species to the east, and
• to the west, a transition from dry---site ponderosa and lodgepole pine to mixed conifer to
a sub---alpine mix of tree species near the crest of the Cascades.
The boundary between these two general eco---types is driven for the most part by elevation,
precipitation and soil moisture---holding capacity.
Central Oregon Fire Adapted Ecosystems
Most central Oregon ecosystems, particularly those at low and mid elevations adjacent to most
community and residential development, are described as fire adapted. Vegetative species in
these areas have evolved in and are dependent on relatively short fire return intervals. Over the
last 100+ years, fire suppression and forest management activities have altered this natural fire
return interval. This has created species shifts and increases in stand density and forest fuels.
This change has increased susceptibility of the forest to insects, diseases and to wildland fire.74
Inventory and analysis of this shift by the Central Oregon Fire Management Service (COFMS)
stratifies the national forest and adjacent lands into one of three Condition Classes based on the
number of "missed" fire cycles/5
Vegetative Mapping for Fire Regime and Condition Class
The Deschutes National Forest, Ochoco National Forest and the Prineville District of the Bureau
of Land Management, working together as Central Oregon Fire Management Services (COFMS)
review, and edit if necessary, the Central Oregon Fire Management Plan on an annual basis.
Included in that plan is an extensive Fire Regime and Condition Class analysis of the condition of
the vegetation on the public lands managed by the agencies.
Because of the wide variability in vegetative types in central Oregon, the Fire Regime —
Condition Class approach was selected as the best method to describe the range of conditions
present on the ground.
Fire Regime --• Condition Class considers the type of vegetation and the departure from its
natural fire behavior return interval. Five natural (historical) fire regimes are classified based on
74 Fitzgerald,S.,OSU Extension Wildland Forest Specialist,interview March 2004.
75 Central Oregon Fire Management Plan,Central Oregon Fire Management Service.
Page 143 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
the average number of years between fires (fire frequency) combined with the severity of the
fire on dominant overstory vegetation. Western juniper, for example has a fire return interval of
approximately 30 years with high potential for stand replacement fires. Therefore, it falls within
Fire Regime II.
Table 11-10 Fire Regimes
Fire '" ire Fire "Plant
Regime 41oup d reg4r y Severity „ Association droup
0$35 years Low severity
Ponderosa pine,
manzanita,bitterbrush
II 0$35 years Stand replacement Western juniper
III 35$100+years Mixed severity Mixed conifer dry
IV 35$100+years Stand replacement Lodgepole pine
V >200 years Stand replacement Western hemlock, mixed
conifer wet
Source:Deschutes County CWPPs
Condition Class categorizes a departure from the natural fire frequency based on ecosystem
attributes. In Condition Class 1, the historical ecosystem attributes are largely intact and
functioning as defined by the historical natural fire regime. In other words, the stand has not
missed a fire cycle. In Condition Class 2, the historical ecosystem attributes have been
moderately altered. Generally, at least one fire cycle has been missed. In Condition Class 3,
historical ecosystem attributes have been significantly altered. Multiple fire cycles have been
missed. The risk of losing key ecosystem components (e.g. native species, large trees, soil) is low
for Class 1, moderate for Class 2, and high for Class 3.
Page 144 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table II-I I Condition Class
Ctlt :w w I t; v
sc
` ` an a w,
r
Cla$S ?r { r
*Fire regimes are within or near an historical range.
Condition
*The risk of losing key ecosystem components is low.
Class 1 *Fire frequencies have departed from historical frequencies (either increased or
decreased) by no more than one return interval.
*Vegetation attributes are intact and functioning within an historical range.
*Fire regimes have been moderately altered from their historical range.
*The risk of losing key ecosystem components has increased to moderate.
Condition *Fire frequencies have departed (either increased or decreased) from historical
Class 2 frequencies by more than one return interval.This change results in moderate
changes to one or more of the following: fire size, frequency, intensity,severity
or landscape patterns.
*Vegetation attributes have been moderately altered from their historic ranges.
*Fire regimes have been significantly altered from their historical range.
*The risk of losing key ecosystem components is high.
Condition *Fire frequencies have departed (either increased or decreased) by multiple
Class 3 return intervals. This change results in dramatic changes to one or more of the
following: fire size, frequency, intensity, severity, or landscape patterns.
*Vegetation attributes have been significantly altered from their historic ranges.
Source:Deschutes County CWPPs
While each of the fire regimes described exist in Deschutes County, Fire Regime I and Fire
Regime II generally describe the forest condition that is present at the lower elevations adjacent
to the more densely populated, wildland urban interface (WUI) areas of the county. The forest
vegetative species shift cited above however is causing a greater presence of Fire Regime III at
lower elevations with an increasing dominance of non---native species and increased fuels loading
in those sites. This results in higher levels of fire intensity, crowning and spotting potential.
In Deschutes County, the majority of public lands are in Condition Class 2 or 3, having missed
one or two (or more) fire return intervals. Ground vegetation and tree saplings have grown
unchecked by natural fire contributing significantly to the potential for extreme fire behavior
including crowning, torching and spotting.
Fire Behavior
Wildland fire behavior is comprised of three components: fuels, topography and weather. While
these three parameters individually define fire behavior, their interactive dynamics offer insight
for effective mitigation approaches. The fire behavior triangle helps demonstrate the
relationship between these three parameters.
The fuels aspect of fire behavior takes into consideration loading, size and shape, compactness,
horizontal and vertical continuity and chemical composition. Each of these parameters offers
opportunities for effective hazardous fuels treatment mitigation actions. Due to the dry nature
of most areas of Deschutes County, many of the brush species contain a significant amount of
volatile, highly flammable oils and resins (e.g. bitterbrush), These relatively low profile fuels can
Page 145 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
generate very intense, high flame length fire behavior. This is similar to fires observed in the
chaparral fires in southern California.
Topography takes into account elevation and slope position and steepness, aspect and shape of
the country. Deschutes County's west boundary lies at the crest of the Cascade Mountains
generally about 6,000 to 7,000 feet. The elevation falls off to the east, transitioning through the
lower slopes and foothills of the Cascades, crossing the Deschutes River and progressing down
to about 3,000 feet in the high desert. This generally gives the area an east and south aspect,
which provides strong solar exposure throughout most of the day. The Cascades also act as a
barrier to the prevailing westerly winds. This creates a rain shadow effect that limits
precipitation on the east side of the mountains and contributes to gusty, turbulent, dry cold
front passages that have historically contributed to high intensity fires with rapid rates of fire
spread and medium to long range spotting.
As mentioned above and described in Appendix C, Central Oregon weather is strongly affected
by the Cascade Mountains. The relatively low precipitation, particularly at lower elevations
adjacent to areas of community development, strong solar radiation and gusty wind patterns
combine to generate a fairly dry environment.
There are some opportunities to compensate for the wildland interface fire exposure effects of
local dry climatic conditions and weather patterns by consideration of topographic features
during home construction and development planning. Overall, however, the greatest potential
to impact fire behavior lies with hazardous fuels management, varying in scope from defensible
space around individual homes and structures to well planned, landscape scale treatments to
mimic the effects of periodic low intensity fire.
In Central Oregon, forests ecologically within the historical norm are also more fire tolerant and
are less susceptible to high intensity, stand replacement fires. Ultimately, fire behavior is related
to the structure of the forest fuels. Hazardous fuels treatment strategies are the subject of
ongoing research efforts.76
The Wildland Urban Interface of Deschutes County
Over the last ten years, public recognition of the term "wildland urban interface" (WUI) has
become greater with increased incidences of wildland fires, loss of residences, and highly visible
smoke columns. The term "wildland urban interface" describes the boundary and intermixture
of structural development adjacent to and within areas dominated by wildland fire vegetation.
Fire suppression tactics in interface areas, both structural and wildland, are continually adapting
to provide better safety for firefighter and the public.
Probability Assessment
In Oregon, wildfires are inevitable. Although usually thought of as being a summer occurrence,
wildland fires can occur during any month of the year. The vast majority of wildfires burn during
June to October time period. Dry spells during the winter months, especially when combined
with winds and dead fuels, may result in fires that burn with intensity and a rate of spread that
76 Science Basis for Changing Forest Structure to Modify Wildfire Behavior and Severity by Russell T.Graham,Sarah
McCaffrey,and Theresa B.lain.RMRS---GTR---120,USDA Forest Service,2004.
Page 146 of 469- I;XI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
cause difficultly for local resources that typically don't have their full staffing in the winter
season. The threat of wildfire continues today. However, wildfire risk to human welfare and
economic and ecological values is more serious today than in the past because of the buildup of
flashy fuels, changes in vegetation composition over time, construction of houses in proximity to
forests and rangelands, increased outdoor recreation, and a lack of public appreciation of
wildfire."
The natural ignition of forest fires is largely a function of weather and fuel; human---caused fires
add another dimension to the probability. Dry and diseased forests can be mapped accurately
and some statement can be made about the probability of lightning strikes. Each forest is
different and consequently has different probability and recurrence estimates. Wildfire has
always been a part of these ecosystems and sometimes with devastating effects. The intensity
and behavior of wildfire depends on a number of factors including fuel, topography, weather,
and density of development- There are a number of often---discussed strategies to reduce the
negative impacts of these phenomena. They include land---use regulations, management
techniques, site standards, and building codes. All of these have a bearing on a community's
ability to prevent, withstand, and recover from a wildfire event.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a wildfire event is "high," meaning at least one incident is likely
within the next 10 —35 year period (as the history of wildfires indicates, it is likely that
Deschutes County will experience a wildfire on an annual basis). Based upon available
information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this probability rating for
Deschutes County.78
Future Climate Variability
One of the main aspects of the probability of future occurrences is its reliance on historic
climate trends in order to predict future climate trends. Counties east of the Cascade Mountain
Range in Oregon are experiencing more frequent and severe wildfires than is historically the
norm, and many climate predictions see this trend continuing into the future. Temperature
increases will occur throughout all seasons, with the greatest variation occurring during summer
months. Hotter temperatures mean more combustible vegetation. This information was
considered while developing the probability of wildfire occurrence for the county.
Vulnerability Assessment
Wildfires are a natural part of forest and grassland ecosystems. Past forest practices included
the suppression of all forest and grassland fires. This practice, coupled with hundreds of acres of
dry brush or trees weakened or killed through insect infestation, has fostered a dangerous
situation. Present state and national forest practices include the reduction of understory
vegetation through thinning, mastication and prescribed (controlled) burning.
Each year a significant number of people build homes within or on the edge of the
urban/wildland interface, thereby increasing wildfire hazards. Many Oregon communities
"Ibid
782015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
Page 147 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
(incorporated and unincorporated) are within or abut areas subject to serious wildfire hazards,
complicating firefighting efforts and significantly increasing the cost of fire suppression.
Each Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) utilized a variety of hazard assessment tools
depending on the vegetation ecotypes of the Communities at Risk within each CWPP. At a
minimum however, each CWPP utilized the Oregon Department of Forestry Assessment of Risk
Factors which is based on five categories of evaluation that include a variety of information
designed to identify and evaluate wildland fire risk across Oregon: risk of wildfire occurrence,
hazard, protection capability, human and economic values protected and structural
vulnerability.
Over the last five years, collaborative groups in each of seven CWPP areas met to conduct these
assessments and determine priorities for fuels reduction activities on public and private lands.
Each CWPP and year of update (and next expected revision) is listed below:
• Greater Bend CWPP (2011, expected revision 2016)
• Greater La Pine CWPP (2015, expected revision 2020)
• Greater Redmond CWPP (2011, expected revision 2016)
• Greater Sisters Country CWPP (2014, expected revision 2019)
• Sunriver CWPP (2015, expected revision 2020)
• East and West Deschutes County CWPP (2012, expected revision 2017)
• Upper Deschutes River Coalition CWPP (2013, expected revision 2018)
Based on the numerical outputs of this assessment, each of the Communities at Risk receives a
score for each category and a total score. Utilizing the scores, the Communities at Risk can be
ranked for prioritization. The following table details the priorities determined under each CWPP.
Page 148 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RE SOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-12 Summary of CWPP Priorities in Communities at Risk
Highest
This is a new category
Bend WUI Southwest,West,Southeast,West UGH,Northwest
High
East UGR,Northeast,North This is a new category
Highest Priorities Wickiup Acres,Masten Road Area
Day Road Corridor,6th&Dorrance,Finely Butte moved down
Next Highest(Higher)Priorities
This is a new category
La Pine WUI Newberry,City of La Pine,Ponderosa Pines
High Priorities Huntington Newberry and Ponderosa Pines
South,Little Deschutes River,Newberry Estates, moved up,Huntington and Section
Ponderosa Pines and Section 36. 36 removed,
First Priorities Northwest,
Category name change from
Southwest, Northeast,Southeast,and Urban Northwest Highest to First
Redmond WUI High Priorities Urban
Northeast,Urban Southwest,Urban Southeast Category name change from High
Extreme Risk Priority Communities Whychus to Second Removed
Canyon,Whychus Creek Camp Sherman,Black
Very High Risk Priority Communities Butte Ranch Removed
Indian Ford Creek,Metolius Tollgate,Squaw Creek,
Sisters WUI Crossroads, Plainview,Sisters,
High Risk Priority Communities City Panoramic Removed
of Sisters,Fryrear Butte,McKenzie Canyon Softie Lake,Sage
Meadow,Forked Horn,Aspen
Lakes, Cascade Meadow
Highest priority is treating public lands surrounding Sunriver No change
Sunriver WUI g
and private lands inside Sunriver
Highest Priorities:
Public Lands:Reservoirs,West Evacuation Routes,All West
Lakes,Tumale Falls,Paulina&East Lakes and their Evacuation No change
Routes,Newberry Visitors Center and Lava River Cave
East&West Private Lands:Alfalfa, Millican,Brothers, Pine Mountain,
Deschutes County Hampton North of Hwy 20 and Glass Butte Road.
WUI High Priorities
Public Lands:Edison Trailhead,Other West Trailheads,Round
Mountain,Newberry Lava Cast Forest,Sugar Pine Butte No change
Private Lands: Fox Butte Rd,Evacuation Routes,Hampton
South of Hwy 20.
Highest Priorities Three
Big River moved down
Rivers, Little Deschutes Corridor,Foster Road Corridor
Upper Deschutes Higher Priorities
This is a new category
River Coalition WUI Haner Park,Big River
High Priorities Wild
River, Fall River Haner Park moved up
Source:Deschutes County CWPPs
Notes:Sunriver only has one rating area The priorities for this CWPP can be found in the action plan rather than the a
risk assessment.
In both the La Pine&Sister's revisions the base map with the rating areas was re---evaluated with different rating areas
to inlcude more structures(as such the names of areas changes,but the boundaries remained the same).
The Deschutes County CWPPs utilized the Oregon Department of Forestry Assessment of Risk
methodology to determine community risk. The assessment used a scoring matrix with six
factors: likelihood of fire occurring (Risk), hazard (based on weather, topography, and fuel),
protection capability, protection capability, values protected, and structural vulnerability79. The
79 Deschutes County CWPPs.Sunriver did not perform the analysis since all of it's area was considered equal.
Page 149 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
hazard assessment information was used to develop a scoring matrix that would provide
results that was used for prioritizing the WUI areas.
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"high" vulnerability to wildfire hazards; meaning more than 10% of the region's population or
assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster. Based upon available information
the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes
County.8°
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores each hazard
and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the
occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the wildfire hazard is rated #2, out of 9
rated hazards, with a total score of 220.
Community Hazard Issues
Threat to Life and Property
The interface between urban and suburban areas and these resource lands are producing
increased exposure to life and property from wildfire. In many cases, existing fire protection
services cannot adequately protect new development. Wildfires that also involve structures
present complex and dangerous situations to firefighters.
Personal Choices
Many interface areas, found at lower elevations and drier sites, are also desirable real estate.
More people in Oregon are becoming vulnerable to wildfire by choosing to live in wildfire---prone
areas.81
A community at risk is a geographic area within and surrounding permanent dwellings (at least
one home per 40 acres) with basic infrastructure and services, under a common fire protection
jurisdiction, government, or tribal trust or allotment, for which there is a significant threat due
to wildfire.
Private Lands
Private development located outside of rural fire districts where structural fire protection is not
provided is at risk. In certain areas fire trucks cannot negotiate steep grades, poor road surfaces,
80 Ibid.
81 National Wildland/Urban Interface Fire Protection,Fire protection in the Wildland/Urban Interface:Everyone's
responsibility,Washington D.C.,(1998).
Page 150 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
narrow roads, flammable or inadequately designed bridges, or traffic attempting to evacuate
the area. Little water during the fire season, and severe fuel loading problems add to the
problem. In some areas, current protection resources are stretched thin, thus both property in
the interface and traditionally protected property in the forests and cities are at greater risk
from fire. While the Firewise program has increased knowledge of the fire risk and preparedness
for fire season however, many property owners in the interface are not aware of the problems
and threats that they face, and owners in some areas have done little to manage or offset fire
hazards or risks on their own property.
Drought
Recent concerns about the effects of climate change, particularly drought, are contributing to
concerns about wildfire vulnerability. Unusually dry winters and hot summers increase the
likelihood of a wildfire event, and place importance on mitigating the impacts of wildfire before
an event takes place.
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
Local fire prevention and hazardous fuels treatment efforts have been an integral component of
the local interagency coordination picture since the early 1980's. The challenge of an expanding
wildland urban interface was recognized in Deschutes County two decades ago. The local fire
service response system reflects that long period of interface fire experience and the recognized
value of pre---incident mitigation activities.
County and Cities
Project Impact
Deschutes County was designated an Oregon Project Impact community in 1999. At the time,
this national---level program was established "to reduce the human and economic costs of
disasters through prevention, preparation and mitigation." Deschutes County was one of only a
few areas across the nation identified to focus on wildland fire related mitigation activities. A
steering committee was established by the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners to
provide oversight and accountability for use of the funds. The original $300,000 grant allowed
Project Impact to construct an additional escape route out of an at---risk community and fund
additional activities for the next three years.
In 2002, a consultant and a sub---group of the steering committee began to explore development
of a business plan for a follow---on organization to Project Impact. Project Wildfire was
established. Based on the foundation of the Project Impact experience and as stated previously,
Project Wildfire continues to provide coordination of a variety of wildland fire mitigation
activities including the FireFree program, the facilitation of the 7 Community Wildfire Protection
Page 151 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Plans, serves as a source of wildfire mitigation and preparedness information for local groups,
and secures grant funding to support fuel mitigation activities in local at risk communities.
FireFree
The FireFree program is a nationally recognized model for homeowner education and mitigation
programs in the wildland urban interface. Created in 1997 following the devastating Skeleton
Fire in Bend, FireFree creates awareness and educates residents about the risks of wildland fire
to homes and property and the ten simple steps they can take to reduce those risks. FireFree
encourages homeowners to take responsibility for risk mitigation by creating defensible space
around their property and disposing of debris. To find the ten FireFree steps, the FireFree
program has an established website www.firefree.org.
FireFree is the local grass root,call---to---action program in Deschutes County for residents to
prepare their property for wildfire. The FireFree events culminate every spring and fall with
FireFree community clean up days where residents can dispose of their yard debris created by
maintaining or creating defensible space, for free at surrounding disposal sites. FireFree is
coordinated by Project Wildfire as a collaborative effort among local fire agencies, forestry
departments, private businesses and the insurance industry.
Project Wildfire
Project Wildfire is the result of a Deschutes County effort to create long---term wildfire mitigation
strategies and provide for a disaster---resistant community. Its mission is to prevent deaths,
injuries, property loss and environmental damage resulting form wildfires in Deschutes County.
Created by Deschutes County Ordinance 8.24.010, Project Wildfire is the community
organization that facilitates, educates, disseminates and maximizes community efforts toward
effective fire planning and mitigation. Project Wildfire is governed by a 27---member steering
committee that is defined by County Ordinance 8.24.020 as a 50---50 balanced mix between fire
agency representatives, private residents, elected officials, Deschutes County 911, Deschutes
County Emergency Management, Insurance, and many other at large community members.
Project Wildfire has established a web site (www.projectwildfire.org) to help showcase the wide
variety of hazardous fuels treatment, prevention projects, and public information and
educational opportunities.
Wildland and Structural Fire Services Program Coordination
Both wildland and structural fire agencies provide a range of services including:
• educational and prevention services;
• pre---season planning and incident response consistent with statutory,jurisdictional and
regulatory responsibility; and
• fire response on private and public lands within Deschutes County.
Fire agencies in central Oregon have responded to expanding community development,
increasing population and increasing wildland urban interface fire load (risk) by developing a
well coordinated structural and wildland response system.
Page 152 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The structural agency Interface Task Force system and the interagency efforts of Oregon
Department of Forestry, USFS, and BLM preplanned initial and extended attack system have
been established for the tri---county region. The wildland and structural fire resources are
routinely merged at the fire scene to meet specific demands of interface fire situations. During
the 2014 summer beginning in June, the Interface Task Force system was activated on a weekly
basis. These task forces are regularly utilized several times per year both in the tri---county area
and in other portions of the state. Central Oregon Interagency Dispatch Center (COIDC) fielded
900 incidents between ODF, USES & BLM; the COFMS district hosted 17 IMTs (the average is 2 or
3 IMTS).
The effectiveness of these systems continues to work well because of annual coordination and
update processes and the strong interagency working relationships between all of the
jurisdictional and supporting organizations. The Bridge Creek and Cold Springs/Tollgate fires in
the late 1970's initiated the refinement of the wildland---preplanned system, coordination with
structural resources and a culture of progressive coordination. The system undergoes annual
evaluation and revision through the Central Oregon Fire Chiefs Association.
Multi-Agency Incident Coordination
In the mid 1980s, central Oregon fire agencies routinely held table---top and scaled field exercises
or "disaster drills." Initially, these drills addressed wildland interface fires. Later, "all---risk"
hazards including flood, loss of transportation routes, petroleum spills, etc., were merged into
the drills. These drills helped identify components of the response process that were most
subject to breakdown. These components were re---engineered and integrated into the
preplanned response system. The drills have become important to the ongoing development of
a more integrated, interagency initial and reinforced response system, particularly for wildland
urban interface fires.
The local Multi---Agency Coordination (MAC) system was created following the 1990 Awbrey Hall
wildland fire. MAC, a formalized process for priority setting and coordination among
jurisdictional agencies, was initially established in the City of Bend Public Works building. This
facility was used for both periodic exercises and for a variety of incidents. In mid 1995 MAC was
moved to the Deschutes County Sheriff Office, a new facility with accommodations that include
a large conference/training area. Multi--agency coordination training and drills are now held in
that facility for a wide variety of agency personnel.
Reinforced Incident Response Capacity
Central Oregon has a unique capacity to quickly provide expanded staffing to larger scale fire
incidents. The US Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and the Oregon Department of
Forestry have a large pool of personnel trained and certified to meet the requirements of all
management positions within the Incident Command System. Formerly, the Central Oregon
Interagency Type 2 Incident Management Team was organized in the late 1970's. Its purpose
was to provide a local team of personnel to manage developing interface fire incidents until
further assistance could be mobilized to the area. At the time, Oregon Department of Forestry
or federal incident management teams (IMT) would require six to ten hours to mobilize and
travel to central Oregon. Because of the Interagency Management Team in central Oregon a
significant level of experience and capacity has been developed.
Page 153 of469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Central Oregon fire managers recognized the probability of the Type 2 Central Oregon IMT not
having the capacity to function as originally intended and it was disbanded. This is a result of the
following:
1. With a high number of current large wildland fire incidents that occur nationally and
regionally, high demand exists for both federal and state IMT services. They have been
heavily mobilized to incidents throughout the western U.S. for a significant period each
year and the Central Oregon Type 2 IMT may not be available.
2. Demand increases due to intensified fire behavior resulting from weather conditions
and hazardous fuels build---up.
The current Oregon interagency IMT dispatching system has identified four Type 2 IMTs with
personnel scheduled on a one week on and three weeks off rotation as a stopgap measure.
Opportunity exists to leverage ICS trained personnel for incidents other than wildland fire. The
National Association of State Foresters (NASF) published "Fire and Ice: The Roles of State and
Federal Forestry Agencies in Disaster Management and Response" in 1999.2 In cooperation with
FEMA and USDA Forest Service the report focused on the value of Incident Command System
(ICS) trained wildland fire management personnel in support of multijurisdictional incident
response. With current budgets, fiscal limitations exist when using wildland fire agency
personnel in support of all---risk incidents.
A formal Central Oregon Cooperative Wildland Fire Agreement exists among wildland and
structural fire agencies. While wildland fire agencies are funded to address wildland fire issues
there are statutory and agency---specific limitations to expending dedicated fire fighting funds for
"all risk" incidents. During a Declaration of Emergency, wildland fire agencies can be partially
reimbursed through the federal response framework.
Central Oregon Fire Chiefs Association
The Central Oregon Fire Chiefs Association (COFCA) provides a formal forum for fire chiefs in
Crook, Deschutes, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Jefferson counties to integrate any
refinements to the interface fire response system for their individual structural and wildland
agencies. COFCA also provides the leadership umbrella for a variety of local interagency
prevention, investigation and training groups.
Wildland Fire Prevention
Central Oregon wildland and structural fire services have a long tradition of effective
organization---specific and cooperative programs. In dry,fire---prone regions such as central
Oregon, fire prevention programs address two facets of preventing destructive wildfires: 1)
ignition prevention, and 2) large, catastrophic fire prevention.
82"Fire and Ice:The Roles of State and Federal Forestry Agencies in Disaster Management and Response."National
Association of
State Foresters in cooperation with FEMA and the USDA Forest Service,September,1999.
Page 1.54 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
An example of a cooperative ignition prevention effort is the Central Oregon Fire Prevention
Cooperative (COFPC). This effort was organized in 1978 to provide a forum for coordination of
common fire prevention needs between the state and federal wildland fire agencies and
structural fire service agencies in Crook, Deschutes, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Jefferson
counties. COFPC provides a mechanism to maximize effective use of staffing and fiscal resources
from all of the cooperating agencies. Its purpose is to conduct a wide variety of ignition
prevention, youth education, public service and public education initiatives. COFPC remains
active today and has received state, regional and national recognition for its efforts.
The second category includes activities intended to mitigate the impact of large fires. Examples
focus on broad hazardous fuels treatment strategies to keep fires at more manageable levels
and the development of defensible space around individual homes. There are a variety of local
programs currently active and several more in the developmental stage throughout the county.
Project Wildfire is a successful example of a collaborative approach to large wildland fire
mitigation. A national leader and model for wildland fire mitigation; Project Wildfire takes
advantage of public and private partnerships and collective resources to prevent deaths,
injuries, property loss and environmental damage from wildland fire.
In the years since the 2005 Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, Project Wildfire has become the
facilitator and "caretaker" of seven Community Wildfire Protection Plans and the coordinator of
the FireFree Program. Project Wildfire succeeds where an individual or one agency cannot.
Project Wildfire is also committed to developing wildland fire prevention and education
strategies and implementing hazardous fuels reduction programs across the County.
Community Wildfire Protection Plans
Through the CWPP process, the overwhelmingly clear answer to the wildland fire mitigation
question is to reduce the potential for extreme fire behavior by reducing the amount of
hazardous fuels in high risk areas on both public and private lands. Since the inception of
CWPPs, Deschutes County has secured approximately $6 million in funding under the National
Fire Plan, Western States and FEMA grant programs to educate communities and treat
hazardous fuels in and around communities at risk.
The wildland fire mitigation efforts in Deschutes County span a variety of agencies and groups.
The County has facilitated treatment on over 2,000 acres of hazardous vegetation on private
lands each year since 2005. While this number does not sound significant on the surface, it is
rather formidable when one considers that these fuels treatments were achieved on private
properties % to % acres at a time. Since Project Wildfire's establishment in 1999, over 110,000
acres have been treated within and around communities. Complimentary Federal Land projects
more than double this figure.
The CWPPs identified priority Communities at Risk and the US Forest Service has responded by
treating national forest land in the WUIs since 2005.
These successful projects however are also due in part to the level of collaboration experienced
in Deschutes County. As stated earlier, Project Wildfire and the CWPP Committees and other
groups such as the Nature Conservancy's Fire Learning Network and Central Oregon
Intergovernmental Council routinely engage community members from all areas concerned
about wildland fire. This includes representatives from the timber industry as well as
Page 155 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
environmental groups. It is not uncommon to see Timber Industry Consultants at the same
planning table as Sierra Club members. This collaborative approach to fuels management on
public lands includes all interested parties from the beginning. The results we continue to see in
central Oregon are broadly accepted fuels treatment projects that proceed without litigation
and protest.
Deschutes County is also home to one of the first ten funded Collaborative Forest Landscape
Restoration projects, which is restoring the federal forest to a more resilient condition while
improving the fuel conditions in the WUI. Called the Deschutes Collaborative Forest Project
(DCFP).
Emergency Operations Plans
The county, and cities, have Emergency Operations Plans (EOP). The EOPs describe how the
jurisdictions will organize and respond to emergencies and disasters. The plan includes specific
information related to wildfires.
Rangeland Fire Protection Associations
Rangeland Fire Protection Associations (RFPAs) provide wildfire protection of private land within
Deschutes County. RFPAs (formed under ORS 477.315) protect over 3.2 million acres of private
land in eastern Oregon with support from the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODE). RFPAs
operate as independent associations of landowners that provide their own protection with the
support of the ODE (chiefly technical support for grants, grant writing, procurement of
equipment and fire fighting training)83. The ODE provides a small source of funding for the
RFPAs, however, the majority of funds come from federal grants (primarily Volunteer Fire
Assistance and Rural Fire Assistance). Additional fees are collected from voluntary membership
dues. The RFPA has a responsibility to protect private lands of members and non---members alike
per the agreement formed with ODE when the RFPA is formed.
The following two RFPAs are active within Deschutes County:
• Brothers/ Hampton RFPA (established 2006)
• Post Paulina RFPA (established 2006)
State
In part because of Deschutes County's 1990 Awbrey Hall Fire, the 1993 State Legislature initiated
a process to identify wildfire hazard and declare wildfire hazard zones. The legislation
provided a mechanism for counties to supersede local provisions requiring the use of flammable
roofing materials such as wood shake. A second provision requires that addresses of structures
be clearly identified. This process is complete in Deschutes County with the implementation of
provisions in the Deschutes County Building Code. This is of particular significance because a
combustible roof is the most vulnerable structure component to ember attack in interface
wildfire situations. By Deschutes County Ordinance, installation of combustible roofing materials
is no longer allowed on new structures or replacement roof systems.
83 Foster,Gordon.Oregon Department of Forestry."Status of Rangeland Fire Protection Associations".2011.
http://www.oregon.gov/odf/fire/fpfc/rfawhite.pdf.Accessed March 2013.
Page 156 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RLSOLUTION 2015-087
The Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act of 1 997 (Senate
Bill 360)
Administered by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF), Senate Bill 360 enlists the aid of
property owners toward the goal of turning wildland urban interface properties into less volatile
zones where homes can survive and firefighters may more safely and effectively defend them
against wildland fire. Senate Bill 360 applies only to interface areas on private land within the
boundary of an Oregon State Department of Forestry District.
The law requires property owners in identified areas to reduce excess vegetation around
structures and along driveways. In some cases, depending on the rating classification of the
property, it is also necessary to create additional fuel breaks along property lines and roadsides.
The process of identifying wildland urban interface areas follows steps and definitions described
in Oregon Administrative Rules. Briefly, the identification criteria include:
• Lands within the county that are also inside an Oregon Department of Forestry
protection district.
• Lands that meet the state's definition of "forestland."
• Lands that meet the definition of "suburban" or "urban"; in some cases, "rural" lands
may be included within a wildland urban interface area for the purpose of maintaining
meaningful, contiguous boundaries.
• Lots that are developed, 10 acres in size or smaller, and which are grouped with other
lots with similar characteristics in a minimum density of four structures per 40 acres.
A classification committee identified wildland urban interface areas in each county where
Senate Bill 360 is applied. Once areas are identified, a committee applies fire risk classifications
to the areas. The classifications range from "low" to "high density extreme," and the
classification is used by a property owner to determine the size of a fuel break that needs to be
established around a structure. The classification committee reconvenes every five years to
review and recommend any changes to the classifications.
The Oregon Department of Forestry is the agency steward of this program. It supplies
information about the act's fuel reduction standards to property owners. ODF also mails each of
these property owners a certification card, which may be signed and returned to ODF after the
fuel reduction standards have been met. Certification relieves a property owner from the act's
fire cost recovery liability. This takes effect on properties that are within a wildland urban
interface area and for which a certification card has not been received by the Department of
Forestry. In these situations, the state of Oregon may seek to recover certain fire suppression
costs from a property owner if a fire originates on the owner's property, the fuel reduction
standards have not been met, and ODF incurs extraordinary suppression costs. The cost---
recovery liability under the Oregon Forestland--- Urban Interface Fire Protection Act is capped at
$100,000.
In Deschutes County, Senate Bill 360 Ratings fall into High, Extreme and High---Density Extreme
categories (see Figure II---22 below). The provisions of Senate Bill 360 also contain Optional
Standards to accommodate a variety of circumstances and landowner preferences. Additional
fuel breaks along property lines and roadsides are required for those properties that fall under
the Extreme and High Density Extreme ratings.
Page 157 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
W
i
• 4 le
1 moi
4_,
= cm . _.
= an
I'
=
= ..■ L11 9 co
-a ith
ea •Ime
co
. . 0
co _Ilif _,
Ca
E ru E a LE
= CC
+la CZ CO ci M III 2 0 C)
= an gil. (i°, A
i "r• .."
= CO a ' V
en . .
ii ill
1 -LI; 1 ,It j
CA
L.. a i a
I=1
:if
.
I IP
•
•
0,--1
1 ' i i:
-..,1 _
,i , fii ;i qii. ,, -III
i
-
4
- r 1 _ A
,
,
L
- _
-14
A ,
,„, •. .•1„...0„,...„.t ,
.,.,
U I • -.-
II j I ,II
P
,
-- 7
4., - L -
. i
,-, ...
I . .
Z- .
=
=
la
t)
il -.74
2
z
z ...":'
If. A ..
8 •
.a. -
u_ 7
Each of the Community Wildfire Protection Plans incorporates Senate Bill 360 ratings where
appropriate to provide additional risk assessment information. It also incorporates the Senate
Bill 360 standards when listing recommendations for defensible space and fuel breaks on private
property:
• A minimum 30---foot primary fuel break around structures for properties rated High. Up
to an additional 70 feet of fuel breaks are required depending on rating and roof
composition. A fuel break consists of: Removal of dead/dry/flammable brush around
home, roof, chimney, decks and under nearby trees; removal of low hanging branches
on trees; and reposition of wood piles at least 20 feet away from home during fire
season.
• A minimum fuel break of 12 feet wide and 13.5 feet tall along driveways are also
required if they are over 150 feet long.
Federal
In 2002, President George Bush established the Healthy Forests Initiative (HFI) to improve
regulatory processes to ensure more timely decisions, greater efficiency and better results in
reducing the risk of high intensity wildfire. This initiative allowed forest management agencies
for the first time, to expedite the environmental compliance process for the purpose of reducing
hazardous fuels on public lands.
In 2003, the US Congress passed historical bi---partisan legislation: the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act (HERA). This legislation expands the initial effort under the Healthy Forests
Initiative and directs federal agencies to collaborate with communities in developing a
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), which includes the identification and prioritization
of areas needing hazardous fuels treatment. It further provides authorities to expedite the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for fuels reduction projects on federal lands.
The act also requires that 50% of funding allocated to fuels projects be used in the wildland
urban interface.84
At the time of compiling data, resources and information for the 2005 Natural Hazard Mitigation
Plan, HFRA was new on the scene and the complete impact of its legislative reach was unknown.
As a result of the authorities under HFRA, communities in Deschutes County now have the
opportunity to participate in advising where federal agencies place their fuels reduction efforts.
With a Community Wildfire Protection Plan in place, community groups can apply for federal
grants to treat hazardous fuels and address special concerns to reduce the risk of catastrophic
loss as a result of wildland fire.
Although some of the authorities under the Healthy Forests Initiative have been subsequently
challenged in federal courts, all have been successfully appealed and the original intent and
authorities under each remain the same.
As the Deschutes County CWPPs are revised, the plans now include specific language regarding
the National Cohesive Fire Management Strategy. In 2009, Congress passed the Federal Land
84"Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003"(H.R.1904);One Hundred Eighth Congress;Administrative
implementation information available at www.fireplan.gov.
Page 159 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Assistance, Management, and Enhancement (FLAME) Act and called for a National Cohesive
Wildland Fire Management Strategy to address wildland fire related issues across the nation in a
collaborative, cohesive manner. The Cohesive Strategy was finalized in 2014 and represents the
evolution of national fire policy:
"To safely and effectively extinguish fire, when needed; use fire where allowable;
manage our natural resources; and as a Nation, live with wildland fire."
The primary, national goals identified as necessary to achieving the vision are:
Resilient landscapes: Landscapes across all jurisdictions are resilient to fire---related
disturbances in accordance with management objectives.
Fire---adapted communities: Human populations and infrastructure can withstand a wildfire
without loss of life and property.
Wildfire response: All jurisdictions participate in making and implementing safe, effective,
efficient risk---based wildfire management decisions.
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are three identified wildfire action items for Deschutes County; in addition, several of the
Multi---Hazard action items affect the wildfire hazard. An action item matrix is provided within
Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A. To
view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
Page 160 of 469- I?XIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
WINDSTORM
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
The Windstorm hazard was not assessed in the 2010 Plan, therefore, this
section provides new content to the Deschutes County NHMP.
Causes and Characteristics of the Hazard
Extreme winds occur throughout Oregon. The most persistent high winds take place along the
Oregon Coast and in the Columbia River Gorge. High winds in the Columbia Gorge are well
documented.The Gorge is the most significant east---west gap in the Cascade Mountains
between California and Canada. Wind conditions in central Oregon are not as dramatic as those
along the coast or in the Gorge yet can cause dust storms or be associated with severe winter
conditions such as blizzards. A majority of the destructive surface winds striking Oregon are
from the southwest. Some winds blow from the east but most often do not carry the same
destructive force as those from the Pacific Ocean.
A windstorm is generally a short duration event involving straight---line winds and/or gusts in
excess of 50 mph. Although windstorms can affect the entirety of Deschutes County, they are
especially dangerous in developed areas with significant tree stands and major infrastructure,
especially above ground utility lines. A windstorm will frequently knock down trees and power
lines, damage homes, businesses, public facilities, and create tons of storm related debris.
Though tornadoes are not common in Oregon, these events do occasionally occur and
sometime produce significant property damage and even injury. Tornadoes are the most
concentrated and violent storms produced by earth's atmosphere, and can produce winds in
excess of 300 mph. They have been reported in most of the counties throughout the state since
1887. Most of them are caused by intense local thunderstorms common between April and
October.
History of Windstorms in Deschutes County
The Columbus Day storm in 1962 was the most destructive windstorm ever recorded in Oregon
in terms of both loss of life and property. Damage from this event was the greatest in the
Willamette Valley, where the storm killed 38 people and left over $200 million in damage.
Windstorms occur yearly; more destructive storms occur once or twice per decade. The
following table shows windstorms that have affected Deschutes County between 1951 and
2007. Since 2007 there have been 27 additional windstorm events that included wind speeds
between:35 and 80 mph (many of these wind events are accompanied by heavy rains and/ or
thunderstorms).85
85 NOAA Storm Events Database,http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
Page 161 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 11-13 Partial History of Significant Windstorms (1951 to 2007)
Date � fC �' 1 Comments
Nov.,1951 Statewide Widespread damage,transmission and utility lines,wind speeds 40=60
mph,gust 75=80 mph
Dec,1951 Statewide Wind Speed up to 60 mph in Willamette Valley,75 mph gusts;damage to
building and utility lines.
Dec.,1955 Statewide Wind speeds 55=65mph,with 69 mph gusts.Considerable damage to
buildings and utility lines.
Nov.,1958 Statewide Wind speeds up to 51 mph,with 71 mph gusts.Major highways blocked by
fallen trees.
Oct.,1962 Almost all of Oregon Oregon's most famous and most destructive windstorm,the Columbus Day
Storm,produced a barometric pressure low of 960 rnb
Mar.,1971 Most of Oregon Storm center moved into NW Washington,bringing cold front heading east
and damaging winds on March 26.
Nov.,1981 Pacific Northwest Back to=back storms on the 13th and 15th of November
Jan.,1990 Statewide Severe windstorm
Dec.,1991 NE and Central Oregon Severe windstorm
Strongest windstorm since Nov.1981;barometric pressure of 966.1 rnb at
Dec.,1995 Statewide Astoria,and an Oregon record low 953 mb off the coast;major disaster
declaration FEMA=1107=DR=OR
Apr.,2003 Deschutes County $10,000 in property damage
Nov.,2003 Deschutes County $2,000 in property damage
A strong wind gust blew a Ponderosa Pine tree over onto a home in
Oct.,2005 Central Oregon southeast Bend.The property damage from this event is estimated at
$50,000
A strong wind gust blew over a Ponderosa Pine Tree which fell on two
Nov.,2005 Central Oregon mobile homes causing extensive damage at Sisters Mobile Home Park.The
property damage from this event is estimated at$40,000.
Jun.,2006
Jefferson, Deschutes, Strong winds and hail caused$7 million in insurance claims for damage to
Crook Counties automobiles and homes
Oct.,2007 Central Oregon A cold front brought strong winds with gusts 40=50 mph which knocked
down trees and power lines in Sisters.One tree fell onto a house.
Sources:Oregon State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT 2015,Taylor,G.H.and Hatton,R.R.,1999,the Oregon
Weather Book,A State of Extremes:Corvallis,Oregon,Oregon State University Press,NOAA Storm Events
Database
Hazard Identification
A windstorm is generally a short duration event involving straight---line winds and/or gusts in
excess of 50 mph. Windstorms can affect developed areas of the county with significant tree
stands and major infrastructure, especially above ground utility lines. The lower wind speeds
typical of eastern Deschutes County can still be high enough to knock down trees and power
lines, and cause other property damage.
As of the 2014 Oregon Residential Specialty Code, Oregon Basic Wind Speeds for 50 Year Mean
Recurrence Interval, Deschutes County is listed within the lowest wind speed category as an
area impacted by 85 mph area wind speeds.
For winter weather events (including high winds,) the National Weather Service monitors
gauging stations and provides public warnings for storms and high winds.
Page 162 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Windstorms in Deschutes County usually occur from October to March, and their extent is
determined by their track, intensity (the air pressure gradient they generate), and local terrain.86
The National Weather Service uses weather forecast models to predict oncoming windstorms,
while monitoring storms with weather stations in protected valley locations throughout
Oregon.87
Extreme weather events are experienced in all regions of Oregon. The regions that experience
the highest wind speeds are in the Central and North Coast of Region 1. The table below shows
the wind speed probability intervals that structures 33 feet above the ground would expect to
be exposed to within a 25, 50 and 100 year period. The table shows that structures in Deschutes
County, within Region 6, can expect to be exposed to lower wind speeds than most regions
within the state.
Table 11-14 Probability of Severe Wind Events by NHMP Region
Z r ealrl vent 5OflYetitEvert w N Yie
(4% anriOal (2% antioa to " l 'an 4i ,
tlegion 1:
75 mph 80 mph 90 mph
Region 2: 65 mph 72 mph 80 mph
North Willamette Valley
Region 3:
60 mph 68 mph 75 mph
Mid/Southern Willamette Valley
Region 4: 60 mph 70 mph 80 mph
Southwest Oregon
Region 5:
75 mph 80 mph 90 mph
Region 6: 60 mph 65 mph 75 mph
Central Oregon
Region 7:
70 mph 80 mph 90 mph
Region S:
Southeast Oregon 55 mph 65 mph 75 mph
Source:Oregon State Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan,2009
Figure II---23 visualizes the maximum wind speed that structures 33 feet above the ground would
expect to be exposed to; for Deschutes County that expected wind speed is less than most of
the state at 85 mph.
ac State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan.Oregonshowcase.org,March 2006.
http://www.oregonshowcase.org/downloads/pdf/stateplan/OR---SN HM P_wind_chapter-_2009.pdf
87"Some of the Area's Windstorms."National Weather Service,Portland.
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/pqr/paststorms/wind.php
Page 163 of 469- E.XI-IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure 11-23 Oregon Building Codes Wind Speed Map
CalumL,n
Mw Ee.. 1 3.5
tw'ach,,von hlultnornah \Ivncr•, —f f
4G n tlnk'r ,
ri't \nmhill Clackamas "N.
tv n ' ) 1 --.I ✓..
1FMar, --- i) \ '
f....._ 1 N I1alx
''.r ^''' tctic vn I \vlie.ehr
' `' Linn ,...rT�� cirm•t
Benic.r w roi, `
Lane
..)
y Urchin... L.
A[ ,Y ` Ding laS
.ariti 7i-
Vlei i___� I,aAe
! �r
n"m'
'
+Vi.t Josephine! .larksnn Klamath
, 1 ■■
a;A I;:rea.■t oh fu I c\tlielrc to the cwean a,rrJs seal he rya gnacd 110 mrh areas
h.Vdlue,mt notional desren 3-,ccundµ:nt o.and sprrls m in le.lxr hour di 33 reLI lice ticur•d
tier I.\ptr m c( :;rte,irr\.
ai.
I I I i mldr
Hti:mph
Source:Oregon Residential Specialty Code,2014..
Probability Assessment
Windstorms affect Deschutes County on nearly a yearly basis. More destructive storms occur
once or twice per decade. According to the State NHMP Region 6— Central Oregon where
Deschutes County is located is likely to experience windstorms of 60 mph during a 25---year cycle.
It should be noted that some of the report incidents are localized events that do not affect large
areas of the county or cities.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a windstorm event is "high," meaning one incident is likely within
the next 10 — 35 year period. Based upon available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk
Assessment supports this probability rating for Deschutes County.88
882015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
Page 164 of 469- FXIIIBI7• I3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Vulnerability Assessment
Many buildings, utilities, and transportation systems within Deschutes County are vulnerable to
wind damage. This is especially true in open areas, such as natural grasslands or farmlands. It is
also true in forested areas, along tree---lined roads and electrical transmission lines, and on
residential parcels where trees have been planted or left for aesthetic purposes. Structures most
vulnerable to high winds include insufficiently anchored manufactured homes and older
buildings in need of roof repair.
Fallen trees are especially troublesome. They can block roads and rails for long periods of time,
impacting emergency operations. In addition, up---rooted or shattered trees can down power
and/or utility lines and effectively bring local economic activity and other essential facilities to a
standstill. Much of the problem may be attributed to a shallow or weakened root system in
saturated ground. In Deschutes County, trees are more likely to blow over during the winter
(wet season). Also, irrigation wheel lines frequently get tangled in windstorms, and ultimately
affect the agriculture economy.
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"moderate"vulnerability to windstorm hazards; meaning between one and ten---percent of the
region's population or assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster (particularly if
utility lines are damaged). Based upon available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk
Assessment supports this vulnerability rating for Deschutes County.89
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring.Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores each hazard
and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the
occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the windstorm hazard is rated #4, out of
9 rated hazards,with a total score of 179.
Community Hazard Issues
The damaging effects of windstorms may extend for distances of 100 to 300 miles from the
center of storm activity. Positive wind pressure is a direct and frontal assault on a structure,
pushing walls, doors, and windows inward.
Negative pressure also affects the sides and roof: passing currents create lift and suction forces
that act to pull building components and surfaces outward. The effects of winds are magnified in
the upper levels of multi---story structures. As positive and negative forces impact and remove
the building protective envelope (doors, windows, and walls), internal pressures rise and result in
roof or leeward building component failures and considerable structural damage.
89 Ibid.
Page 165 4.469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Windstorms can result in collapsed or damaged buildings, damaged or blocked roads and
bridges, damaged traffic signals, streetlights, and parks, among others. Roads blocked by fallen
trees during a windstorm may have severe consequences to people who need access to
emergency services. Emergency response operations can be complicated when roads are
blocked or when power supplies are interrupted.
Historically, falling trees have been the major cause of power outages in Deschutes County.
Overhead power lines can be damaged even in relatively minor windstorm events.
Industry and commerce can suffer losses from interruptions in electric service and from
extended road closures. They can also sustain direct losses to buildings, personnel, and other
vital equipment. There are direct consequences to the local economy resulting from windstorms
related to both physical damages and interrupted services.
Windstorms can be particularly damaging to manufactured homes and other non---permanent
housing structures, which, in 2012, accounted for 9.1% of the housing units in Deschutes
County, special attention should be given to securing these types of structures.
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
County and Cities
The county, cities, and utility districts routinely maintain hazard trees to keep utility lines and
other infrastructure safe from damage in wind events.
State
The Oregon Building Code (both residential and other codes) sets standards for structures to
withstand 80 mph winds. It is based on the International Residential Code and the International
Building code.
Existing strategies and programs at the state level are usually performed by Public Utility
Commission (OPUC), Building Code Division (BCD), Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF),
Oregon Emergency Management (OEM), Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), and the
Oregon Emergency Response System (OERS), who all have vital roles in providing windstorm
warnings statewide.
The Public Utility Commission ensures the operators manage, construct and maintain their
utility lines and equipment in a safe a reliable manner. These standards are listed on the
following website: http://www.puc.state.or.us/PUC/safety/index.shtml
The OPUC promotes public education and requires utilities to maintain adequate tree and
vegetation clearances from high voltage utility lines and equipment,
Page 166 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Oregon Emergency Management strives to reduce any damage and impacts caused by
windstorms by working in partnership with PUC, ODOT. ODF promotes mitigation strategies and
programs that reduce tree---caused damage to utility systems and highway corridors.
Federal
FEMA has recommended having a safe room in homes or small businesses to prevent residents
and workers from "dangerous forces" of extreme winds to avoid injury or death. This
recommendation is provided through FEMA's resource manual: Taking Shelter From the
Storm9n
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are no identified windstorm action items for Deschutes County; however, several of the
Multi---Hazard action items affect the windstorm hazard. An action item matrix is provided within
Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV, Appendix A. To
view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
so
http://www.fema.gov/safe---room---resources/fema p -320---taking---shelter storm building safe---room---your home---or---
small---business
Page 167 01469- EXIIIBII' B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
WINTER STORM
Significant Changes Since the 2010 Plan
There are no significant changes in the potential for winter storms to occur in
Deschutes County since 2010; therefore, there are no significant changes in
this section from the 2010 Plan. However, the format of the section and
minor content changes has occurred.
Causes and Characteristics of Winter Storms
The National Climatic Data Center has established climate zones in the United States for areas
that have similar temperature and precipitation characteristics. Oregon's latitude, topography,
and proximity to the Pacific Ocean give the state diversified climates. Deschutes County is
primarily located within Zone 7: South Central Area, south and western portions of the county
are located within Zone 5: High Plateau. The climate in Zone 7 generally consists of wet winters
and dry summers.91 These wet winters result in potentially destructive winter storms that
produce heavy snow, ice, rain and freezing rain, and high winds. Severe storms affecting Oregon
with snow and ice typically originate in the Gulf of Alaska or in the central Pacific Ocean. Winter
storms occur over eastern Oregon regularly during November through February.92 Cold arctic air
sinks south along the Columbia River basin, filling the valleys with cold air.93
Figure 11-24 Oregon Climate Divisions
Oregon's Climate Divisions
r�
4 > 8
1 V
oregon
(114"1 south centr
al
3 7
Source.Oregon Climate Service,
"'Oregon Climate Service,"Climate of Deschutes County,"
91 Oregon State Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan"Winter Storms Chapter",2012
55lbid
Page 168 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION ION 2015-087
The principal types of winter storms that occur in Deschutes County include:
Snow Storm
Snowstorms require three ingredients: cold air, moisture, and air disturbance. The result is
snow, small ice particles that fall from the sky. In Oregon, the further inland and north one
moves, the more snowfall can be expected. Blizzards are included in this category.
Ice Storms
Ice storms are a type of winter storm that forms when a layer of warm air is sandwiched by two
layers of cold air. Frozen precipitation melts when it hits the warm layer, and refreezes when
hitting the cold layer below the inversion. Ice storms can include sleet (when the rain refreezes
before hitting the ground) or freezing rain (when the rain freezes once hitting the ground).
Extreme Cold
Dangerously low temperatures accompany many winter storms. This is particularly dangerous
because snow and ice storms can cause power outages, leaving many people without adequate
heating.
History of Winter Storms in Deschutes County
Destructive storms producing heavy snow, ice and cold temperatures occurred throughout the
County's history, most notably in 1916, 1920, 1937, 1950, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1992---93 and
the winter of 1998---99. Records indicate storms occurring between 1916 and 1937 were marked
by heavy snow drifts and cold temperatures. Records also indicate people and communities
were generally prepared and equipped to cope with the extreme weather conditions.
The severe winter storm of 1950 impacted the entire state of Oregon. While many places
experienced high winds, cold weather and snow, the impact in Deschutes County was high snow
fall and drifts. Transportation of supplies imported to the Deschutes Basin was limited. In
general, Deschutes County and the region are well prepared for severe winter storms thus
reducing the impact of inclement weather.94
In recent years, the challenge facing the region is the significant increase in population and
growth in tourism as a local industry. Both of these shifts have generally brought new
population to the area, particularly with little or no experience with living and working in severe
winter weather. This condition impacts shelter, access to medical services, transportation,
utilities, fuel sources and telecommunication systems. In severe winter storm conditions,
travelers must seek accommodations, sometimes in communities where lodging is limited or
overextended. A significant amount of supplies including food and fuel are transported into the
Deschutes Basin and in severe winter conditions, these necessities are often limited when road
conditions are unfavorable. Likewise, unfavorable road conditions make emergency response
operations more difficult to a more fragile population.
94 Taylor,George H.and Hannan,Chris,The Oregon Weather Book,(1999)Oregon State University Press.
Page 169 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Recent shifts in climate patterns beginning in the 1960's has resulted in snowfall and cold
weather shifts. While there have been record snowfalls, they are less frequent. The number of
severe cold days has been fewer and less frequent. Fluctuating temperatures within storm
events also creates the likelihood of ice dams.
Hazard Identification
Winter storms occur in all parts of the county. The extent depends upon air temperatures, the
level of moisture in the atmosphere, and elevation.
A severe winter storm is generally a prolonged event involving snow and cold temperatures. The
characteristics of severe winter storms are determined by the amount and extent of snow, air
temperature, and event duration. Severe storms have various impacts in different parts of the
county. There may be a 20 degree temperature difference from Terrebonne in the north part of
the county and La Pine in the south part of the county. The National Weather Service Pendleton
office monitors the stations and provides public warnings on storm, snow and cold temperature
events as appropriate.
Probability Assessment
The recurrence interval for severe winter storms throughout Oregon is about every 13 years;
however, there can be many localized storms between these periods. Winter storms do occur in
eastern Oregon regularly from November through February. Deschutes County experiences
winter storms a couple times every year, to every other year.
Deschutes County's Natural Hazards Mitigation Steering Committee believes that the County's
probability of experiencing a winter storm event is "high," meaning one incident is likely within
the next 10 — 35 year period. Based upon available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk
Assessment supports this probability rating for Deschutes County.`'
Vulnerability Assessment
Perhaps the most advantageous aspect of Central Oregon's cold and snowy winters is the fact
that the region is typically prepared, and those visiting the region usually come prepared. As can
be expected, however, there are occasions when preparation cannot meet the challenge. In
Deschutes County, extreme cold and heavy snow can disrupt farming practices. Likewise,
schools have trouble heating their buildings. The constant freezing and melting of snow around
manholes often lead to potholes, and power outages can be frequent in adverse weather.
Finally, extreme cold can cause breaks in water pipelines when temperatures drop below 10 F.
Specific estimates of property and infrastructural damages for winter storm events are not
available at this time.
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Steering Committee rated Deschutes County as having a
"high"vulnerability to winter storm hazards; meaning that more than 10---percent of the
region's population or assets would be affected by a major emergency or disaster. Based upon
95 2015 Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan DRAFT.Department of Land Conservation and Development,2015.
Page 170 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
available information the Oregon NHMPs Regional Risk Assessment supports this vulnerability
rating for Deschutes County.99
Risk Analysis
The risk analysis involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in a
geographic area over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components: (1) the magnitude
of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment (assessed in the
previous section), and (2) the likelihood or probability of the harm occurring. Table 2---6 of the
Risk Assessment (Volume I) shows the county's Hazard Analysis Matrix which scores each hazard
and provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the
occurrence of a particular hazard. Based on the matrix the winter storm hazard is rated #1, out
of 9 rated hazards, with a total score of 230.
Community Hazard Issues
Life and Property
Severe winter storms contribute to threats on life and property. Injury and death are often
associated with traffic accidents on snow and/or ice covered roads, physical exertion linked to
shoveling snow and other activities involved in traveling through snow, and hypothermia from
prolonged exposure to the cold. When streets and roads are affected by severe snow and ice,
emergency vehicles including police, fire and medical may experience difficulty in reaching
targeted destinations.
Roads
County, state, city and many private roads are routinely monitored for snow and ice.
Jurisdictions and many private land owners in the rural---urban interface plow snow on a regular
basis. Extreme snow fall and ice conditions usually place more demand on local jurisdictions,
staff and budgets. Impassible roads hamper emergency response operations.
Power Lines
Extreme cold temperatures have caused power outages that interrupt services and damage
property. Many outlying ranches and farms have generators and are generally self---sufficient in
these events. However as the general population becomes more urban, fewer numbers of
people have resources such as wood stoves, a traditional back up source for heat. Rising
population growth and new infrastructure, particularly tourism related, create higher probability
for damage to occur from severe winter storms as more life and property are exposed to risk.
Water Lines
The most frequent water system problems related to extreme cold weather are breaks in water
mainlines. Breaks occur during severe cold event impacting residents and business. Inadequate
96
Ibid.
Page 171 of 469- EXHIBIT H to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
insulated potable water and fire sprinkler pipes can rupture and cause extensive damage to
property. Aligned with the extreme population growth, Deschutes County has a significant
number of new residential and commercial structures which have been built under current
codes that recognize severe cold weather conditions.
Creek flooding within a single storm event, or between events and fluctuating temperatures
may lead to the build up of ice dams in creeks. In the winter of 2003, an ice dam release on
Whychus Creek caused ice and debris to build up and recede on the creek as it passed through
Sisters. This release caused the creek level to rise to its high water mark, but broke loose before
flooding homes.
More information on this hazard can be found in the Regional Risk Assessment for Region 6 of
the Oregon NHMP.
Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources include current mitigation programs and
activities that are being implemented by city, county, regional, state or federal agencies and/or
organizations.
County and Cities
County and municipal Public Works and Road Departments have plans in place to mitigate and
respond to severe winter storms. The plans are updated annually and routinely implemented.
Utility companies have existing restoration plans that include routine upgrade and repair,
emergency restoration, and public education. Additionally,
schools and employers of large scale businesses and agencies have "snow---day" plans.
These schedules routinely plan a minimum of five to eight "snow---days" per year.
State
Studded tires can be used in Oregon from November 1 to April 1. They are defined under Oregon
Law as a type of traction tire. Research shows that studded tires are more effective than all-
--weather tires on icy roads, but can be less effective in most other conditions.
Highway maintenance operations are guided by local level of service (LOS) requirements. In
general, classifications of highways receive more attention. Routes on the National Highway
System network, primary interstate expressways and primary roads, will be cleared more quickly
and completely. In Deschutes County, this includes Highway 97 and Highway 26. Critical areas like
mountain passes will have snow---chain requirements for vehicles, and many local streets are
"snow emergency routes" that will be cleared of parked cars. Parking lot and sidewalk snow
removal is mostly the responsibility of property owners, sometimes by local ordinance.
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) spends about $16 million per year on snow and
ice removal from the state highway system though winter maintenance practices. These
practices include: snow plowing, sanding roadways for ice, and using anti---icing chemicals.
Page 172 of 469- I'XI IIBIT B to RESOLU'T'ION 2015-087
Through the educational collaboration between the Oregon Department of Forestry and the
Pacific Northwest Chapter, International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) the How to Recognize and
Prevent Tree Hazards activity brochure was created.
TripCheck provides traffic incident, weather, and highway condition reports, as well as useful
links to bus, rail, airport, and truck information. The website provides road condition images
from approximately 140 road cameras, including over 40 in rural areas such as mountain passes
where knowing road conditions can be crucial to safety: http://www.TripCheck.com/.
Federal
The National Weather Service issues severe storm watches and warnings when appropriate to
alert government agencies and the public of possible or impending weather events. The watches
and warnings are broadcast over NOAA weather radio and are forwarded to the local media for
retransmission using the Emergency Alert System.
Hazard Mitigation Action Items
There are three identified winter storm action items for Deschutes County; in addition, several
of the multi---hazard action items affect the winter storm hazard.An action item matrix is
provided within Volume I, Section 3, while action item forms are provided within Volume IV,
Appendix A. To view city actions see the appropriate city addendum within Volume III.
Page 173 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Volume III:
Jurisdictional Addenda
Jurisdictional Addenda area provided for the following cities:
• Bend BA---1
• La Pine To be provided
• Redmond RA---1
• Sisters To be provided
Page 174 of 469- LXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
CITY OF BEND
ADDENDUM
Introduction
This document serves as the City of Bend's Addendum to the Deschutes County Natural
Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP). The City's Addendum is considered part of the county's
multi---jurisdictional plan,and meets the following requirements: (1)Multi---jurisdictional Plan
Adoption§201.6(c)(5),(2)Multi---jurisdictional Participation§201.6(a)(3),(3)Multi---
Jurisdictional Risk Assessment §201.6(c)(2) (iii), and (4) Multi---jurisdictional Mitigation
Strategy §201.6(c)(3) (iv).
A description of the city specific planning and adoption process follows, along with detailed
community specific action items; for detailed information see Volume IV, Appendix B.
Information about the city's risk relative to the county's risk to natural hazards is
documented in this addendum's Hazard Analysis and Issue Identification section. The
section considers how the city's risk differs from or matches that of the county's; additional
information on Risk Assessment is provided within Volume I, Section 2 of this NHMP.
How was the Plan Developed?
The NHMP was developed by the Deschutes County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan steering
committee, while this addendum was created by the City of Bend steering committee. The
Deschutes County Emergency Manager was designated as the NHMP's convener and will
take the lead in implementing, maintaining and updating the plan. Locally, Damian Syrnyk,
Bend Senior Planner, convened a local steering committee for the purpose of developing the
city's addendum.
The local steering committee was closely involved throughout the development of the plan
and served as the local oversight body for the plan's development. The local steering
committee met on two separate occasions: January 28`h and February 11th, 2015 (see
Appendix B for more information). Steering committee members contributed data and
maps, reviewed and provided guidance towards the community profile, risk assessment,
mitigation strategy (action items), and implementation and maintenance plan. The
addendum reflects effort from the formal meetings and during subsequent informal
meetings between members of the steering committee and with OPDR.
An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In
order to develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the
planning process should include opportunities for the public, neighboring communities, local
and regional agencies, as well as, private and non---profit entities to comment on the plan.'
OPDR provided a publicly accessible project website for the general public to provide
feedback on the draft NHMP via a web form. In addition, Deschutes County and the City of
'Code of Federal Regulations,Chapter 44.Section 201.6,subsection(b).2015
Page 174 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLU'T'ION 2015 087
Bend provided press releases on their websites to encourage the public to offer feedback on
the plan update.
In addition, OPDR administered a public opinion survey to obtain additional input from the
public regarding the county's risks, vulnerabilities, hazards history, and mitigation strategies.
See Volume IV, Appendix F for more information.
Updating the mitigation plan is a requirement to gain eligibility for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's Pre---Disaster Mitigation, Hazard Mitigation, and Flood Mitigation
Assistance grant Programs. This project is funded through the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's (FEMA) FY12 Pre---Disaster Mitigation Competitive Grant Program
(PDMC-PL---10---OR---2012---002).
The Bend Addendum to the Deschutes County NHMP was adopted on [insert date] and
the NHMP was approved by FEMA on [insert date].
For more information on the composition of the steering committee and the process see
this NHMP's Volume I, Acknowledgements and Executive Summary, and Volume IV,
Appendix B.
Action Item Matrix
The City's action items were developed through a two--stage process during the 2015 NHMP
development. In stage one, OPDR facilitated a work session with the steering committee to
discuss the city's risk and to identify potential issues. In the second stage, OPDR, working
with the local steering committee, developed potential actions based on the hazards and
the issues identified by the steering committee. In addition, there are 21. County Action
Items that include Bend as an "Affected Jurisdiction". For additional information see the
discussion near the end of this document.
The City's actions are listed below in matrix format. For more detailed information on each
action, see the action forms within Attachment 1 of this addendum.
Page 177 of 469 EXHIBIT R to RESOLUTION 2015 0-g7
M
3 3 3 3 ') 3 3 3 3 m
d; v a v v a v a, a
rRS z z z z z z z 2 z
rte
E E E E E E
` E E E
I. Ht V `V V V
,- h F H H H
40 " 00 " oL '� t m C
C o. N � c 0 W
y a vZ
GJ G1 a C a C a a t
V u a .
C .� 'a '� '� 'y N -, E ? y 10 0 N
as u E N a a to N C E y •
PS a a m 2 4 T V L T N �, .?O r Oo a
u
0- C '- G C W c C a " A c L.L., G u W
c
m a ., y C N Y
° m L m m 4a •-• .V 4° 0 m m h C .- E E a C V - N N u N N O N Q -2 E Y ❑ E
u
D w
❑ W o o o T
o C• 7, C 4- 'oA . LL3_ 4. © O c G C > c a LI > C m C t
• C c w ,2- S =- -g c O C O C 1 a L.
CO 0 a u < U v 3 U E a u m u 2 E o g u m
,u uY v v a o v 1 o " A . a m v w LL .. a v ` ' V LL C v C m C a U a E•
E .. m w
' u u u u •- L u o u -a E u a' v u -o u
- o G 1 c 4 - 'S v ¢ p . '8 to N ❑ 0 n •O N o o 2 E C o 3 n E
a v ❑ a , O l9 a 1 o y — O ❑ a ❑ a ❑ W u r 0 E m u 9 E a
C ❑ c C C a O T C C C wC P e E c a C w C ` a+ , v E vc c v C f, E E vd a G : b ' d : S-- r
.6 s w 1 C ❑ w t _ C W O C Q w . C W 0 w V W w C 'a W ❑ ❑ J ❑
¢Ci V C .c4.• V V V C v
c1.0 E
E E E E E E E E E
ate+ 4 y1p a L}' aoo a L V S a L .
C A x V to C
2 0 0 C O T D N C a O T 2 a
..iJ' L9 2 V' 2 l7 ZZ V' 2 o 22 0 2 l7 �' 13 22
a
r% c
To g
a I'il Q v - v Y ro .0 o a v a % .5 4' a O
p▪ ., C _. C a
ap o C 13 b0 0 OC E C C N C
c pp V - - E m o
O tp al m . '^' 0 Q C tNo
L V N E G oo a o W
0 O a .Q T -O a v L C
" `m C E - v �.; -o
E m CO u 5 - a 0 m :C
V v C ._�. E L t @ to w 0 .. Y 0 to -..
5 ro L c 0 .p N b L m.•
• o i a
a o. o c m .3 aVV m u c N
v v . E •E _0 c Z2, V a r o
'O 7 N C 2 ND !ID
N 0 ttoo a
�a t a °� E `., a a of v E E
o m •
N oa a • N C m 3 r m C �O C '4 ��
E c I' C o a Y u v m c Y 7 v 0 n ,. o
n O C d
o i N ■
N 0 �+ C u• -a Lo C V C C '«_
% d l .E q ro
©' m m ` ° ro o 'w a a c a c m E a C
•
Q v c o o E C E -o i C c m -0 m ..
a 0. v r o 0
'O E -o 'n a d c C C E c c 'E E re _,T, a " o o I
.a v G ,a@ S a a s C 0 O u a a L u i C o t� u v•
m C d 7 a r ',1_),_ . C v 2 a O 2 ,47', .11
2 a v o v m o N N Y v v 3 E w a ❑ d E vi O • v c, a c to e
0 . _ 2
z •n
Cr; -0
Q ~ O
CO IRS , v m H 0 2
•, 10 V U ''
r N m a ✓t l0 A , N
sr
st
d.0 N.
0
' W �.0
CU
0
1 s
IC
• m
. p
v v v v v v a)
Z Z 2 Z 2 Z Z Z 2
R .
E E 9 9 9 9 E E E
F U) 00 ao
le it,
u 5
' " O ° O 0 O U) vUi _ U)
m ad ago T Y — eu _«_
C 2 C C u• 0 C al E c C
.' a a a w -p CIJ ID :4 C w C7 E a` w Y c E c
C O N .• O 9 T p 2 Y a1 T U a➢ w ).- V U ' « � `c U p
w cc T� E c v c .. c V .c o a� rn t j o
!bpi, .0 x v 2 E a E E E a ai t° D a E ° a e E u c c
w u .. E " E v .. E ' u w .n .� v E L a u E E y N 8 s,
c - 'v ` u v 2 io a 9 p t '2 iE O C `o ai o y o a u m 9 `0 6i
0......:. .m C � G }. ✓� C . CCO C T U) _ T _ U c T N O a0 T -p
W E T C U -2 'E' 8 - -O C u C U G C C Q C H W t 9 .E-'
C 3 C 0 C 10 C O o ry o C a1 aJ C `$
Y C O aa0 ap V a00 a0 E V . ao V U) no U ^ E - lJ E U 0.0 ❑ W # i°CO
" ', r u • o _
o c W a, E a v c d ° E E v a m a v o v c a c v :. a
", a C w , a U W a, J V m c, N t E 0 U C N a 5 a v C U w E G 9 E Y t 4■
_.,L2
. u °c' c °° , y w o m w .n O . . p▪ u .._ u __ m . O al u° aci• u °1 = u . O v E.
E r L W A C G N C E C o Q 5 N E C ` E C N E u C O C 0 c9 G 5 - N 0 C C E v vi a T,• �, N m ➢ a N N 5 v E N ? ' N = N n v v E N ,. K i @ 5 d A = W a 5 C N N
.it C C p p d c LW Q C V w A' 'A C 5 W tl w U c W vii - 0 W o C ❑ 0 0 a c ,ru w C3
G 9 C C C 'ad, 9 C
E
a) E E E E E E E
o
g t pp L m b0 L m L amp ado L L m 0�0
'E 3 3 3 3 r3 3 c 3 = 3 c 7 c
p ro o 0 o ro o O ro 4 0 ❑ ,�
(7 G� L7 47 l7 l7 C7 l7 C7 22 l7 2
d a w a
_
Q E 0 9 w v c w
r.
a
w G a C L p A
r
• _p 3 ° a m Y 4E v Co a a i' p o s, y 3 c Y
Y
m v %p
L E .5 E T 4 ra
' w N L n
°
" e a v 3 C o- E o o c 0
E
N c p 2 u -°
�
o -0 c o o n o v o °
a ro e v c' z
+o. ° @ E 'r >' - 0 s 5 E `° 3 -[
c .9 E ° cn o -a Y v ro v +.
o po w o « C o a 3 Of ._ 3 Eo ro
.V. c a v v a no 7 v v c T C .., E
E m y = °
N " "b a 3 G E ran ao 3 0 '�^ m ," m y E vi
a m - -O -. aJ .0 nco u O T -0 '^ c• C "Y To O el
ry ''E'
E O
wC N v o Tfl O C . ` N
1
U �.� -a C .a O v s v c .� _ _O E 4 a v
9 O 0 •O L E 9 5 3 C L ❑ 2 • O
@ c E 1 C a w v u o a E 3 u w e E t o a) 40 9 to
° o ro . - o ° v a • c _ o C y c ro pa m 0 E m E .o v N E
,. - `5' o E a o p n a .E c m a' o a .o ., . c ao E 0 v -o cv c v m , c o a, o a' v o w u p ° ° a v
. LE u m
2 p1
2
u
c° 1
. 0 a =
m ,
00 se
4) i o 2 v
N M L
N G ■ a C g iK tt _ r1
LL LL O .
s n 3 3 3 3
How Will the Plan be Implemented?
The City Council will be responsible for adopting the City of Bend addendum to the
Deschutes County NHMP. This addendum designates a coordinating body and a convener to
oversee the development and implementation of action items. Because the city addendum is
considered part of the county plan, the city will look for opportunities to partner with the
County to maintain the plan, and coordinate mitigation efforts through the implementation
of action items, etc. The City's steering committee will convene after re---adoption of the City
of Bend addendum on the same semi---annual schedule as the county.The City's Senior
Planner will serve as the convener and will be responsible for convening the local steering
committee. The convener will also remain active in the County's planning process. The
steering committee will seek to involve senior staff and decision makers throughout the
duration of the five---year implementation and maintenance of the NHMP addendum.
Implementation through Existing Programs
Many of the Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan's recommendations are consistent with the
goals and objectives of the city's existing plans and policies. Where possible, the City of
Bend will implement the NHMP's recommended actions through existing plans and policies.
Plans and policies already in existence have support from local residents, businesses, and
policy makers. Many land---use, comprehensive, and strategic plans get updated regularly,
allowing them to adapt to changing conditions and needs. Implementing the NHMP's action
items through such plans and policies increases their likelihood of being supported and
implemented.
The City of Bend currently has the following plans that relate to natural hazard mitigation:
Table BA-2 Existing Plans
mm
Document Year
General Plan 1998
Development Code (Flood,Section 10.10.22A.4) 2014
Emergency Operations Plan 2009
Transportation System Plan 2013
Greater Bend CWPP* 2011
Water Pubilc Facility Plan 2013
Sewer Public Facility Plan 2014
Stormwater Public Facility Plan 2014
Source:City of Bend
The steering committee and the community's leadership have the option to add or
implement action items at any time. This allows the steering committee to consider
mitigation strategies as new opportunities arise, such as funding for action items that may
not be of the highest priority. When new actions are identified, they should be documented
using an action item form (see Attachment 2). Once a proposed action form has been
submitted to the convener, the action will become part of the City's addendum.
Page 180 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Continued Public Participation
Keeping the public informed of the city's efforts to reduce the city's risk to future natural
hazards events is important for successful plan implementation and maintenance. The city is
committed to involving the public in the plan review and updated process. The City
Addendum along with the County Plan will be posted on---line on the University of Oregon's
Scholars Bank https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/1907 so that the
public may view the plan at any time.
In addition, natural hazards information dissemination is conducted throughout the year
when opportunities present themselves via the city offices and website.
Plan Maintenance
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan will be updated every five years in
accordance with the update schedule outlined in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. During
the county plan update process, the city will also review and update its addendum. The
convener will be responsible for convening the steering committee to address the questions
outlined below.
• Are there new partners that should be brought to the table?
• Are there new local, regional, state, or federal policies influencing natural hazards
that should be addressed?
• Has the community successfully implemented any mitigation activities since the
plan was last updated?
• Have new issues or problems related to hazards been identified in the community?
• Are the actions still appropriate given current resources?
• Have there been any changes in development patterns that could influence the
effects of hazards?
• Have there been any significant changes in the community's demographics that
could influence the effects of hazards?
• Are there new studies or data available that would enhance the risk assessment?
• Has the community been affected by any disasters? Did the plan accurately address
the impacts of this event?
These questions will help the steering committee determine what components of the
mitigation plan need updating. The steering committee will be responsible for updating any
deficiencies found in the plan.
The remainder of this addendum includes three sections:
1. Community Profile and Asset Identification,
2. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, and
3. Mitigation Strategy section.
Page 182 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
COMMUNITY PROFILE
ASSET IDENTIFICATION
This section provides city specific asset identification. For information on the characteristics
of Bend, in terms of geography, environment, population, demographics, employment and
economics, as well as housing and transportation see Volume IV, Appendix C, Community
Profile. Many of these community characteristics can affect how natural hazards impact
communities and how communities choose to plan for natural hazard mitigation.
Considering the city specific assets during the planning process can assist in identifying
appropriate measures for natural hazard mitigation.
Asset Identification
The following assets were identified by the steering committee in 2015:
Critical and Essential Facilities
• City Hall —710 NW Wall Street, Bend, OR 97701
• Public Works:
o Transportation — 1375 NE Forbes Road, Bend OR 97701
C) Utilities Business Office — 62975 Boyd Acres Road, Bend, OR 97701
o Water Reclamation Facility — McGrath Road in unincorporated Deschutes
County
o Bridge Creek water intake facility — Skyline Road (unincorporated Deschutes
County)
• Police Department and Municipal Court— 555 NE 15th Street
• Fire Department— offices and fire stations in Bend:
a Administration — 1212 SW Simpson Ave, Bend, OR 97702
o Station 301 — 1212 SW Simpson Ave, Bend, OR 97702
o Station 303 — 61080 Country Club Dr, Bend, OR 97702
a Station 305 -- 63377 SW Jamison Street, Bend, OR 97701
• Bend Municipal Airport---63136 Powell Butte Road, Bend, OR 97701
Deschutes County Critical and Essential Facilities (located in
Bend):
• Administration — 1300 NW Wall St
• Sheriff, Adult Community Justice — 63360 NW Brita St, Building 3
• 9---1---1 Services-20355 Poe Sholes Drive
• Adult Corrections (Jail) 63333 Highway 20
• Community Development— 117 NW Lafayette Ave
• County Annex, Health Dept. —1128 NW Harriman St
• Community Justice Center— 63360 NW Britta St, Building 1
• County Courthouse Building— 1164 NW Bond Street
• County Sheriff's Complex— 63333 Highway 20
Page 183 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Health Services Building — 2577 NE Courtney Drive
• Justice Building— 1100 NW Bond Street
• KIDS Center (Health Services) 1375 NW Kingston
• Mike Maier Building (Children and Families Commission) — 1130 NW Harriman St
• Property & Facilities/Information Technology Building — 14 NW Kearney Ave
• Road Department— 61150 SE 27th Street
• Rosie Bareis Community Campus — 1010 NW 14th St
• School Based Health Center— 2150 NE Daggett Lane
• Wall St Services Building (Health Services) — 1340 NW Wall Street
Special Districts with Offices in Bend
• Pacific Power— electric power utility
• Cascade Natural Gas — natural gas utility— 64500 OB Riley Road
• Bend Broadband (cable, landline phone, internet provider) — 63090 Sherman Road
• CenturyLink — cable, landline phone, internet provider
Bend-La Pine School District (schools located in Bend)
• Elementary Schools:
o Amity Creek —437 NW Wall Street
o Bear Creek—51 SE 13th St
o Elk Meadow — 60800 Brookswood Boulevard
o High Lakes-- 2500 NW High Lakes Loop
o Highland Magnet — 701 NW Newport Avenue
o Juniper Elementary— 1300 NE Norton Avenue
o Pine Ridge— 19840 Hollygrape St
o RE Jewell Elementary— 20550 Murphy Rd
o Westside Village Magnet— 1101 NW 12th St
a William E. Miller—300 NW Crosby Drive
• Middle Schools in Bend:
o Cascade — 19619 Mountaineer Way
o Pilot Butte— 1501 NE Neff Road
o Sky View—63555 NE 18th St
o REALMS (Rimrock Expeditionary Learning) — 63175 OB Riley Road
• High Schools in Bend:
o Bend —230 NE 6th St
o Marshall — 1291 NE 5th St
o Mountain View— 2755 NE 27th St
a Summit — 2855 NE Clearwater Drive
Colleges and Universities
• Central Oregon Community College — 2600 NW College Way
• Oregon State University, Cascades Campus:
a Main offices 2600 NW College Way
o Graduate & Research Center— 650 SW Columbia St
Page 184 of 469- EXI IIB1T B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Social Service Providers
Included below is a list of social service providers. For additional service providers see
Attachment 3.
• Deschutes County Health Services— 2577 NE Courtney Drive, Bend, OR
• Neighbor Impact— 20310 Empire Ave, #A100, Bend, OR 97701
• Housing Works
• American Red Cross, Mountain River Chapter—815 SW Bond, Suite 110, Bend,
OR 97702
• Salvation Army, Deschutes County— 515 NE Dekalb Ave, Bend, OR 97701
• St. Vincent De Paul —950 SE 3rd, Bend, OR 97701
• Or Department of Human Services— Self Sufficiency Program — 1300 NW Wall
St, Suite 101, Bend, OR 97701
• State of Oregon —Seniors and People with Disabilities— 1300 NW Wall Street,
Suite 102, Bend, OR 97702
• Emergency shelters:
o Bethlehem Inn — 3705 N. Highway 97, Bend, OR 97701
o Cascade Youth and Family Center— 19 SW Century Drive, Bend, OR
97702
o Saving Grace -- 1425 NW Kingston Ave, Bend, OR 97701
o Two shelters that are confidential and provide shelter for homeless,
pregnant, and/or parenting teens
o The Shepherd's House
• Child programs:
a Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon —500 NW Wall Street, Bend, OR
97701
a Alyce Hatch Center— 1406 NW Juniper, Bend, OR 97701
a Cascade Youth and Family Center-- 19 SW Century Drive, Bend, OR
97702
a Central Oregon Family Resource Center— 1130 NW Harriman St, Suite B,
Bend, OR 97701
Population
Bend's estimated population as of July 1, 2014 is 79,985 people. The city's population has
grown an estimated 3,346 people or 4.4% since the 2010 Census2. The acknowledged
Coordinated Population Forecast for Bend is 109,389 people by the year 2025, which
represents an increase of 29,404 people or 37% between 2014 and 20253.
Bend's population growth has occurred in all parts of the city, with more occurring on
Bend's west side and in southwest Bend. The groups that have seen the largest increases in
household growth include Latino and Hispanic households and households composed of
members 65 years and older.
2 Portland State University, Population Research Center,"Annual Population Estimates",2014.
32004 Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County—updated 2009
Page 185 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Land Use
The City of Bend's acknowledged comprehensive plan is the Bend Area General Plan. The
Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission first acknowledged the plan in
1981. The City last completed a major update of the plan in 1998. Since that time, the City
has updated the plan chapters on demographics and population (2004); economic
development (2005); transportation (2013), and public facilities and services (2013---2014).
The City implements the plan through the Bend Development Code, which was adopted in
2006.
The City is currently working on a project to evaluate the capacity of the UGB for needed
housing and economic opportunities, which is expected to include an expansion of the UGB.
The project is on schedule to be completed with local adoption in spring of 2016. The plan
amendments and implementing development code changes will touch on needed housing,
employment land, land for public parks and schools, transportation, and public facilities (e.g.
water and sanitary sewer).
Bend Park and Recreation District
The Bend Park and Recreation District operates and maintains 81 parks and open spaces,
and 65 miles of trail.4 The district has its own tax district and is governed by a five member
elected board of directors that is managed by an Executive Director. The districts parks
include 36 neighborhood parks (155 acres), 24 community parks (543 acres), 3 regional
parks (954 acres), and 18 natural areas (906 acres) and more than 24 facility buildings.'
Tourist Locations
• Drake Park— adjacent to flood plain
• Pilot Butte — Highway 20
• Shevlin Park
• Pine Nursery Park
• Farewell Bend Park adjacent to Old Mill District
• Several public golf courses:
c River's Edge
0 Awbrey Glen
o Bend Golf and Country Club
• Old Mill District (shopping & entertainment) 450 SW Powerhouse Drive #2
Economy
Bend is the largest city east of the Cascade Mountains, and the seventh largest in Oregon.
As such, it serves as a large regional hub for retail sales, health care, higher education, and
leisure, hospitality, and tourism. The growing traded sector industries in Bend include:
4 Bend Park and Recreation District website, http://www.bendparksandrec.org,accessed April 2,2015.
5 Bend Park and Recreation District,"Parks, Recreation,and Green Spaces Comprehensive Plan",
February 2012 update.
Page 186 of 469- [XIIIBIT B to RESOI,UI'ION 2015-087
• Bioscience
• Aviation and aerospace
• Outdoor recreation equipment and apparel;
• Software;
• Specialty manufacturing;
• Corporate and administrative offices, and;
• Brewing and Distilling.
The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Deschutes County (in which Bend is the
largest city and county seat) was 6.5% in February. The number of employed persons was
75,831, and the civilian labor force was 81,516. Total nonfarm payroll employment in
February 2015 was 70,050.
Cultural and Historic Resources
The sites(Table BA---3) and structures(Table BA---4) listed below represent the city's official
list of historic places compiled by the city and county, and approved by the Oregon Land
Conservation and Development Commission.6
Table BA-3 Historic Sites — City of Bend
Sites Designated in itb Jaques Location
A.M. Drake Homesite Drake Park
Foley Landmark Pilot Butte State Park
1813 Rock 129 NW Idaho Street
Bend School Landmark Drake Park
Central Oregon Pioneers' Landmark Pioneer Park
Johns Landmark Drake Park
Oregon Trunk Freight Warehouse Site Railroad tracks&NW Division
Pilot Butte Inn Site 1133 NW Wall Street
ShevlinMHixon Mill site Shevlin Center near dam
Weist Homesite Landmark 1315 NE Third Street
Historic St11u tuce • Location
A.J.Tucker Blacksmith Shop 200M202 NW Greenwood Avenue
Athletic Club Gymnasium 520 NW Wall Street Bend
August Nelson Building 838 NW Bond Street Brooks
Scanlon Craneshed building 721 SW Industrial Way
Charles Boyd Homestead 20410 Bend River Mall Drive
Cozy Hotel 327 NW Greenwood Avenue
Delaware Grocery 845 NW Delaware Avenue
Deschutes County Library Building 507 NW Wall Street
Downing Hotel 1033 NW Bond Street
Source:Bend Area General Plan,1998.
G Bend Area General Plan, 1998.
Page 187 of469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table BA-3 Historic Structures — City of Bend
Historic Stru to 1 Location
Evan A.Sather Home 7 NW Tumalo Avenue
First Presbyterian Church 157 NW Franklin Avenue A.L.
French Home 429 NW Georgia Avenue Hoover's
George Palmer Putnam House 606 NW Congress Street
H. E.Allen House 875 Brooks Street Bend
James E. Reed House 45 NW Greeley Avenue
John I.West Building 130 NW Greenwood Avenue
Kenwood School 701 NW Newport Avenue
Keyes House 912 NW Riverside Boulevard
Liberty Theatre 849T851 NW Wall Street
Lucas House 42 NW Hawthorne Avenue
Mountain View(Mayne)Hospital 515 NW Kansas Avenue
N.P. Smith Pioneer Hardware Building 935T937 NW Wall Street
Nels and Lillian Andersen House 63160 Nels Anderson Road
Niswonger House 44 NW Irving Avenue
O'Donnel Building 921T933 NW Wall Street
O'Kane Building 115 NW Oregon Avenue
Old Bend High School Building 520 NW Wall Street
Old Clinic 731 NW Franklin Avenue
Old U.S. Post Office 777 NW Wall Street
Pierson Blacksmith Shop 211 NW Greenwood Avenue
Railroad Depot 1160 NE Division Street Bend
Reid School 129 NW Idaho Avenue
Sawyer House 434 Drake Road
ShevlinTHixon Executive House 545 NW Congress Street
Spheir Building 901 NW Bond Street
St. Francis Catholic Church 494 NW Lava Road
Stover House 1 Rocklyn Road
Thomas McCann House 440 NW Congress Street
Trinity Episcopal Church 469 NW Wall Street
Tweet irrigation dam Division St. near Yale Avenue
Universal Garage 124T128 NW Greenwood Avenue Steidl
Water&Light Co. Powerhouse/dam Foot of Vermont Street Bend Woolen
Mill 1854 NE Division Street
Wright Hotel 215 NW Greenwood Avenue
Source: Bend Area General Plan, 1998.
Page 188 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
RISK ASSESSMENT
This section of the NHMP addendum addresses 44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) --- Risk Assessment. In
addition, this chapter can serve as the factual basis for addressing Oregon Statewide
P g g
Plannin g Goal 7 —Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. Assessing natural hazard risk has three
phases:
• Phase 1: Identify hazards that can impact the jurisdiction. This includes an
evaluation of potential hazard impacts — type, location, extent, etc.
• Phase 2: Identify important community assets and system vulnerabilities. Example
vulnerabilities include people, businesses, homes, roads, historic places and drinking
water sources.
• Phase 3: Evaluate the extent to which the identified hazards overlap with, or have
an impact on, the important assets identified by the community.
The information presented below, along with hazard specific information presented
elsewhere in this addendum, within the Hazard Annexes (Volume II), and community
characteristics presented in the Community Profile (Appendix C), will be used as the local
level rationale for the risk reduction actions identified in this addendum. The risk
assessment process is graphically depicted in Figure BA---1 below. Ultimately, the goal of
hazard mitigation is to reduce the area where hazards overlap vulnerable systems.
Figure BA-I Understanding Risk
diMUSGS Understanding Risk DISASrrrt
Natural Hazard \Vulnerable System
Potential Catastrophic fr SS Exposure,Sensitivity
and Chronic Physical Lvents i Risk t and Resilience of:
•Past Recurrence Intervals 1 1 • Population
•suture Probability I of 1 • Economic.Generation
•Spend of Onset I t • Ruilt Environment
•Macjnitucle• 1 Disaster t • Academic and Research f unction
•Duration % , • Cultural Assets
•Spatial Extent t , • Infrastructure
3 s s Ability,Resources
s and Willingness to:
•Mitigate•Respond
•Prepare •Recover
Source:USGS-Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience Research Collaboration,1006
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Page 189 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Hazard Analysis Methodology
This NHMP utilizes a hazard analysis methodology that was first developed by FEMA circa
1983, and gradually refined by the Oregon Military Department's Office of Emergency
Management over the years.
The methodology produces scores that range from 24 (lowest possible) to 240 (highest
possible). Vulnerability and probability are the two key components of the methodology.
Vulnerability examines both typical and maximum credible events, and probability
endeavors to reflect how physical changes in the jurisdiction and scientific research modify
the historical record for each hazard. Vulnerability accounts for approximately 60% of the
total score, and probability approximately 40%.
This method provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, or relative risk. It
doesn't predict the occurrence of a particular hazard, but it does "quantify" the risk of one
hazard compared with another. By doing this analysis, planning can first be focused where
the risk is greatest.
In this analysis, severity ratings, and weight factors, are applied to the four categories of
history, vulnerability, maximum threat (worst---case scenario), and probability as shown in
the table below. See Volume I, Section (3 Risk Assessment) for more information.
Hazard Analysis
On February 11th, 2015, the City of Bend addendum steering committee developed their
hazard vulnerability assessment (HVA), using the County's HVA as a reference. Changes from
the County's HVA were made where appropriate to reflect distinctions in vulnerability and
risk from natural hazards unique to the City of Bend, which are discussed throughout this
addendum.
Table BA---4 shows the HVA matrix for Bend showing each hazard listed in order of rank from
high to low. For local governments, conducting the hazard analysis is a useful step in
planning for hazard mitigation, response, and recovery. The method provides the
jurisdiction with sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the occurrence of a
particular hazard.
Table BA-4 Hazard Analysis Matrix — City of Bend
Total';
Maximum Threa# ��d
Hazard j' , M`'p m " im� l ' Probability Vulnerabllit r heat` Score RaOfQ
Wildfire 20 70 50 100 240 #1
WinterStorm 20 70 50 90 230 #2 Top
Windstorm 20 70 25 80 195 #3 Tier
Earthquake(Cascadia) 2 49 40 100 191 #4
Volcano 2 21 50 100 173 #5 Middle
Drought 8 56 15 70 149 #6
Tier
Flood 16 56 25 50 147 #7
Earthquake(Crustal) 2 7 25 80 114 #8 Bottom
Landslide 2 7 5 20 34 #9 Tier
Source:City of Bend NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
Page 190 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Three chronic hazards (wildfire, winter storm, and windstorm) and one catastrophic hazard
(Cascadia earthquake) rank as the top four hazard threats to the city (Top Tier). The volcano,
drought, and flood hazards comprise the next three highest ranked hazards (Middle Tier),
while crustal earthquake and landslide hazards comprise the lowest ranked hazards (Bottom
Tier).
Table BA---5 categorizes the probability and vulnerability scores from the hazard analysis for
the city and compares the results to the assessment completed by the Deschutes County
NHMP Steering Committee (areas of differences are noted with bold text within the city
ratings).
Table BA-5 Probability and Vulnerability Comparison
. ' 4iN{� may'
'1 a�
Pitoiabuthty I abtl� Y m h babIIfty
Drought High Low High Low
Earthquake(Cascadia) Moderate High Moderate High
Earthquake(Crustal) Low Moderate Low Low
Flood High Moderate High Low
Landslide Low Low Low Low
Volcano Low High Low High
Wildfire High High High High
Windstorm High Moderate High Moderate
Winter Storm High High High High
Source:City of Bend NHMP Steering Committee and Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
Drought
A drought is a period of drier than normal conditions that results in water---related problems.
Drought occurs in virtually every climatic zone, but its characteristics vary significantly from
one region to another. Drought is a temporary condition; it differs from aridity, which is
restricted to low rainfall regions and is a permanent feature of climate. The extent of
drought events depends upon the degree of moisture deficiency, and the duration and size
of the affected area. Typically, droughts occur as regional events and often affect more than
one city and county.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for drought is high (which is
the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to drought is low (which is the
same as the county's rating).
The city has ample high quality surface and groundwater supplies fed primarily by the Bridge
Creek watershed and from the Deschutes regional aquifer. Groundwater supplies are
utilized as a supplemental water source when snowmelt or heavy precipitation increases the
surface water turbidity. In addition, the City of Bend actively reclaims water and encourages
water conservation through their WaterWise program.
For more information on the Drought Hazard(including history and extent) see the Drought
Annex in Volume II.
Page 191 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Earthquake
Oregon and the Pacific Northwest in general are susceptible to earthquakes from four
sources: 1)the off---shore Cascadian Fault Zone;2) deep intra---plate events within the
subducting Juan de Fuca Plate; 3) shallow crustal events within the North American Plate;
and 4) earthquakes associated with volcanic activity.'
The areas most susceptible to ground amplification and liquefaction have young, soft alluvial
sediments, found along river and stream channels. The extent of the damage to structures
and injury and death to people will depend upon the type of earthquake, proximity to the
epicenter and the magnitude and duration of the event.
The steering committee HVA evaluated both crustal earthquakes and a Cascadia
earthquake. The steering committee determined that the city's probability of experiencing a
crustal earthquake is low (which is the same as the county's rating) and that their
vulnerability to a crustal earthquake is moderate (which is higher than the county's rating).
The steering committee determined that the city's (and State's) probability of experiencing a
Cascadia earthquake is moderate (which is the same as the county's rating) and that their
vulnerability to a Cascadia earthquake is high (which is the same as the county's rating).
The concentration of residents, businesses, and infrastructure within the City of Bend is
greater than anywhere else in the county. Additionally, much of the city's critical
infrastructure is constructed of un---reinforced masonry (which is especially vulnerable to
seismic events) and built prior to the current seismic safety standards of the 1990s.
Although there are several faults located in the Bend vicinity (Table II---6),the city is not
particularly susceptible to liquefaction, and is not expected to be experience very strong to
violent shaking in an earthquake event(see Tables II---5 and II 6).As such,the city's greatest
vulnerability to earthquakes has more connection to the age of the city's infrastructure and
buildings than to the particular geology of the area. The city considers itself to have high
vulnerability to a Cascadia earthquake event due to secondary effects of the hazard,
including access to transportation routes, energy resources, communications, and the need
to assist with refugees of the damage that is expected west of the Cascades.
As noted above the city has a high concentration of buildings that are built prior to 1990,
which increases the city's vulnerability to the earthquake hazard. Information on specific
buildings' estimated seismic resistance, determined by DOGAMI in 2007, is shown in Tables
BA---6 to 8 below.The tables below display the rankings of all facilities within the city's
jurisdiction; each "X" represents one building within that ranking category.
Table BA---6 shows evaluated school facilities. Of the school facilities evaluated by DOGAMI
using RVS, two (2) have very high (100% chance) collapse potential, and 18 buildings have
high (greater than 10% chance) collapse potential.
Taylor,George H.and Chris Hannan.The Oregon Weather Book.Corvallis,OR:Oregon State University Press.
1999
Page 192 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table BA-6 Rapid Visual Survey Scores: Schools
f^. ,iv # .. att @yp, ';t+ "; i�9dr �;� +�+,. a v
+itp a°Si ' h t i' � $ .' °1
o�
N%ig h
0:404 1 )
Elementary Schools
Amity Creek Elem. School
(437 NW Wall St, Bend) XX
Bear Creek Elementary School
(51 SE 13th St, Bend) XXX XXX
Buckingham Elementary School
X
(62560 Hamby Rd, Bend)
Elk Meadow Elementary School
(60880 Brookswood Blvd, Bend) X
Ensworth Elementary School
X
(2150 NE Dagget Ln, Bend)
High Lake Elementary School X
(2500 NW High Lakes Lp, Bend)
Highland School at Kenwood Elem. School
XX
(701 NE Newport, Bend)
Juniper Elem. School XXXX X X
(1300 NE Norton St, Bend)
RE Jewell Elementary School (20550 Murphy, Bend)
S Addition Admin Office(Aug. 2008) X
S Remodel Admin Office(Aug. 2008)
Lava Ridge Elementary School
(20805 Cooley Rd, Bend) X
Pine Ridge Elementary School X
(19840 Hollygrape St, Bend)
Tumalo Elementary School
(19835 2nd St, Bend) X X XXXXX
Westside Village Magnet School at Kingston
Elementary School X
(1101 NW 12th St, Bend)
Middle Schools
Cascade Middle School
(19619 Mountaineer Way, Bend) XX
S Addition of Gymnasium,Admin office(Aug. 2008)
S Remodel Admin Offices, bathrooms (Aug. 2008)
High Desert Middle School
(61111 27th St, Bend) X
Pilot Butte Middle School XX XXX X
(1501 NE Neff, Bend)
Sky View Middle School X
(63555 NE 18th St, Bend)
Source:DOGAM I 2007.Open File Report 0---07---02.StatewideSeismic Needs Assessment Using Rapid Visual
Assessment.
Page 193 of 469- EXI 1113IT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Table BA•6 Rapid Visual Survey Scores: Schools (continued)
, ' 1..rriel of Collapse Potential
Low Modem* High Very High
Facility , A%) (>1%) (>10%) (100%)
High Schools
Bend Senior High School X XXXXXXX X
(230 NE 6th St, Bend)
Marshall High School XX
(1291 NE 5th St, Bend)
Mountain View Senior High School
(2755 NE 27th St, Bend) XX XXXX X
D Addition Classroom (435 sf) (Aug. 2008)
D Remodel Classroom(898 sf)(Aug. 2008)
Summit High School X
(2855 NW Clearwater Dr, Bend)
Source:DOGAMI 2007.Open File Report 0---07---02.Statewide Seismic Needs Assessment Using Rapid Visual
Assessment.
Table BA---7 shows evaluated community college facilities. Of the buildings evaluated by
DOGAMI using RVS, none have very high (100% chance) collapse potential, and nine (9)
buildings have high (greater than 10% chance) collapse potential.
Table BA-7 Rapid Visual Survey Scores: Community College
Level of Collapse Potential
Low Moderate High. Very High
Facility ( L99), (>1%) (>10%) {100%) ..
Central Oregon Community College; Bend Campus
Bookstore X
Boyle Education Center X
Cascade Hall X
Grandview Student Union Center X
Juniper X
Library X
Mazama Gym X
Modoc (Old Library) X
Ochoco Hall X
Pence X
Pinckney Art Center X
Pioneer Hall X
Ponderosa X
Source:DOGAMI 2007.Open File Report 0---07---02.Statewide Seismic Needs Assessment Using Rapid Visual
Assessment.
Table BA---8 shows evaluated public safety and hospital facilities. Of the buildings evaluated
by DOGAMI using RVS all have low (< 1% chance) collapse potential.
Page 194 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table BA-8 Rapid Visual Survey Scores: Public Safety and Hospital�y�
12:':,'",k k t 9'i tk '; ' , ° evert of 5r, ?A R,i7"ft4° 1 TI 7
? ri iY q r� V i�,Y a y I
1 ?1':/; ,d Y I� Vi' i I '
Low M+a ler H 8191
" t 'i 1 w ( %1 ( ,, . `c,4,, .$t`;qr N t rl
Public Safety
Bend Police Department
X
(555 NE 15th St, Bend)
Bend FD< East Station 304 X
(62420 Hamby Rd, Bend)
Bend FD<South Station 303
X
(61080 Country Club Rd, Bend)
Bend FD<Tumalo Station 302
X
(19850 4th St, Bend)
Bend FD<West Station 301 X
(1212 SE Simpson Ave, Bend)
Deshutes County RFPD#2
X
(63377 Jamison St, Bend)
Deschutes County Sheriffs Office/ EOC
X
(63333 W Hwy 20, Bend)
Hospitals
St.Charles Medical Center r Bend
XX
(2500 NE Neff Rd, Bend)
Source:DOGAMI 2007.Open File Report 0---07---02.Statewide Seismic Needs Assessment Using Rapid Visual
Assessment.
The county and cities have opted to create one action item for all the facilities that have a
"high" or "very high" rating (see Appendix A). The buildings with 'high' or 'very high'
collapse potential include multiple education facilities located throughout the city, all of
which can play a key role in during disaster events or during long---term recovery.
For more information on the Earthquake Hazard (including history and extent) see the
Earthquake Annex in Volume II.
Flood
Flooding results when rain and snowmelt creates water flow that exceed the carrying
capacity of rivers, streams, channels, ditches, and other watercourses. In Oregon, flooding is
most common from October through April when storms from the Pacific Ocean bring intense
rainfall. Most of Oregon's destructive natural disasters have been floods.8 Flooding
can be aggravated when rain is accompanied by snowmelt and frozen ground; the spring
cycle of melting snow is the most common source of flood in the region. The principal types
of flood that occur in Bend include:spring/snow melt flooding,warm winter rain---on---snow
flooding, Ice jams, flash floods, and dam failure.
8 Taylor,George H.and Chris Hannan.The Oregon Weather Book.Corvallis,OR:Oregon State University Press.
1999
Page 195 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for flood is high (which is the
same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to flood is moderate (which is
higher than the county's rating).
The city's high ratings are due to the fact that Bend is bisected by the Deschutes River which
is susceptible to various winter and spring flood events including ice jamming. Ice jams on
the Deschutes and Little Deschutes rivers have created flood conditions in the past and will
continue to do so due to local topography. Ice jams commonly happen during the winter
and early spring, while the river is still frozen. Sudden warming at higher altitudes can melt
waters resulting in increased runoff of water and ice into large reaches of frozen river
below. On the way downstream, the ice can "jam" in narrow places on the river or against a
road crossing, effectively damming the river, sometimes followed by a sudden breach and
release of the water and ice. In addition, the city is concerned that changes in the character
of the river channel (sediment buildup) will effect river flooding if a large event occurs. Short
duration flash floods also impact the community's stormwater system, including the ability
of pipes and ditches to convey short precipitation, causing damage and economic impacts.
Action items are included to address the concerns with ice jamming and the changes to river
character.
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
The Deschutes County Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) were modernized in 2007. The
table below shows that as of November 2014, Bend has 57 National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) policies in force and four (4) paid claims. The city's last Community
Assistance Visit (CAV) was July 20, 1994. The city is not a member of the Community Rating
System (CRS). The table displays the number of policies by building type and shows that the
majority of residential structures that have flood insurance policies are single---family homes
(48) and that there are two (2) non---residential structures with flood insurance policies.
Additionally, there is one property that is a minus rated A---zone property.
The community repetitive flood loss record for Bend does not include any repetitive flood
loss, or severe repetitive flood loss, buildings and has not had any repetitive loss claims.
Table BA-9 Food Insurance Detail
�y;�?isa w„ ` Policies by Policlinic Type Minus
Currant ;„ j iel a ,,r q i PreiWIRM Ingle 2 to 4 Other Non: Rated
Jurisdiction FIiW,PRO,,14 i Y,ai Policiet Polities Family ', Family Residential Residential A Zone
Bend 9/28/07 9/4/87 57 21 48 5 2 2 1
Severe
Pre.FIRM Substantial'-10epetitive Repetitltre
Insurance Total Paid Claims Damage Loss lOss Total paid CRS Class Last
Jurisdiction in Force Claims Paid Claims Buildings iRuilrlliigs Amount Rating CAV
Bend $17,290,600 5 4 0 0 0 $50,393 NP 7/20/94
Source:Information compiled by Department of Land Conservation and Development,November 2014.
For more information on the Flood Hazard (including history and extent) see the Flood Annex
in Volume II.
Page 196 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Landslide
A landslide is any detached mass of soil, rock, or debris that falls, slides or flows down a
slope or a stream channel. Landslides are classified according to the type and rate of
movement and the type of materials that are transported. In a landslide, two forces are at
work: 1) the driving forces that cause the material to move down slope, and 2) the friction
forces and strength of materials that act to retard the movement and stabilize the slope.
When the driving forces exceed the resisting forces, a landslide occurs.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for landslide is low (which is
the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to landslide is low (which is the
same as the county's rating).
The city has had no problems with landslides in city limits in known history and is located in
a generally stable area (the city is generally located on basalt with six---inches of top soil). A
few neighborhoods within the city (Awbrey Butte, etc.) are located on steep hillsides but
have not experienced problems in the past.
For more information an the Landslide Hazard (including history and extent)see the
Landslide Annex in Volume ll.
Volcano
The Pacific Northwest lies within the "ring of fire", an area of very active volcanic activity
surrounding the Pacific Basin. Volcanic events occur regularly along the ring of fire, in part
because of the movement of the Earth's tectonic plates. Volcanic events have the potential
to coincide with numerous other hazards including ash fall, earthquakes, lava flows,
pyroclastic flows, lahars, and debris flows, and landslides.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for volcanic event is low
(which is the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to volcanic event is
high (which is the same as the county's rating).
Were a volcanic event to occur in the Cascades region of Oregon, Bend could be at risk for
ash fall, depending on the severity of the event and the direction of the wind. Due to Bend's
proximity to the Three Sisters and Newberry Crater, in relation to other areas within eastern
Oregon, the effects of a volcanic event may be more disruptive to normal business,
economic activity, and health.
For more information on the Volcano Hazard (including history and extent)see the Volcano
Annex in Volume ll.
Wildfire
Wildfires occur in areas with large amounts of flammable vegetation that require a
suppression response due to uncontrolled burning. Fire is an essential part of Oregon's
ecosystem, but can also pose a serious threat to life and property particularly in the state's
growing rural communities. Wildfire can be divided into three categories: interface,
wildland, and firestorms. The increase in residential development in interface areas has
resulted in greater wildfire risk. Fire has historically been a natural wildland element and
Page 197 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
can sweep through vegetation that is adjacent to a combustible home. New residents in
remote locations are often surprised to learn that in moving away from built---up urban
areas, they have also left behind readily available fire services providing structural
protection.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for wildfire is high (which is
the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to wildfire is high (which is the
same as the county's rating).
The city experiences the effects of wildfire frequently (example, Two Bulls Fire in 2014 and
Awbrey Hall in 1990; see Wildfire Annex Figure II---14 for a map of the large wildfire history).
As of 2011, the estimated population within the East and West Bend UGRs is 76,870
including approximately 30,700 structures (as of 2013 the population of Bend is 78,280 and
it is expected to grow an additional 31,000 people by 2025). The Greater Bend Area
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP, August 2011, to be updated in 2015/16) relies
upon (1) the Oregon Department of Forestry Assessment of Risk Factors and (2) the
classification ratings of individual areas under the Oregon Forestland---Urban Interface Fire
Protection Act of 1997 (Senate Bill 360) to determine fire risk within the Greater Bend
Wildland---Urban Interface (WUI). According to the Senate Bill 360 ratings Bend (East UGR
and West UGR) are rated as High fire risk (see map in Attachment 4); and according to the
ODE Assessment all areas within the Greater Bend WUI are rated with a High probability of
wildfire risk occurring and Extreme vulnerability (except for East UGR which is rated High)10
In addition to general concerns for the safety of residents and structures the city's primary
drinking water is sourced from the Bridge Creek watershed (west of the city) and is
considered vulnerable to wildfire. Rangeland surrounding the city to the east acts as a
natural firebreak, and WUI areas in and near Bend are regularly maintained through fuel
reduction projects specified within the Greater Bend Area CWPP. For more information on
wildfire risk and fuels reduction projects see the Greater Bend Area CWPP and visit the
Project Wildfire website: http://www.prajectwildfire.org/.
For more information on the Wildfire Hazard (including history and extent)see the Wildfire
Annex in Volume II and the Greater Bend CWPP.
Windstorm
A windstorm is generally a short duration event involving straight---line winds and/or gusts
in excess of 50 mph. Although windstorms can affect the entirety of Deschutes County,
they are especially dangerous in developed areas with significant tree stands and major
infrastructure, especially above ground utility lines. A windstorm will frequently knock
down trees and power lines, damage homes, businesses, public facilities, and create tons
of storm related debris.
9 Lighthall, Kate.2011.Greater Bend Community Wildfire Protection Plan, U.S.Census Bureau.2000
Decennial Census,Table P001,and 2004 Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County—
updated 2009
10 The ODF Assessment takes into account the likelihood of a fire occurring, hazard rating, protection
capability, human and economic values protected,structural vulnerability to determine the overall score.
For detailed information review the CWPP available on the Project Wildfire website:
http://www.projectwildfire.orq/
Page 198 of 469- EXHIBIT H to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for windstorm is high (which
is the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to windstorm is moderate
(which is the same as the county's rating).
Historical wind events have uprooted trees, damaged roofs and windows, and damaged
utility lines. Windstorms have not caused disastrous local damage but are a persistent
problem. Windstorms are often associated with microbursts (thunderstorms). A primary
windstorm vulnerability for the community is damage to utility lines, including fiber optics,
which are key to the economic sectors of the community.
For more information on the Windstorm Hazard(including history and extent) see the
Windstorm Annex in Volume II.
Winter Storm
Severe winter storms can consist of rain, freezing rain, ice, snow, cold temperatures, and
wind. They originate from troughs of low pressure offshore that ride along the jet stream
during fall, winter, and early spring months. Severe winter storms affecting Deschutes
County typically originate in the Gulf of Alaska or in the central Pacific Ocean. These storms
are most common from November through March.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for winter storm is high
(which is the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to winter storm is high
(which is the same as the county's rating).
Bend is located at a higher elevation east of the Cascades, which is a major contributor to
winter storms. Major winter storms can and have occurred in the Bend area, and while they
typically do not cause significant damage; they are frequent and have the potential to
impact economic activity. Road closures on Highway 97, or the passes to the Willamette
Valley (Highways 58 and 126), due to winter weather are a common occurrence and can
interrupt commuter and large truck traffic. The city budgets funds for seasonal winter storm
needs, such as clearing roads.
For more information on the Winter Storm Hazard(including history and extent)see the
Winter Storm Annex in Volume ll.
Summary
The figure below presents a summary of the hazard analysis for the City of Bend and
compares the results to the assessment completed by the Deschutes County NHMP Steering
Committee.
In terms of history, probability, vulnerability, and maximum threat, the hazard analysis for
the city overall rated their threat to the wildfire, windstorm, flood, and crustal earthquake
hazards higher than the county. The top two hazards for the city and the county are wildfire
and winter storm; the city rates windstorm as it's third highest rated hazard and the county
rates the Cascadia earthquake events as it's next highest rated hazard event.
Page 199 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure BA-2 Overall Hazard Analysis Comparison — Bend and Deschutes County
41
240 31 32
42
43
33 44
44
55 55
5L 66 47
120 ttg 47
48
#9
#9
Drought Farthquake Far hqua ke Flood landslide Volcano Wildfire Windstorm Winter Storm
(Cascacl la) (Crustal)
County Bend
Source:City of Bend NHMP Steering Committee and Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
Page 200 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
•
MITIGATION
STRATEGY
Mitigation Plan Mission
The plan mission states the purpose and defines the primary functions of Deschutes
County's NHMP. It is intended to be adaptable to any future changes made to the plan and
need not change unless the community's environment or priorities change.
The mission of the Deschutes County NHMP is:
To promote sound public policy designed to protect citizens, critical facilities,
infrastructure, private property, and the environment from natural hazards.
This can be achieved by increasing public awareness, documenting the resources for risk
reduction and loss---prevention, and identifying activities to guide the county towards
building a safer, more disaster resistant community.
The Bend steering committee reviewed the 2015 NHMP plan mission statement and agreed
it accurately describes the overall purpose and intent of this plan. The Steering Committee
believes the concise nature of the mission statement allows for a comprehensive approach
to mitigation planning.
Mitigation Plan Goals
Mitigation plan goals are more specific statements of direction that Deschutes County
citizens, and public and private partners can take while working to reduce the county's risk
from natural hazards. These statements of direction form a bridge between the broad
mission statement and particular action items. The goals listed here serve as checkpoints as
agencies and organizations begin implementing mitigation action items.
The Bend Addendum steering committee reviewed and agreed to the 2015 Deschutes
County NHMP plan goals. All the plan goals are important and are listed below in no
particular order of priority. Establishing community priorities within action items neither
negates nor eliminates any goals, but it establishes which action items to consider to
implement first, should funding become available. Below is a list of the 2015 NHMP goals:
Goal 1: Protect life and reduce injuries resulting from natural hazards.
Goal 2: Minimize public and private property damages and the disruption of essential
infrastructure and services from natural hazards.
Goal 3: Implement strategies to mitigate the effects of natural hazards and increase the
quality of life and resilience of economies in Deschutes County.
Goal 4: Minimize the impact of natural hazards while protecting, restoring, and
sustaining environmental processes.
Page 201 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Goal 5: Enhance and maintain local capability to implement a comprehensive hazard
loss reduction strategy.
Goal 6: Document and evaluate progress in achieving hazard mitigation strategies and
action items.
Goal 7: Motivate the public, private sector, and government agencies to mitigate the
effects of natural hazards through information and education.
Goal 8: Apply development standards that mitigate or eliminate the potential impacts of
natural hazards.
Goal 9: Mitigate damage to historic and cultural resources from natural hazards.
Goal 10: Increase communication, collaboration, and coordination among agencies at all
levels of government and the private sector to mitigate natural hazards.
Goal 11: Integrate local NHMPs with comprehensive plans and implementing measures.
(Note: although numbered the goals are not prioritized.)
Mitigation Plan Action Items
Short---and long term action items identified through the planning process are an important
part of the mitigation plan. Action items are detailed recommendations for activities that
local departments, citizens and others could engage in to reduce risk. They address both
multi---hazard(MH)and hazard---specific issues.Action items can be developed through a
number of sources. The figure below illustrates some of these sources. A description of how
the plan's mitigation actions were developed is provided below.
Figure BA-3 Development of Action Items
•
s s
Potential Action Item
Pool
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience(2008)
Page 202 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOIAJ l'ION 2015-087
Action Item Worksheets
Each action item has a corresponding action item worksheet describing the activity,
identifying the rationale for the project, identifying potential ideas for implementation, and
assigning coordinating and partner organizations. The action item worksheets can assist the
community in pre---packaging potential projects for grant funding. The worksheet
components are described within Volume I, Section 3 (Mitigation Strategy). The City specific
action item worksheets are located in Attachment 1, Action Item Forms.
The City is also a party to several actions described in the County NHMP; each jurisdiction
listed on the County Action Item forms as an "Affected Jurisdiction" will contribute to and
work towards completion of that action as it pertains to their jurisdiction. There are 21
County Action Items that include Bend as an "Affected Jurisdiction". For detailed
information on each County level action item form see Volume I, Section 3, Mitigation
Strategy and Volume IV, Appendix A, Action Item Forms.
Action Item Development Process
Development of action items was a multi---step, iterative process that involved
brainstorming, discussion, review, and revisions. Action items were developed by the
steering committee and were influenced by actions first identified in the City of Bend
Emergency Operations Plan (2009). A number of actions identified by the County steering
committee include the City as an affected jurisdiction; these actions are broad actions that
include implementation components at both the county and city level. All actions were
reviewed by the committee and revised as necessary before becoming a part of this
document.
Page 203 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOl,t1TION 2015-087
ATTACHMENT I :
ACTION ITEM FORMS
Action Item Forms
The action item forms portray the overall action plan framework and identify linkages
between the plan goals, partnerships (coordination and partner organizations), and actions.
Table BA---10 provides a list of actions for the city.The pages that follow include individual
forms for each mitigation action.
Table BA-IO Mitigation Actions
eluted Hazards
al c
to 4)
r -p 0 d O w►
r �^' r.
Action. High ° 6 m 3
Item Prier , "�;i�t�I#n Status > 3 3 3
MH#1 Long%Term New X X X X X X X
MH#2 Short%Term New X X X X X X X X
MH#3 Yes Long%Term New X X X X X X X
MH#4 Short%Term New X X X X X X X X
MH#5 Long%Term New X X X X X X X X
MH#6 Short%Term New X X X X X X X X
MH#7 Short%Term New X X X X X X X
EQ#1 Long%Term New X
EQ#2 Long%Term New X
FL#1 Long%Term New X
FL#2 Long%Term New X
FL#3 Long%Term New X
VE#1 Long%Term New X
VE#2 Long%Term New X
WF#1 Short%Term New X
WF#2 Short%Term New X
WF#3 Short%Term New X
WF#4 Short%Term New X
Source: City of Bend NHMP Steering Committee
Page 204 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
.� vny�+ 3u3ik ,,�ra rr +'' i ;c-,' nd"N� � J
m su F� r
r
�J/�� �Q � } �y G
'v 41 ' I i I (� ��� RA 4 ii !t >,y qy, h r,+ i $ &`§ t sD
e P! { , kl #If'1�1"iQ'�'lt w#t1F f'l ':a 'alg
(Wh cd '� O►t i rarer k!9f ion Iteiti? ',`
r rrw a, r
r
•1 M2 M3 M4
Identify, improve, and sustain collaborative programs
focusing on the real estate and insurance industries, M5 M6 117 ■g •Yes
public and private sector organizations, and individuals.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important to raise awareness about hazard mitigation with professions who regularly interact
with homebuyers, home sellers, and those who finance real estate transactions.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Provide background pieces, white papers, and/or Added in 2015
information to local builder and realtors associations,
local government communications professionals, and
presentations to governing bodies.
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Police Department, Fire Department Deschutes County Emergency Services, Deschutes County
Rural Fire Protection District #2
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
II
OEM (Public Private Partnership), DLCD, Local Ongoing
Funding Resources •Short Term(1---2 years)
Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Pad;_ . • r . , - .
Mitigation Action:MUi ir".w r #2 Nigh Priority
Alignment •with Plan.Goals:
at do w want to ri a . 7 Action Item?
tr „,P r ,,..s+,
•1 El 2 13 ■4
Develop public and private partnerships to foster natural
hazard program coordination and collaboration. ■5 •6 •7 1 8 MY es
•9 • 10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important to ensure all agencies charged with or choosing to pursue natural hazards mitigation
planning are coordinating efforts to be more effective and prevent duplication of efforts.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Police Department, Bend Fire Department Deschutes County Emergency Services, Deschutes County
Rural Fire Protection District #2
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, County Emergency
Manager ShortTerm(1---2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 2f46 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
`" 1 h7,, 41,N ,e4'1"'''.,'•.:. ,:: 1 r'{f 4,,-",5",,,,',,''''
1 ' 1 v d { µW{ ,; S
:1M/� �y r H P torn
, , , , r A , 0041' r , � i ti & t BEY vv y, Y� d R� »r t ,
,t R, ° f ,„ { 9 „.r r C9 7r d W ` d a,Mr t NY tI'fl('[' [.� Aye
(w 1! i i q !'�,dl " r rq t*r' p tid t n1 .1 i} A p to Sry
l*, tcIOw d� ►`Xy4.0{ , , 1
1 t 5 fl�ai. d}kk i d ti,�� �:4 ; i+ 7n
Siva{ ��,Y:. � w� ) "�; a ".b 8^,1.4w.iry Y8 i.
Develop inventories of at---risk buildings and .1 M2 •3 .4
infrastructure, and prioritize mitigation projects based
on those providing the most benefit (at the least cost) to S 6 7 8 Yes
the population of the City of Bend.
•9 ■10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
DOGAMI RVS (2007), City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Retrofitting of vital infrastructure, such as schools, emergency service, and other community buildings,
provides important improvements that reduce hazard exposure and the cost and time associated with
recovery (Source: American Planning Advisory Service Report Number 483/484).
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires communities to identify actions and projects that reduce the
effects of hazards on the community, particularly to buildings and infrastructure [201.6(c)(3)(ii)]. Identifying
critical and essential facilities for retrofit will help to identify major infrastructure issues and appropriate
mitigation actions to protect critical and essential facilities.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Conduct detailed structural evaluation that outlines Added in 2015
recommendations for building deficiencies, and
provides a cost estimate
Conduct structural evaluation and make Added in 2015
recommendations(structural and non---structural)for
fix. Align projects with regular maintenance
programs.
Develop public/ private partnerships with building Added in 2015
contractors and architects to pursue specific
retrofitting projects.
Ensure schools and universities, government Added in 2015
infrastructure, and critical facilities meet current
seismic standards.
Apply for grant funding. Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Public Works, Engineering and Infrastructure, Deschutes County Emergency Services, OEM, DOGAMI,
Bend Airport FEMA, IFA
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program,
Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program, Ongoing
Page 207 of 44 P.Xb--(LIT B to RESOLUTION 2415-47
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre- •ShortTerm(1---2 years)
--Disaster Mitigation Grant Program,
Long---Term(3---5 years)
Resource Assistance for Rural Environments
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 208 of 169- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
r••' w� +,rta,�.;, i}r },,^�"'+Y� i a,� q'v's;a k a�b ,,i tk Y M 'k1 C '� E'i P^'t?i "*W M
AliggtreOt,fu(th k'IAn Coals CC#id a
(What dd wi vva It td.(i r, ;; °i }a o- r'°+P n'IteM
q ,p yu1
lM� r.f ,r .�134rt i;, v k C 0!!!ek e, !}, !k° ,r v v ,+"aP ur"tm"i��Y,, !44
Strengthen emergency services by maintaining the City 11 1 11 2 •3 •4
of Bend Emergency Operations Plan, linking emergency ■5 ■6 •7 ■$ II Yes
services with hazard mitigation programs, and
enhancing public education. •9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
The City of Bend last adopted the emergency operations plan or EOP in 2009. This action is important to
update and maintain the plan so the City is prepared to respond effectively to natural hazards.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Update the 2009 Bend EOP. Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Police, Fire, Public Works, City Administration Deschutes County Emergency Services, Bend Park and
Recreation District
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, County Emergency
Management/ NHMP Steering Committee UShort Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
)gag- I _ , e° _ - , , • ,!•
Mitigation Action;: tulti- -hazard#5 High Priority
Alignment with Plan Goals:
W at, a we want to d ");,, ' A' Lion Item?
Use technical knowledge of natural ecosystems and •1 •2 •3 •4
events to link natural resource management and land
use organizations to mitigation activities and technical •5 •6 •7 •8 •Yes
assistance.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important to help inform the next update to the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).
The CWPP was last updated in 2011. The recent work on the Bend urban growth boundary remand has
highlighted the need to better link planning for natural hazard mitigation (e.g. wildfire) with long range
planning for the City.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Deschutes County Emergency Services, Deschutes County
Forester, DOGAMI, Oregon Water Resources, Oregon
Department of Forestry
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, County and City staff •Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 210 of/169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
i & r ,• {. r w i; ^ z is a"ir"s • M ytr
01°F1
�p �pp W y
1Y�aM �4 !t Higtc e r r r '97 4r ig tit44 t
tWt A � r!(Wh db We y ff t4i S 4 !ry r i t
a a
n
4`?;'
•1 •2 3 U4
Develop benchmarks for a disaster---resistant and
resilient community. 5 6 7 •S Yes
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
The State of Oregon the Oregon Resilience Plan in 2013, and is working to complete the State's Natural
Hazards Mitigation Plan this year. This action is important to ensure consistency in benchmarking for hazard
mitigation and resilience planning.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Coordinate with County Community Development Added in 2015
and cities to update comprehensive plans to include
benchmarks in their Goal 7 plan elements
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Police Department, Fire Department Deschutes County Emergency Services, Deschutes County
Community Development
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Local Funding Resources, County and City II Ongoing
staff, UO Community Service Center/ OPDR, El Short Term(1---2 years)
OSU Cascades
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 211 of 469-4-A1=1 1T B to RESOLUTJCA! 24l-1 I '
Mitigation Actin M lti--hazard#7 Alignment with plan.Goals: High Priority
;
(What do we want tc��M4' �,';� � t,e P rr > Action Item?
�54
▪ 1 2 •3 •4
Develop and implement, or enhance, strategies for
debris management for natural hazard (winter storm, •5 6 7 •g •Yes
wind, flood, etc.) events.
•9 • 10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Debris from natural hazards can be a potential threat to citizens, interfere with travel, and act as an
attractive nuisance.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Collaborate with County to create a joint debris Added in 2015
removal plan.
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Police, Fire, Public Works Departments Deschutes County Emergency Services, Deschutes County
Rural Fire Protection District #2, Deschutes County Road
Department, ODOT
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, County Road
Department, and City Public Works Short Term(1 2years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Pag-212 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
v
-_.m
�� ' ��� ^I���� �'
��,��'�`� ` � `.��������� � '`�����������
„` ~ `� -. - -~� .�~ � '~—__ ~ .� - _ _
Seismically retrofit vulnerable facilities and •l •2 •3 •4
infrastructure to increase their resiliency to seismic
• ��� ��7 ��8 Yes
hazards.Consider both structural and non---structural
�� �� --
retrofit options. •9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Conduct structural evaluations of critical and Added in 2015
essential facilities (including historical buildings), and
infrastructure and make recommendations
(structural and non---structural)for fix.
Align projects with regular maintenance programs. Added in 2015
Champion/
Growth Management
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, Engineering and Deschutes County Community Development, Bend Park and
Infrastructure Planning, Public Works Recreation District, Bend — LaPine Schools, Deschutes
County Library,
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongo rg
Seismic Rehabilitation Grants (IFA), Local
•
Funding Resources
Sho�Term(z--zyean)
E Lvng-'-Te,m(]—'5years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 213 ofz169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-447
Mitigation Actlorr:'Earthquake #2 Alignment with Plan owls; Priority.
( $at dc,we want tb .
W i iPn°item?
�1 •2 •3 •4
Improve local capabilities to perform earthquake
building safety evaluations and to record and manage 115 •6 7 •g U Yes
building inventory data.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important to ensure new construction and remodeling of existing buildings and structures can
be constructed to withstand potential earthquakes.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Coordinate training for local building officials, Added in 2015
including plans examiners and building inspectors, to
perform earthquake safety evaluations.
Provide similar training to private building and home Added in 2015
inspectors
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, Engineering and Deschutes County Community Development, Deschutes
Infrastructure Planning County Emergency Services
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, partner with County
and Oregon Building Codes Division (BCD) �5hortTerm(1-2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 214 of 469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
ii�a., ,r ., trj i`
) a 11't tics a cd% ` `Afoment,with Plan' l p i ''°r tiO t
+ Ad ion item?,l
(Vhat;d0h Ito. ltd?)ia'
•1 112 113 •4
Identify critical public infrastructure and facilities located
in flood hazard areas and implement mitigation and 5 •6 ■7 ■g •Yes
preparedness measures for those facilities.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
The City has completed recent updates to its transportation (2013), water (2013), and sewer collection
(2014) system plans. Completing this task will help inform the next round of updates to these plans that are
expected to take place after the City completes work on the UGB Remand Project.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Coordinate with County, ODOT, utilities, and Added in 2015
irrigation districts to develop inventory of critical
public infrastructure.
Identify and program improvements to these Added in 2015
facilities for mitigating flood hazards
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Public Works, Engineering and Infrastructure Deschutes County: Community Development, Emergency
Planning Services, Road Departments ;Oregon Department of
Transportation
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Local Funding Resources for identification, II Ongoing
consider application for FEMA non---disaster •Short Term(1---2 years)
mitigation grant
"'Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 215 of 469-PM-I-la-IT U to RLSOLUTION 2015-087
Mitigation flood #2 i
High Priority
,, Alignment with'PIAn Gtv�is;
(Whet do we went to do?) Action Item?
�1 II 2 3 U4
Identify floodway obstructions and implement
mitigation measures to remove obstructions. 5 •6 .7 8 •Yes
•9 •10 • 11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Engineering and Infrastructure Planning Deschutes County Community Development, Emergency
Services, Roads; Oregon Department of State Lands,
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, Department of State
Lands, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife �Short Term(1-2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 216 of 169- EXI II-B-IT B to RESOI?UTI111•1 20-15 087
d a M`,� Wg+ �wq. p d� { 'yy,'p11 ';'a i Al ,i 1 il.q N � ,,,,,t4,44 ■ ,4 4v,,, 4; ;
t .0 ctiv t l OOC�''#�° '& tfW7 t is i '� V�;p&'> tror^i';g , 17
.�� i 00, ; Alignment,wit i, l rlw `'`
(WI 44 We want to do„ r :A im' ,, , 4g " ' �t r (, A o ,1(eI '',.
,t , . r pti. ,0,;„, ,.,gird.,r .,ni, 1.,v:i,i 1'15 ... . r•vi■r ,'ill
E1 1 1 2 .3 .4
Develop strategies to enhance the use of open space
within the floodplain for flood mitigation, fish habitat, 115 .6 M7 •g •Yes
and water quality issues.
U9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Under Oregon planning law, the City's General Plan must address and satisfy Goals 5 (Open Spaces, Natural
Areas, Habitat) and Goal 7 (Natural Hazards). This action is important because it provides an avenue for the
City to address two goals with a set of strategies focused on flood mitigation.
Ideas for Implementation (I-low will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Engineering and Infrastructure Planning, Bend Park and Recreation District; Deschutes County
Community Development Community Development; Oregon Department of State
Lands, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, DLCD
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
U Ongoing
Local Funding Resources (City and County
Planning with technical assistance from DLCD) .Short Term(1-2 years)
▪Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 217 of'169 LXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Acti't?r Volcano #1 High Priority
with ith Plan Goals:
(What do we want to do?), Action Item?
11 2 •3 •4
Identify critical facilities and industries that may be
affected by ash fall and develop and implement ash fall ■5 ■6 17 •g •Yes
emergency response and mitigation projects.
�9 110 I11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009), Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan (2007) to be updated in 2015
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Do not currently review volcanic activity
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Collaborate with owners/ operators of critical Added in 2015
facilities and industries on ash fall emergency
response and mitigation projects
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Engineering and Infrastructure Planning, Deschutes County: Community Development, Emergency
Utilities, Streets Services
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, OSU Cascades,
DOGAMI, USGS II Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term (3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 218 of/169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
, , 1 0 t t O+'^,'4 h r Pl°
tni
'� J b' ��{ 7� 4 41 Mt IMI+ dWI°� ���A A,11,�
driVili ratlt to do?)+b ; r �i+; 1l�ap kip
. �QI rG':` _,N.��"` ,"7 PG 1 Ott n°..�S.I, i'.d.w,,!7■'j,P7 6''1 f 4 ,'a"r!+;�L:x,u a. i�ap.i,b,n+7c4h,,sm 'i t
•1 1 2 U 3 U 4
Collaborate with the USGS's Cascade Volcano
Observatory and related agencies to create ash fall ■5 5 7 IN g Yes
warning messages that are more appropriate for Bend.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009), Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan (2007) to be updated in 2015
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
While not eminent, creating warning messages now will ensure the City and coordinating partners are ready
to respond to a volcanic event.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Growth Management
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Communications, Police, Fire USGS, OSU---Cascades, OEM, Deschutes County Emergency
Services, Deschutes County Communications, Deschutes
County 911
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, OSU Cascades,
DOGAMI, USGS •Short Term(1---2 years)
▪Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 219 of 469 EXI IIBI'I' 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
'PAiticatipoi Attionp Wildfire Alignment with Plan Goals: HB Priority
,I;(70/hatltiO
we want to do ! Action Item?
•1 •2 U3 1.4
Inventory alternative firefighting water sources and
II encourage the development of additional sources. 5 6 •7 8 Yes
•9 •10 ■ 11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009), Greater Bend CWPP (2011)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important because it will help inform updates to both the Bend EOP and the Bend CWPP. The
CWPP is intended to be updated every five years, with the next update coming up in sometime between
2016 and 2017.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Fire Department, Engineering and County Forester, Project Wildfire, Deschutes County
Infrastructure Planning Emergency Services, Deschutes County 911
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
Local Funding Resources (City/ County) •Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term (3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 220 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
.,,, ^N' ,. 4 �rPli°s"'a „.n ti r rN�',;",� r Cf ; '. iii:;, kTr,?Yta..qa a�%" r%,.a +9}"`: sla 9+ f K�'�nrW 46a, iaN wa b',�S .d . i,yWOa+W, WE„ + ;.,.• r5 w. MSr ,. e,
c +, J y Y°P r,Y ," r uN,jr; , ;10 1' i## k'Whi ) 01i,+�i ,,,,:+' ,Ma d
at�.L 0,)qe aft 01,004404;,!„!.,',+1 Mi + !N� W 1 yN it ri Sri qP ,l Sit ;.� t1Oi'1; ! ,,
.r, , ",r zg ,w4W.rM a., ^ ,, 6„,..3 W„u.i,,Wt,�i A' J,,,o N1uNtak, °rr ;,, ,,T. ,4sub;,a 6.,,, , "nu4,
•1 •2 U3 11114
Encourage creation and adoption of wildland---urban
interface maps to direct development requirements that ■5 116 ■y ■g I Yes
assist wildfire mitigation.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009), Greater Bend CWPP (2011)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
HB 3623, encouraging the amendment to create inventories that expand beyond private lots development —
i.e., Wildfire boundaries may be more expansive and not a clean line.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Incorporate this work as a task in the next Added in 2015
Community Wildfire Protection Plan for Bend
(update 2011 CWPP)
Champion/ Growth Management
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Fire Department, Community Development, Deschutes County Forester, Project Wildfire, Deschutes
Information Technology (GIS) County Community Development, Deschutes County
Emergency Services, Deschutes County 911
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
U Ongoing
Local Funding Resources, Project Wildfire,
Greater Bend CWPP •Short Term(1---2 years)
▪Long---Term (3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 221 of 469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Mitigation AO* , W!ldfir+� Ali •
rirhert with Platt Goals: 1#11 n Priority
(What do we want try, tar .w r Action.Item?
Increase communication, coordination, and •1 •2 •3 •4
collaboration between wildland---urban interface
property owners, city and county planners, and fire •5 •6 •7 •8
prevention crews and officials to address inherent risks •Yes
in wildland---urban interface areas, available prevention/
protection measures, and federal mitigation assistance •9 • 10 •11
programs.
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009), Greater Bend CWPP (2011)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important to improve communication and collaboration between agencies and staff involved
with land development and planning (e.g. city and county planners) and those professionals working in
wildfire mitigation and response. This is an opportunity to update the respective comprehensive plans and
land use regulations of the cities and Deschutes County to ensure future development in wildland urban
interface areas can occur to reduce and mitigate risks of wildfire.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Growth Management
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development; Fire Department Deschutes County Forester, Project Wildfire, Deschutes
County Community Development; Deschutes County Rural
Fire Protection District #2, Deschutes County Emergency
Services
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
II Ongoing
ODF, Local Funding Resources, FEMA and
other federal grant funding �Short Term(1 2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 722 of 169- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
+ n y a y, �• d +
Mt tian Acton/ 1 4 ' Korot,hy viitro
t
(W do we want Ito,de?) ` ^
•1 •2 .3 4
Implement fire mitigation activities in a manner
consistent with the goals of promoting sustainable 5 ■6 .7 •g •Yes
ecological management and community stability.
•9 11 10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City of Bend EOP (2009), Greater Bend CWPP (2011)
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
This action is important to carry out any future mitigation developed through an updated to the Community
Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The CWPP was last updated in 2011. The next update should begin and be
completed 2016---2017.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Added in 2015
Champion/ Growth Management
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, Engineering and Deschutes County Forester, Project Wildfire, Deschutes
Infrastructure Planning County Community Development, Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development, Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife, USFS, BLM
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongoing
ODF, Local Funding Resources, FEMA and
other federal grant funding, USFS, BLM •Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Pag
ATTACHMENT 2:
ACTION ITEM FORM TEMPLATE
111� iiQw"► ►CtIuerj High Priority
, Alignment with Plan.Goals:
mitigation Action::(WI :Wei want to do Action Item?
� 1 012 U3 U4
�5 •6 M7 al 8 likes
•9 • 10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Champion/
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
▪ShortTerm(1---2 years)
▪Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 224 of 169 EXI-IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
ATTACHMENT 3:
SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS
This page intentionally left blank. See next pages for listing of Department of Human Services
facilities. Volume IV, Appendix C also has a list of social service providers.
Page 225 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
DESCHUTES, CROOK AND JEFFERSON COUNTIES
Oregon Department of Human Services-Aging and People with Disabilities
1135 SW Highland Ave,Redmond, OR 97756
LICENSED ADULT FOSTER HOMES
Effective October 2014
BEND
Provider
lriformaCron. C`NI. RN ,....
Acea,Sherry 541-383-4673 5 beds
Mashie House Class 3
20370 Mashie Ct. Heft 523180
Bend, OR 97702
Acea, Sherry / Lantz, Michael 541-383-2364 4 beds
Cottage Care Class 3
61148 SE Benham Rd Lie# 515367
Bend, OR 97702
Alexander, Raquel 541-382-1284 5 beds
Klahani Home For Ladies &Gentlemen Class 3
20580 Klahani Lie#540146
Bend, OR 97702
Alloy, Vicki 541-306-6906 5 Beds Private
Honoring Elders, LLC Class 3
2820 NE Faith Dr Lie#524775
Bend, OR 97701
Betterton, Molly 541-385-4740 5 beds
Mountain Home Class 3
2209 NE Wells Acres Rd Lic#578521
Bend, OR 97701
Chance, Connie 541-389-6652 4 beds
Pioneer Retreat Class 2
2110 NE Shepard Rd Lie#5658.58
Bend,OR 97701
Chavez-Lopez, Bertha 541-317-0224 5 beds
Bright Star I Class 2
61659 SE Zih St Lie#509358
Bend, OR 97702
Chavez-Lopez, Bertha 541-385-1842 5 beds
Bright Star II Class 2
61653 SE 27 St Lic# 517120
Bend, OR 97702
Chavez Francis 541-385-1090 2 beds
Helping Hands Foster Care Class 3
1652 NE Wells Acres Rd Lie#5249.53
Bend, OR 97701
Chavez, Martina 541-306-4902 5 beds
The Golden House Inn Class 2
2975 NE Pacific Crest Lie#523841
Bend, OR 97701
Clark,Pauline 541-389-8684 5beds
Nisika Home Class 3
61234 Nisika. Ct Lie# 518535
P . .
. . . ■ . ` . -1 6
Bend, OR 97702
***NOT TAKING NEW CLIENTS*** 3 beds
Cobos, Tom & Carol 541-389-0353 Class 2
Golden Years Foster Home Lie# 500330
22060 Neff Rd. -PO Box 484
Bend,OR 97709
Coffman, Jessica 541-306-6310 5 beds
Helping Hands Senior Home Care Class 3
1435 NE Sharkey Terrace Lie#523767
Bend, OR 97701
Curtis-Kellogg, Skyleah 541-382- 5 beds
9334 Skyleah R. Kellogg A1R Class 3
1933 NW Hill Lie#518563
Bend, OR 97701
Doty,Michelle 541-306-6088 5 beds
High Desert Haven Class 3
1940 SE Arhorwood Ave I.,ie# 521219
Bend, OR 97702
Douglas, Nicki 541-330-6009 5 beds
Angel Haven Class 3
20873 SE Greenmont Dr Lie# 507243
Bend, OR 97702
Dovolis, Lauren/Gina Turner 541-330-194.5 5 beds
Cobblestone Inn 541-420-3286 Class 3
20776 NE Liberty Ln. Lie#518158
Bend, OR 97701
Dovolis, Lauren/Gina Turner 541-382-4659 5 beds
Gemstonelnn 541-420-3286 Class 3
2646 NE Genet Ct. Lie# 518157
Bend,OR 97701
Dovolis, Lauren/Gina Turner 541-38.5-3178 5 beds
River Rock. Inn 541-420-3286 Class 3
2809 Great Horned P1 Lie#523280
Bend, OR 97701
Dovolis,Lauren/Gina Turner 541-385-3132 5 beds
Sandstone Inn 541-420-3286 Class 3
2805 Great Homed Pl, 97701 Lie# 523278
Dovolis, Lauren/Gina Turner 541-330-4083 4 Beds
Moonstone Inn 541-420-3286 Class 3
2813 Great I fomed P1 Lie#523997
Bend, OR 97701
Fox, Christine 541-383-5910 5 betls Private
Precious Moments AEC Class 3
65920 Old Bend/Redmond Hwy Lie# 520645
Bend, OR 97701
Giberson, Deborah 541-330-8632 5 beds
Hummingbird Glen Class 3
63077 Marsh Orchid Dr Lie#522445
Bend, OR 97701
Giberson, Deborah & David 541-408-9818 3 beds
Hummingbird Way Class 3
Page 228 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
63071 March Orchid Dr Lie# 524340
Bend, OR 97701
Grant, Stephanie 541-389-6021 _5beds
Butler Market Home Class 3
915 Butler Mkt.. Rd Lie// 514932
Bend, OR 97701
Johnson, Nora 541-408-9776 5 beds
Shoshone Lodge Class 3
21322 Starling Dr Lie# 512452
Bend, OR 97701
Johnson, Victoria and Jason 541-390-0801 5 beds Private
The Ranch 541-306-6227 Class 2
59694 Calgary Loop Lic# 517712
f, Y P
Bend, OR 97702
Johnson, Victoria and Jason 541-390-0801 5 beds Private
The Lodge 541-306-6227 Class 2
22179 Calgary Dr Lie# 518929
Bend, OR 97702
Johnson, Victoria and Jason 541-390-0801 5 beds Private
Ridgewater 541-647-6902 Class 3
61136 Hilmer Creek Dr Lie# 524409
Bend, OR 97702
Jones, Sherron 541-389-9540 5 Beds
Terrango Glen Senior Care Class 3
534 SE Wildcat Dr Lie#507721
Bend, OR 97702
Kennedy, Merry 541-389-53.56 5 beds
Stonebrook Inn Class 3
3387 Stonebrook Loop Lie# 525054
Bend, OR 97701
LaFrance, Barbara 541-647-1031 2beds
Josee '.s House Class 3
60895 SW McMullin Dr Lie# 520402
Bend, OR 97702
Lee,Judy 541-385-0977 5 beds
Lee's Leisure/and Class 3
62134 Cody Jr. Rd Lie# 535844
Bend, OR 97701
Manser, Diana 541-388-8513 4 beds Private
Bear Creek Haven Foster Care Class 2
1231 NE Bear Creek Rd Lie# 523959
Bend, OR 97701
McKeldin, Mike 541-617-8945 4 beds
Baroness House Class 3
2880 NE Baroness PI Lie# 518484
Bend, OR 97701
O'Hara, Kimberly 541-617-8564 4 beds
Amethyst Inn Class 3
60992 Amethyst St Lie# 518701
Bend, OR 97701
Rice, Donita 541-388-2415 5 beds
Page 229 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Donita :s Comfort Care Class 2
613 SW Felton P1 Lie# 502139
Bend, OR 97702
Ruppel, Sharon 541-388-2348 5 beds
Sparkling "R"Adult Foster Care Class 3
63747 O.B. Riley Rd Lie#504659
Bend, OR 97701
Scott, Cameron 541-330-8773 4 beds Private
A Home•/br Dad and Mom Class 2
61161 Cottonwood Dr Lie# 511300
Bend, OR 97702
Vallembois, Judy 541-385-1174 5 beds
We Care Adult Foster Home Class 3
1352NW Albany St Lie# 524964
Bend,OR 97701
t ETY► R/7 SISTER'
•dry p (yy}�❑{. �y ._
Po.,I!JYr• 1 .'f �r.yNy .^L R P''`'L1�J-4_ Y = n ri....
Aragon, Jessica 541-92.3-7400 3beds
Mabuhat, Manor AFH Class 3
928 NW Spruce Place Lie# 521283
Redmond, OR 97756
Bryant,Tina 541-504-4109 5 beds
Brvant's Adult Home Living Class 2
1345 NW Canyon Dr Lie# 503728
Redmond, OR 97756
Hachenberg, Vicki 541-546-7374 4 Beds
Ridgeview Adult Care Class 3
610 E, Ridgeview Dr Lic#568019
Culver, OR 97734
Horner, Amada 541-316-1580 4 beds
Autumn House Class 3
2616 SW Salmon Ave Lie# 522241
Redmond, OR 97756
Horner, Amada 541-526-5681 4 beds
Arvada.s Home Care Class 3
2475 SW 26th St Lie# 518708
Redmond, OR 97756
Kitchin,Carlene 541-548-6631 5 beds
Central OregonAdult Foster Care Class 3
1532NW Jack Pine Ave Lie# 521178
Redmond,OR 97756
Mills,Janell 541-548-1397 5 beds
Home Sweet Home 541-480-8420 Class 2
2618 NE Sedgewick Ave Lie# 521389
Redmond, OR 97756
Negrete, Marlene 541-504-1113 3 beds Private
C,
Pa h 'g EXIIIBIT-Dto RESOLUTION 2015-0 s
543 NW 17"' Lie#522694
Redmond, OR 97756
Partridge, Virginia 541-548-3012 3 beds
Partridge Inn Class 3
3130 SW Canal Blvd /PO Box 2417 Lie# 516487 .
Redmond, OR 97756
Powell, Irene 541-923-3882 5 beds
Irene M Powell AFI-I Class 3
2500 SW 83'cl St Lie# 50.5228
Redmond, OR 97756
Powell, Irene 541-923-7390 Sheds
Irene MPowell A1.11 Class 3
2247 SW Pumice Ave Lie# 543822
Redmond, OR 97756
Roe, Deborah 541-548-0198 5 Beds
The Hari Homestead Class 3
5170 SW Wickiup Ave Lie# 522807
Redmond, OR 97756
Richard, Sheila 541-548-6152 5 beds
Sheila's Care Home Class 2
2362 sw29'h Lie# 510187
Redmond, OR 97756
Thornton, Connie 541-815-5082 5 beds
Haven 1-louse Class 3
10541 N. Hwy 97 Lie# 509366
Terrebonne, OR 97760
Tidwell, Wanda 541-548-6196 4 beds
Angel's Aware Home Class 2
1422NE 5th Lie# 514883
Redmond, OR 97756
Tolle, Leah and David 541-588-6119 4 beds
Absolute Serenity AFC Class 3
119N Rope St. Lie#520644
Sisters,OR 97759
Williams, Judy 541-526-1792 4 beds
Rockin' Chair Cottage Class 2
2620 SW Xero Ave Lie# 525208
Redmond, OR 97756
Williams, Patricia 541-548-5682 2 beds
Angel's Embrace Adult Care Home Class 3
1239 SW 34th Place. Lie# 500183
Redmond, 977.56
A PINS
'rQV der,,.. : Informat on C M
Cram, Bryon 541-536-9900 4 beds
Happy py 1 rails Adult Foster Care Class 2
Page 22. I of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
51417 Evans Way I PO Box 3087 Lie#520819
La Pine, OR 97739
Fee,Dianne 541-536-7869 3 beds
Rosalies Helping Hands Class 2
I 16158 Elkhorn Ln /PO Box 986 Lie#524506
La Pine, OR 97739
Lindquist, Theresa 541-536-5830 3 beds
Big Timber Care Home Class 3
53664 Big Timber Dr./ PO Box 1994 Lie# 539569
La Pine, OR 97739
McVay, Barbara 541-536-1916 5 beds
CascadeLakesAFH Class 3
50792 S Huntington Rd Lie# 522195
La Pine, OR 97739
P 4IL �
RED
Ptoy der
Alger, Cheryl 541-447-1997 4 beds
McCollister Sisters Foster Care Class 2
284 SE Willowdale Dr Lie#518853
Prineville, OR 97754
Arnold, Delene 541-447-7876 2 Beds
Easy Living Care Home Class 2
6142 SE David Way Lie#513019
Prineville, OR 97754
Doty, Michelle 541-362-5120 5 Beds
High Desert I laven Class 3
1163 Bitterbrush Rd Lie#523807
Prineville, OR 97754
Gatlin, Charlotte 541-416-0109 5 beds
Char's Adult Faster Home Class 2
777 NW Martingale Rd Lie#52.5224
Prineville, OR 97754
Koehn, Betty Louise/Badgett, Theresa 5 beds
541-447-2008 Class 3
Mill Creek Lodge Senior Care Lie#521424
4845 NE Mill Creek Rd
Prineville, OR 97754
Moyer, Carolyn 541-416-3638 2 beds
Covenant Care An Adult Residential Home Class 3
960 NE Manzanita St Lie# 525252
Prineville, OR 97754
Smith, Mark 541-362-5137 5 Beds
Mt View Care Home I Class 2
780 NW Martingale Rd Lie# 524143
Prineville, OR 97754
Smith, Mark 541-447-5773 5 beds
Mt View Care Home 11 Class 3
820 NE Oehoeo Avenue Lie# 524544
Prineville, OR 97754
Page 232 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RLSOLU 1'ION 2U15-0W/
Whitehurst, Marilyn 541-447-3291 5 beds
Whitehurst Adult C'are Class 3
549 NW 5th St Lie# 516099
Prineville, OR 97754
Wood, Andrea 541-416-8477 4 Beds
Martingale 1-louse Class 2
282 Willow Ave Lie# 524974
Prineville, OR 97754
Residential-Care Fac sties — Central arg on
Name , Phoue Nu tuber C.ase.Managex
Allerra Clare Bridge
1099 NW Watt Way -Bend 97701 541-385-4717
Amorosa House
175 NE 16th Bldg "A" - Madras 97741 541-475 5301
Ashley Manor
2853 Conners - Bend 97701 541-383-4400
Ashley Manor
572 NE Oak St. - Madras 97741 541-475-7635
Ashley Manor
228 SW Meadowlakes Dr -Prineville 97754 541-447-5816
Ashley Manor
1600 SW Rimrock Way -Redmond 97756 541-504-8855
Aspen Ridge Alzheimcrs 541-385-8500
1025 NE Purcell -Bend 97701
Bend Villa Court
1801 NE Lotus -Bend, 97701 541-389-0046
Mt Bachelor Memory Care
20225 Powers Rd—Bend 97702 541-233-5054
Prairie House
51480 Morson,LaPine-97739 541-536-8559
Touchm ark Mt Bachelor Village Private
19800 SW Touchrnark Way - Bend, 97702 541-383-1515
Assist �l X;zvingy F+�tcliti - Cen bra U reolr>! 'm
Name 1hpuc Nu tube Case`°Man ger,
Aspen Court
470 NE Oak - Madras, Or 97741 541-475-6425 Private
Aspen Ridge Retirement
1025 NE Purcell -13cnd, 97701 541-385-8500
Awbrey House Private
2825 Neff Road B nd, OR 97701 541-317-8464
Brookside Place
3550 SW Canal Blvd.,Redmond, 97756 541-504-1600
The Carriage House Private
150 Williamson Dr. -Prineville, 97754
541-416-0500
Page 233 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Cougar Springs
1942 SW Canyon Dr. -Redmond, 9775 541-316-4400
I
East Cascade
175 NE 16th-Madras,97741 541-475-5303
Fox Hollow
2599 Studio Rd NE -Bend, 97701 541-383-2030
The Heights
3000 SW 23rd -Redmond, 97756 541-923 54.52
High Desert
2660 NE MaryRose - Bend, 97701 541-312-2011
High Lookee Lodge
2321 ()Halle Lane -Warm Springs, 97761 541-553-1182
Ochoco Village
83ONE Elm Street - Prineville, 97754 541-416-3600
Prairie House
51485 Morson St. LaPine, 97739 541-536-8.559
The Summit
127 SE Wilson Ave - Bend, 97701 541-317-3544
1ixe Icilxties ritl ro NuisIg3Ula
TC �'r Cera ocgn
rs
g
C o ' .
C:as o V ie w Nu rsinand , 5
Alzheimer's Care Center
ehab
541-382-7161 Pilot Butte R
(Central Oregon Healthcare)
119 SE Wilson -Bend, 97702 1876 NE Hwy 20 Bend 97701
Bend Transitional Care East Cascade Livin Center
541-382-0479 541-475-3882
2366 NW Lakeside PT. - Bend, 175 16th St,Bldg E. -Madras, 97734
97701
OchocoNursingHome Redmond h ealth Care Center
541-447-7667 541-548-5066
950 NE Elm St. -Prineville, 97754 3025 Reservoir Dr. -Redmond, 97756
ssif ation of A lult`,FFoster Holy'tint Sr 1'
.?..,4'44 ` �,1: : s
Classification Qualifications of provider
Type of care provided
Loss Ilan two�years expr.t ene Resident41mayneed$ed ?.
'Ctasa , providing direct care °' «, t„L asststasnice i�trt p to four activttl �of
. .-. ' dallyliyang(.ADLs) -: ;
dompletioxl of basic training ;4
�
!i
i M� s 'yfiy� GDilrSe � � r } r a tg r t
�ixi+l a .� 4: § { £ye
�} 9
f{ni f L
r:;:::.4,,ii;"°.'::lifill..,,.:.....::::::::,:•":.a.;.:-.:-...1.':::::7.--'-':;:e •i!.-1.E:!:.3 1'wo or more years experience Residents in ay need assistance in all
Class 11 providing direct care. ADLs, but are dependant in no more
than three.
Completion of basic training
Page 234 of 469- EXIiIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
course.
Health care professionals or Residents may be dependant in font
Class III others with at least three year '> or rote ADLs
experience pro ng care to .
people who are dependant The home may have only one
tesident at a time who is totally
CompletionCompletionCompletion of dependant
training
course
DHS may allow,by written exception, a person to live in any classification of a home, The
provider must he able to meet your needs, the needs of the other residents, and all health and safety
standards.
n raged to check the public records of an
You are e ou c � p any home and
review inf orma t ion rega riling substantiated complain t. s . If you
have any quest ion s contact Ag ing and Yeopl e wi th Di.sahil ities
off ice at 54 1-54 8-2206_
Page 235 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 20I 5-087
ATTACHMENT 4:
CWPP MAP
This page intentionally left blank. See next page for a map from the CWPP that shows the CWPP
subregions and SB 360 ratings. For more information see the community wildfire protection plan
located on the Project Wildfire website: http://www.prolectwildfire.org/
Page 236 of 469 EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Page BA---50 May 2015 Deschutes County NHMP
-1
I GREATER BEND CWPP BOUNDARY — SB350 RATINGS
di
{
F-
0
U
a
N
p2 �� O
j m° W �2
/,
m m l
II g
Tsai 1 ��"' o-
1-'Y k
.. / 0}
z82a q
LJ - a`Sg1°w ,
i(':1
4
I■
W ~
M
C y W
<b VhH _... 1 IYta N
I�E l e 114*117- „_,r..„,,j:
•
W „' 49
R3(�� _ . irL
4 38 •y w ...„-0.0 ) ii 1 ..Noti„,, _
t
= '''' ” 7,_ iittl W
:•"
dam vl,,;,c (6 AMFI
N M r w¢ y r
o ",
=
w
c^_ am
r
•
) o
CA
O
\\ a
zit a
C, O
I
F
i
W
Ii'i J
--
C.1
n
CITY OF REDMOND
ADDENDUM
Introduction
This document serves as the City of Redmond's Addendum to the Deschutes County Natural
Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP). The City's Addendum is considered part of the county's
multi---jurisdictional plan,and meets the following requirements: (1)Multi---jurisdictional Plan
Adoption§201.6(c)(5),(2)Multi---jurisdictional Participation 5201.6(a)(3),(3)Multi---
Jurisdictional Risk Assessment §201.6(c)(2) (iii), and (4) Multi---jurisdictional Mitigation
Strategy §201.6(c)(3) (iv).
A description of the city specific planning and adoption process follows; for detailed
information see Volume IV, Appendix B. Information about the city's risk relative to the
county's risk to natural hazards is documented in this addendum's Hazard Analysis and Issue
Identification section. The section considers how the city's risk differs from or matches that
of the county's; additional information on Risk Assessment is provided within Volume I,
Section 2 of this NHMP. The community's mitigation strategy is provided herein along with
community specific action items; action items that have a city role but are identified at the
County level are provided in Volume I, Section 3 and Volume IV, Appendix A.
How was the Plan Developed?
The NHMP was developed by the Deschutes County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan steering
committee, while this addendum was created by the City of Redmond steering committee.
The Deschutes County Emergency Manager was designated as the NHMP's convener and
will take the lead in implementing, maintaining and updating the plan. Locally, Deborah
McMahon, Redmond Principal Planner, convened a local steering committee for the
purpose of developing the city's addendum.
The local steering committee was closely involved throughout the development of the plan
and served as the local oversight body for the plan's development. The local steering
committee met formally on one occasion: January 28 2015 (see Appendix B for more
information). Steering committee members contributed data and reviewed, and provided
guidance towards the community profile, risk assessment, mitigation strategy (action items),
and implementation and maintenance plan. The addendum reflects effort from the formal
meeting and during subsequent informal meetings between members of the steering
committee and with OPDR.
An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In
order to develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the
planning process should include opportunities for the public, neighboring communities, local
and regional agencies, as well as, private and non---profit entities to comment on the plan.'
'Code of Federal Regulations,Chapter 44.Section 201.6,subsection(b).2015
Page 240 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION-2015-087
Deschutes County NHMP May 2015 Page RA---1
OPDR provided a publicly accessible project website for the general public to provide
feedback on the draft NHMP via a web form. In addition, Deschutes County and the City of
Redmond provided press releases on their websites to encourage the public to offer
feedback on the plan update and news outlets reported on the update effort.2
In addition, OPDR administered a public opinion survey to obtain additional input from the
public regarding the county's risks, vulnerabilities, hazards history, and mitigation strategies.
See Volume IV, Appendix F for more information.
Updating the mitigation plan is a requirement to gain eligibility for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's Pre--Disaster Mitigation, Hazard Mitigation, and Flood Mitigation
Assistance grant Programs. This project is funded through the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's (FEMA) FY12 Pre---Disaster Mitigation Competitive Grant Program
(PDMC—PL---10---OR---2012---002).
The Redmond Addendum to the Deschutes County NHMP was adopted on [insert date]
and the NHMP was approved by FEMA on [insert date].
For more information on the composition of the steering committee and the process see
this NHMP's Volume I, Acknowledgements and Executive Summary, and Volume IV,
Appendix B.
Action Item Matrix
The City's action items were developed through a two---stage process during the 2015 NHMP
development. In stage one, OPDR facilitated a work session with the steering committee to
discuss the city's risk and to identify potential issues. In the second stage, OPDR, working
with the local steering committee, developed potential actions based on the hazards and
the issues identified by the steering committee. In addition, there are 15 County Action
Items that include Redmond as an "Affected Jurisdiction".
The City's actions are listed below in matrix format. For more detailed information on each
action, see the action forms within Attachment 1 of this addendum. For additional
information on the County actions affecting the city see Volume I, Section 3 and Volume IV,
Appendix A.
2
MyCentralOregon.com, "Redmond's Disaster Plan is Being Updated", accessed June 10, 2015,
http://www.mycentraloregon.com/2015/06/10/redmonds---disaster---plan---is---being---updated/
Page 242 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
}
to
\ 2 /
y o
j / /
§ op
. V §
3▪ t' 2
( •° ) , t
/ ! >
-�
� dƒ \ � \ / 2
) , \
\ \ � � \ \ k &
ter , ; ra
1 \ � ) ) - --;
j \ )/
g E }
w \ [ / / ,
I o I $ I
\ \
»
` `.6' /Wr
�
� (
\{
{ 'E' \ }
§ \ ( % { I —
/ ti . ,
ii o « \ \
\ F. \ E 17 |
« 7f f U : e
_
A. (\ ) - ^ &
§ i cu c - ) OJ � .
E \ { 7 z i _
-a % ( � � ' 0-
« � : e f » —
} f@ § ; / / } \
0 ' § : { \ _
# E
U f ^ \ ^\
5 }, 7 U , z
e \' ! \ G
k r ' ) "\
I— 2 ; ! / 2
=
. e
How Will the Plan be Implemented?
The City Council will be responsible for adopting the City of Redmond addendum to the
Deschutes County NHMP. This addendum designates a coordinating body and a convener to
oversee the development and implementation of action items. Because the city addendum
is considered part of the county plan, the city will look for opportunities to partner with the
County to maintain the plan, and coordinate mitigation efforts through the implementation
of action items, etc.The City's steering committee will convene after re---adoption of the City
of Redmond addendum on the same semi---annual schedule as the county. The City's
Principal Planner and Public Works Director will serve as the conveners and will be
responsible for convening the local steering committee. The convener will also remain active
in the County's planning process. The steering committee will seek to involve senior staff and
decision makers throughout the duration of the five---year implementation and
maintenance of the NHMP addendum.
Implementation through Existing Programs
Many of the Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan's recommendations are consistent with the
goals and objectives of the city's existing plans and policies. Where possible, the City of
Redmond will implement the NHMP's recommended actions through existing plans and
policies. Plans and policies already in existence have support from local residents,
businesses, and policy makers. Many land---use, comprehensive, and strategic plans get
updated regularly, allowing them to adapt to changing conditions and needs. Implementing
the NHMP's action items through such plans and policies increases their likelihood of being
supported and implemented.
The City of Redmond currently has the following plans that relate to natural hazard
mitigation:
Table RA-2 Existing Plans
Jq�isdict�ar� ,. 9i;;g a Year r .
City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan 2015
City of Redmond Development Code (no mapped SFHA) 2015
City of Redmond Transportation Master Plan 2009
City of Redmond Greater Redmond CWPP* 2011
City of Redmond Wastewater(Collection System) and Water System Master Plan 2007
Source:City of Redmond,Note:The Comprehensive Plan was fast amended in 2007.
The steering committee and the community's leadership have the option to add or
implement action items at any time. This allows the steering committee to consider
mitigation strategies as new opportunities arise, such as funding for action items that may
not be of the highest priority. When new actions are identified, they should be documented
using an action item form (see Attachment 2). Once a proposed action form has been
submitted to the convener, the action will become part of the City's addendum.
Page 244 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Continued Public Participation
Keeping the public informed of the city's efforts to reduce the city's risk to future natural
hazards events is important for successful plan implementation and maintenance. The city is
committed to involving the public in the plan review and updated process. The City
Addendum along with the County Plan will be posted on---line on the University of Oregon's
Scholars Bank https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/1907 so that the
public may view the plan at any time.
In addition, natural hazards information dissemination is conducted throughout the year
when opportunities present themselves via the city offices and website.
Plan Maintenance
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan will be updated every five years in
accordance with the update schedule outlined in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. During
the county plan update process, the city will also review and update its addendum. The
convener will be responsible for convening the steering committee to address the questions
outlined below.
• Are there new partners that should be brought to the table?
• Are there new local, regional, state, or federal policies influencing natural hazards
that should be addressed?
• Has the community successfully implemented any mitigation activities since the
plan was last updated?
• Have new issues or problems related to hazards been identified in the community?
• Are the actions still appropriate given current resources?
• Have there been any changes in development patterns that could influence the
effects of hazards?
• Have there been any significant changes in the community's demographics that
could influence the effects of hazards?
• Are there new studies or data available that would enhance the risk assessment?
• Has the community been affected by any disasters? Did the plan accurately address
the impacts of this event?
These questions will help the steering committee determine what components of the
mitigation plan need updating. The steering committee will be responsible for updating any
deficiencies found in the plan.
The remainder of this addendum includes three sections:
1. Community Profile and Asset Identification,
2. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, and
3. Mitigation Strategy.
Page 245 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
COMMUNITY PROFILE
ASSET IDENTIFICATION
This section provides city specific asset identification. For information on the characteristics
of Redmond, in terms of geography, environment, population, demographics, employment
and economics, as well as housing and transportation see Volume IV, Appendix C,
Community Profile. Many of these community characteristics can affect how natural hazards
impact communities and how communities choose to plan for natural hazard mitigation.
Considering the city specific assets during the planning process can assist in identifying
appropriate measures for natural hazard mitigation.
Asset Identification
The following assets were identified by the steering committee in 2015:
Critical and Essential Facilities
• City Hall — 716 SW Evergreen
• Public Works:
o Main Facility— 243 E Antler Avenue
o Waste Water Treatment Plant — 3100 NW 19th Street
• Police Department — 777 SW Deschutes Avenue
• Redmond Municipal Airport— 2522 SE Jesse Butler Circle
Special Districts with Offices in Redmond
• Central Electric Cooperative — 2098 N Highway 97
• Pacific Power— 1440 SE Lake Road
• Redmond Fire and Rescue
o Station 401 Headquarters — 341 NW Dogwood
o Station 403 Airport—911 SE Salmon
o Station 404 Cline Falls— 100 SE 67th Street
Redmond School District (schools located in Redmond)
Elementary Schools:
• John Tuck— 209 NW 10th Street
• Ma Lynch — 1314 SW Kalama Street
• Sage — 2790 SW Wickiup Avenue
• Tom McCall — 1200 NW Upas
• Vern Patrick—3001 SW Obsidian
Page 246 of 469- EXI JIBI'I' R to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Middle Schools:
• Elton Gregory— 1220 NW Upas
• Obsidian — 1334 SE Obsidian Drive
High Schools:
• Edwin Brown Education Center, 850 W Antler Avenue
• Redmond —675 SW Rimrock Drive
• Redmond Proficiency Academy
• Downtown: 657 Glacier Avenue
• West Campus: 2105 W Antler Avenue
• Ridgeview —4555 SW Elkhorn Avenue
Colleges and Universities
• Central Oregon Community College — 2030 SE College Loop
Hospitals
• St. Charles Medical Center— 1253 NW Canal Boulevard
Social Service Providers
See list in Volume IV, Appendix C, Community Profile.
Population
Redmond's estimated population as of July 1, 2014 is 26,770 people. The city's population
has grown an estimated 555 people or 2.1% since the 2010 Census3. Redmond's
acknowledged Coordinated Population Forecast is 45,724 people by the year 2025, which
represents an increase of 19,134 people or 72% between 2013 and 2025.'
Land Use
The City of Redmond's acknowledged comprehensive plan is the "Redmond Urban Area
2020 Comprehensive Plan". The Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission
first acknowledged the plan in 1979. The City last completed a major update of the plan in
2001. Since that time, the City has updated the plan in 2006 (ORD 2006---09) and 2007 (ORD
2007---08). The City implements the plan through the Redmond Development Code, which
was last updated in 2015.
Redmond has been chosen as a pilot community by the Department of Land Conservation
and Development to enact the process that is provided in Oregon Administrative Rules 660---
3 Portland State University,Population Research Center,"Annual Population Estimates",2014.
4 2004 Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County—updated 2009
Page 247 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
024---0045 to preserve large industrial lots for a regional large lot industrial need. The area
chosen for this is just south of the current Redmond UGB and south of the Deschutes
County Fairgrounds. On May 7, 2105, the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council
unanimously voted to endorse the South Redmond Tract as the first site in the Regional
Large Lot Industrial program. With this endorsement, the property owner, Department of
State Lands, will start a UGB amendment process and request annexation into the city limits
and rezoning to the Large Lot Industrial described in the Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs)
above. The site is about 1,000 acres and would require a UGB expansion, which is slated for
later in 2015.
Building activity is rebounding and approaching robust levels for housing, followed by
industrial and a somewhat lagging commercial sector. Redmond is developing a strong
family---oriented culture with a full range of services for the growing population.
Redmond Park and Recreation District
The Redmond Park's Division operates and maintains 23 parks and open spaces, and 3.75
miles of trails The city's parks include five (5) mini parks (3.4 acres), nine (9) neighborhood
parks (37 acres), two (2) community parks (100 acres), two (2) natural resources areas (207
acres), and four (4) special use parks, including the Juniper Golf Course (185 acres).6
Economy
Redmond is one of the fastest growing cities in Deschutes County. The community has a
fast growing manufacturing sector (growing 22% in employment over the last three years)'.
The growing traded sector industries in Redmond includes:
• Bioscience;
• Aviation and Aerospace Manufacturing;
• Specialty manufacturing;
• Building Products Manufacturing;
• Corporate and Administrative Office Centers; and
• Food Manufacturing.
The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Deschutes County was 6.5% in February
2015. The number of employed persons was 75,831, and the civilian labor force was 81,516.
Total nonfarm payroll employment in February 2015 was 70,050.
5 2030 Parks Master Plan Update,January 2008.
6 Ibid.
Economic Development for Central Oregon website,https://www.edcoinfo.com/,accessed April 28,2015.
$ Ibid,
Page 248 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Cultural and Historic Resources
The sites and structures listed below (Table RA---3) represent the city's official list of historic
places compiled by the city and county, and approved by the Oregon Land Conservation and
Development Commission.9
Table RA-3 Historic Sites — City of Redmond
Nlt �iit �u�lg kckCptt[Sr1
h
Fred Atkinson Building 5353537 S.6th St.
J.D. Butler Building 453 5.6th St.
Burdick Building Site 357 W. 6th St.
Theron Beogher Cottage 422 S.W. 13th St.
Presbyterian Community Church 641 S.W.Cascade Ave.
Ehret Brothers Store 251 S.6th St.
B.H.&A.T.McMickle House 614 N.W.Cedar Ave.
Milton Odem House* 623 S.W. 12th St.
Redmond Union High School 437 S.W.9th St.
Lew A.Smith House 1329 S.W. Evergreen
The New Redmond Hotel* 521 S.6th St.
Joseph A.Wilcox House 636 N.W.Cedar Ave.
WWII Airport Hanger Sisters Avenue
Francis McCormack Allen House** 655 S.W.7th St.
John F. Hosch House** 511 S.W. 12th St.
Fritz Landaker Building** 457 S.6th St.
Alfred Munz House** 404 E. Forest Ave.
Redmond Schoolhouse** 1429 W.Antler Ave.
Source:Redmond Comprehensive Plan,2007;Houser,Michael,Deschutes County Historical Planner
*Site on the National Register of Historic Places
**Site designated as of Historical Interest
9 Redmond Area General Plan,1998.
Page 249 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
RISK ASSESSMENT
This section of the NHMP addendum addresses 44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) --- Risk Assessment. In
addition, this chapter can serve as the factual basis for addressing Oregon Statewide
Planning Goal 7 —Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. Assessing natural hazard risk has three
phases:
• Phase 1: Identify hazards that can impact the jurisdiction. This includes an
evaluation of potential hazard impacts — type, location, extent, etc.
• Phase 2: Identify important community assets and system vulnerabilities. Example
vulnerabilities include people, businesses, homes, roads, historic places and drinking
water sources.
• Phase 3: Evaluate the extent to which the identified hazards overlap with, or have
an impact on, the important assets identified by the community.
The information presented below, along with hazard specific information presented
elsewhere in this addendum, within the Hazard Annexes (Volume II), and community
characteristics presented in the Community Profile (Appendix C), will be used as the local
level rationale for the risk reduction actions identified in this addendum. The risk
assessment process is graphically depicted in Figure RA---1 below. Ultimately, the goal of
hazard mitigation is to reduce the area where hazards overlap vulnerable systems.
Figure RA-I Understanding Risk
Understandin Risk
USGS g SAS I I
,cnrrranchnrrgrngmute RE11lILNC:t
Natural Hazard •\Vulnerable System
Potential Catastrophic l' \\ Exposure,Sensitivity
and Chronic Physical Events l Risk \ and Resilience of:
•Past Recurrence Intervals / 1 • Population
•Future Probability P of I • Economic Generation
•Speed of Ortsr,+t. I f • Built Environment
•Magnitude isaster l • Academic and Research Function
•Duration t D / •Cultural Assets
•Spatial Extent \ r • Infrastructure
\ I
Ability,Resources
and Willingness to:
•Mitigate•Respond
•Prepare •Recover
Source:USGS Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience Research Collaboration,2006
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Page 250 of 469- LXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Hazard Analysis Methodology
This NHMP utilizes a hazard analysis methodology that was first developed by FEMA circa
1983, and gradually refined by the Oregon Military Department's Office of Emergency
Management over the years.
The methodology produces scores that range from 24 (lowest possible) to 240 (highest
possible). Vulnerability and probability are the two key components of the methodology.
Vulnerability examines both typical and maximum credible events, and probability
endeavors to reflect how physical changes in the jurisdiction and scientific research modify
the historical record for each hazard. Vulnerability accounts for approximately 60% of the
total score, and probability approximately 40%.
This method provides the jurisdiction with a sense of hazard priorities, or relative risk. It
doesn't predict the occurrence of a particular hazard, but it does "quantify" the risk of one
hazard compared with another. By doing this analysis, planning can first be focused where
the risk is greatest.
In this analysis, severity ratings, and weight factors, are applied to the four categories of
history, vulnerability, maximum threat (worst---case scenario), and probability as shown in
the table below. See Volume I, Section 2 (Risk Assessment) for more information.
Hazard Analysis
On January 28, 2015, the City of Redmond addendum steering committee developed their
hazard vulnerability assessment (HVA), using the County's HVA as a reference. Changes from
the County's HVA were made where appropriate to reflect distinctions in vulnerability and
risk from natural hazards unique to the City of Redmond, which are discussed throughout
this addendum.
Table RA---4 shows the HVA matrix for Redmond showing each hazard listed in order of rank
from high to low. For local governments, conducting the hazard analysis is a useful step in
planning for hazard mitigation, response, and recovery. The method provides the
jurisdiction with sense of hazard priorities, but does not predict the occurrence of a
particular hazard.
Table RA-4 Hazard Analysis Matrix — City of Redmond
Total
Maximum Threat Hazard
Hazard HiatOrjr Pr(b'ability Vulnerability Threat ecg. "lie' Raft
Winter Storm 20 70 50 90 230 #1
Earthquake (Cascadia) 2 49 40 100 191 #2 Top
Windstorm 16 63 20 80 179 #3 Tier
Volcano 2 21 50 100 173 #4
Wildfire 6 35 40 40 121 #5
Drought 8 56 15 30 109 #6 Middle
Tier
Earthquake (Crustal) 2 7 5 80 94 #7
Flood 2 7 5 10 24 it 8 Bottom
Landslide 2 7 5 10 24 #8 Tier
Source:City of Redmond NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
Page 251 of 469-. EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Two chronic hazards (winter storm, and windstorm) and two catastrophic hazards (Cascadia
earthquake and volcano) rank as the top four hazard threats to the city (Top Tier). The
wildfire, drought, and crustal earthquake hazards comprise the next three highest ranked
hazards (Middle Tier), while flood and landslide hazards comprise the lowest ranked hazards
(Bottom Tier).
Table RA---5 categorizes the probability and vulnerability scores from the hazard analysis for
the city and compares the results to the assessment completed by the Deschutes County
NHMP Steering Committee (areas of difference are noted with bold text within the city
ratings).
Table RA-5 Probability and Vulnerability Comparison
Redmond. County
Hazard Probabilhhy Vulnerability Probability Vulnerability
Drought High Low High Low
Earthquake(Cascadia) Moderate High Moderate High
Earthquake(Crustal) Low Low Low Low
Flood Low Low High Low
Landslide Low Low Low Low
Volcano Low High Low High
Wildfire Moderate High High High
Windstorm High Moderate High Moderate
Winter Storm High High High High
Source:City of Redmond NHMP Steering Committee and Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
Drought
A drought is a period of drier than normal conditions that results in water---related problems.
Drought occurs in virtually every climatic zone, but its characteristics vary significantly from
one region to another. Drought is a temporary condition; it differs from aridity, which is
restricted to low rainfall regions and is a permanent feature of climate. The extent of
drought events depends upon the degree of moisture deficiency, and the duration and size
of the affected area. Typically, droughts occur as regional events and often affect more than
one city and county.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for drought is high (which is
the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to drought is low (which is the
same as the county's rating).
The city has ample high quality groundwater supplies fed by seven (7) production wells
within the Deschutes regional aquifer. There are no issues with groundwater supply and the
annual recharge to the aquifer is high and long---term water level trends show ample supply
for expected population growth and water usage.1° In addition, the city maintains five (5)
10 CH2MHill,2007.Wastewater(collection system)and Water System Master Plan.City of Redmond Oregon.
Page 252 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
storage facilities (2MG each), two (2) booster pump stations, one (1) transfer pump station,
and four (4) pressure reducing stations".
For more information on the Drought Hazard (including history and extent) see the Drought
Annex in Volume ll.
Earthquake
Oregon and the Pacific Northwest in general are susceptible to earthquakes from four
sources: 1)the off---shore Cascadian Fault Zone;2)deep intra---plate events within the
subducting Juan de Fuca Plate; 3) shallow crustal events within the North American Plate;
and 4) earthquakes associated with volcanic activity.12
The areas most susceptible to ground amplification and liquefaction have young, soft alluvial
sediments, found along river and stream channels. The extent of the damage to structures
and injury and death to people will depend upon the type of earthquake, proximity to the
epicenter and the magnitude and duration of the event.
The steering committee HVA evaluated both crustal earthquakes and a Cascadia
earthquake. The steering committee determined that the city's probability of experiencing a
crustal earthquake is low (which is the same as the county's rating) and that their
vulnerability to a crustal earthquake is low (which is the same as the county's rating). The
steering committee determined that the city's (and State's) probability of experiencing a
Cascadia earthquake is moderate (which is the same as the county's rating) and that their
vulnerability to a Cascadia earthquake is high (which is the same as the county's rating).
Two---thirds of Redmond's building stock was built after 1990 and the codification of seismic
codes. Redmond is not particularly susceptible to liquefaction, and is not expected to
experience very strong to violent shaking in an earthquake event (see Volume II,Tables II---5
and II---6). As such, the city's vulnerability to earthquakes is reduced because of it's relatively
new infrastructure and buildings in combination with the particular geology of the area.
However, the city considers itself to have high vulnerability to a Cascadia earthquake event
due to secondary effects of the hazard, including access to transportation routes, energy
resources, communications, and the need to assist with refugees of the damage that is
expected west of the Cascades.
Information on specific buildings' estimated seismic resistance, determined by DOGAMI in
2007, is shown in Tables RA---6 below.The table displays the rankings of all facilities within
the city's jurisdiction; each "X" represents one building within that ranking category.
Of the school facilities evaluated by DOGAMI using RVS, none have very high (100% chance)
collapse potential. Five (5) buildings have high (greater than 10% chance) collapse potential;
however, three of these buildings are located at the former Evergreen Elementary School
which is no longer used as a school facility (it is expected that these buildings will receive
structural seismic upgrades and be the future home of city hall). Of the public safety
11 City of Redmond Website,http://www.redmond.or.us/,accessed April 28,2015.
Taylor,George H.and Chris Hannan.The Oregon Weather Book.Corvallis,OR:Oregon State University Press.
1999
Page 253 of 469- BXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
facilities evaluated, none have very high (100% chance) collapse potential; however, two (2)
buildings have high (greater than 10% chance) collapse potential. None of the community
college buildings or the hospital are rated with High or Very High collapse potentials.
Table RA-6 Rapid Visual Survey Scores
°la Level of Collapse Potential
Low Moderate High ;''Very High
Facility a8� a�.;; (< 1%) (>1%) (>10%) (*00%).
Schools
Evergreen Elem. School
X XXX
(437 S 9th St, Redmond)
John Tuck Elementary School
(209 NW 10th St, Redmond) X XXXX
MA Lynch Elementary School
XX
(1314 SW Kalama St, Redmond)
Vern Patrick Elementary School
X
(3001 SW Obsidian, Redmond)
Deschutes Edge Charter School
X
(1220 NW Upas, Redmond)
Hugh Hartmant Middle School
X
(2105 W Antler, Redmond)
Obsidian Middle School
X
(1334 SE Obsidian Ave, Redmond)
Redmond High School
X XXX
(675 SW Rimrock Dr, Redmond)
Central Oregon Community College 9 Redmond Campus
College Center X
MAIL X
One Stop Building X
Public Safety
Redmond F&R Y Station 401 Headquarters
X
(341 NW Dogwood, Redmond)
Redmond F&R Y Station 403 Airport
X
(911 SE Salmon, Redmond)
Redmond F&R Y Station 404 Cline Falls
X
(100 SE 67th St, Redmond)
Hospitals
St.Charles Medical Center Y Redmond
XX
(1253 NW Canal Blvd, Redmond)
Source:DOGAMI 2007.Open File Report 0---07---02_Statewide Seismic Needs Assessment Using Rapid Visual
Assessment.
The county and cities have opted to create one action item for all the facilities that have a
"high" or "very high" rating (see Appendix A). The buildings with 'high' or 'very high'
collapse potential include multiple education facilities located throughout the city, all of
which can play a key role in during disaster events or during long---term recovery.
For more information on the Earthquake Hazard (including history and extent) see the
Earthquake Annex in Volume ll.
Page 254 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Flood
Flooding results when rain and snowmelt creates water flow that exceed the carrying
capacity of rivers, streams, channels, ditches, and other watercourses. In Oregon, flooding is
most common from October through April when storms from the Pacific Ocean bring intense
rainfall. Most of Oregon's destructive natural disasters have been floods.13 Flooding
can be aggravated when rain is accompanied by snowmelt and frozen ground; the spring
cycle of melting snow is the most common source of flood in the region. The principal types
of flood that occur in Redmond include flash floods (associated with thunderstorms) that
occur frequently and may cause localized flooding that can impact development within
Redmond as it did in August 201314. Redmond is the only incorporated city within Deschutes
County that does not have a mapped special flood hazard area (floodplain); the Deschutes
River is located west of the city. However, the city does have a canal that runs through the
city as part of the Central Oregon Irrigation District's (COID) Pilot Butte Canal (running from
Bend, through Redmond to Terrebonne).
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for flood is low (which is
lower than the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to flood is low (which is lower
than the county's rating).
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
The Deschutes County Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) were modernized in 2007 and do
not include a special flood hazard area for Redmond. The table below shows that as of
November 2014, Redmond has zero (0) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policies in
force and no paid claims. The city has never had a Community Assistance Visit (CAV) and is
not a member of the Community Rating System (CRS). The community repetitive Mood loss
record for Redmond does not include any repetitive flood loss, or severe repetitive flood
loss, buildings and has not had any repetitive loss claims.
Table RA-7 Flood Insurance Detail
Policies by Building Type Minus
t urreht Initial Total Pre:FIRM Single 2 to 4 Other r to d
Jurisdiction FIRM Date FIRM Date Policies Policies Family Family Residential,`l,ts i i }4, ale,
Redmond 9/28/07 9/28/07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Severe
Pre:FIRM Substantial. Repetitive Repetitive
Insurance Total Paid Claims Damage Loss Loss Total Paid CRS Class Last
Jurisdiction in Force Claims Paid Claims Buildings i3ul44010" ti
Redmond $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 NP NA
Source:Information compiled by Department of Land Conservation and Development,November 2014.
For more information on the Flood Hazard (including history and extent) see the Flood Annex
in Volume ll.
13 Taylor,George H.and Chris Hannan.The Oregon Weather L3ook.Corvallis,OR:Oregon State University Press.
1999
14 "Redmond couple's home hit by flooding" KTVZ News, accessed April 29, 2015,
http://www.ktvz.com/news/redmond cou ples---home---h it---by---flooding/21678364
Page 255 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Landslide
A landslide is any detached mass of soil, rock, or debris that falls, slides or flows down a
slope or a stream channel. Landslides are classified according to the type and rate of
movement and the type of materials that are transported. In a landslide, two forces are at
work: 1) the driving forces that cause the material to move down slope, and 2) the friction
forces and strength of materials that act to retard the movement and stabilize the slope.
When the driving forces exceed the resisting forces, a landslide occurs.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for landslide is low (which is
the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to landslide is low (which is the
same as the county's rating).
The city has had no problems with landslides in city limits in known history and is located in
a generally stable area. A few neighborhoods within the city (around the Dry Canyon) are
located on steep hillsides but have not experienced problems in the past.
For more information on the Landslide Hazard (including history and extent)see the
Landslide Annex in Volume II.
Volcano
The Pacific Northwest lies within the "ring of fire", an area of very active volcanic activity
surrounding the Pacific Basin. Volcanic events occur regularly along the ring of fire, in part
because of the movement of the Earth's tectonic plates. Volcanic events have the potential
to coincide with numerous other hazards including ash fall, earthquakes, lava flows,
pyroclastic flows, lahars, and debris flows, and landslides.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for volcanic event is low
(which is the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to volcanic event is
high (which is the same as the county's rating).
Were a volcanic event to occur in the Cascades region of Oregon, Redmond could be at risk
for ash fall, depending on the severity of the event and the direction of the wind. Due to
Redmond's proximity to the Three Sisters and Newberry Crater, in relation to other areas
within eastern Oregon, the effects of a volcanic event may be more disruptive to normal
business, economic activity, and health.
For more information on the Volcano Hazard (including history and extent) see the Volcano
Annex in Volume II.
Wildfire
Wildfires occur in areas with large amounts of flammable vegetation that require a
suppression response due to uncontrolled burning. Fire is an essential part of Oregon's
ecosystem, but can also pose a serious threat to life and property particularly in the state's
growing rural communities. Wildfire can be divided into three categories: interface,
wildland, and firestorms. The increase in residential development in interface areas has
resulted in greater wildfire risk. Fire has historically been a natural wildland element and
can sweep through vegetation that is adjacent to a combustible home. New residents in
Page 256 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 20I 5-087
remote locations are often surprised to learn that in moving away from built---up urban
areas, they have also left behind readily available fire services providing structural
protection.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for wildfire is moderate
(which is lower than the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to wildfire is high
(which is the same as the county's rating).
Compared to other areas within the county, Redmond has a lower risk to wildfire due, in
part, to it's location in relation to irrigated agricultural land. The Greater Redmond Area
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP, October 2011, to be updated in 2016) relies
upon (1) the Oregon Department of Forestry Assessment of Risk Factors and (2) the
classification ratings of individual areas under the Oregon Forestland---Urban Interface Fire
Protection Act of 1997 (Senate Bill 360) to determine fire risk within the Greater Redmond
Wildland---Urban Interface (WUI). According to the Senate Bill 360 ratings all Redmond WUI
communities (see Attachment 3) are rated as High fire risk. According to the ODF
Assessment all urban areas within the Greater Redmond WUI are rated with a Moderate
probability of wildfire risk occurring (except for the urban southwest which is rated High)
and Low vulnerability15. The first priority areas for hazardous fuel treatments identified
within the CWPP include the urban northwest community (the three other urban
communities are listed as second priority)'. For more information on wildfire risk and fuels
reduction projects see the Greater Redmond Area CWPP and visit the Project Wildfire
website: http://www.projectwildfire.org/.
Table RA-8 Wildfire Communities and ODF and SB 360 Hazard Ratings
00Er $8 360
Estimated
Community.at gislt, '00. age Homes Population Probability Vulnerability )^ e e
Northeast 13,797 815 2,038 Moderate Low 97.9% 2.1%
Southeast 26,354 116 290 High Low 100.0% 0.0%
Northwest 34,809 2,677 6,692 Moderate Low 93.5% 6.5%
Southwest 20,388 2,437 6,092 High Low 97.0% 3.0%
Urban Northeast 3,263 961 2,402 Moderate Low 100.0% 0.0%
Urban Southeast 4,462 500 1,250 Moderate Low 100.0% 0.0%
Urban Northwest 3,351 3,139 7,848 Moderate Low 100.0% 0.0%
Urban Southwest 4,579 5,459 13,648 High Low 100.0% 0.0%
Total 111,003 16,104 40,260 = 97.2% 2.8%
Source:Greater Redmond CWPP compiled Tables 1,2,and.5
Note:Estimated population is based on Deschutes County's estimate formulated as 2.5 x the number of homes.
For more information on the Wildfire Hazard (including history and extent)see the Wildfire
Annex in Volume II and the Greater Redmond CWPP.
15 The ODF Assessment takes into account the likelihood of a fire occurring,hazard rating,protection capability,
human and economic values protected,structural vulnerability to determine the overall score.For detailed
information review the CWPP available on the Project Wildfire website:http://www.proiectwildfire.orq/
16 Greater Redmond CWPP,2011.
Page 257 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Windstorm
A windstorm is generally a short duration event involving straight—line winds and/or gusts
in excess of 50 mph. Although windstorms can affect the entirety of Deschutes County,
they are especially dangerous in developed areas with significant tree stands and major
infrastructure, especially above ground utility lines. A windstorm will frequently knock
down trees and power lines, damage homes, businesses, public facilities, and create tons
of storm related debris.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for windstorm is high (which
is the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to windstorm is moderate
(which is the same as the county's rating).
Historical wind events have uprooted trees, damaged roofs and windows, and damaged
utility lines. Windstorms have not caused disastrous local damage but are a persistent
problem. Windstorms are often associated with microbursts (thunderstorms). A primary
windstorm vulnerability for the community is damage to utility lines, including fiber optics,
which are key to the economic sectors of the community.
For more information on the Windstorm Hazard (including history and extent) see the
Windstorm Annex in Volume II.
Winter Storm
Severe winter storms can consist of rain, freezing rain, ice, snow, cold temperatures, and
wind. They originate from troughs of low pressure offshore that ride along the jet stream
during fall, winter, and early spring months. Severe winter storms affecting Deschutes
County typically originate in the Gulf of Alaska or in the central Pacific Ocean. These storms
are most common from November through March.
The steering committee determined that the city's probability for winter storm is high
(which is the same as the county's rating) and that their vulnerability to winter storm is high
(which is the same as the county's rating).
Redmond is located at a higher elevation east of the Cascades, which is a major contributor
to winter storms. Major winter storms can and have occurred in the Redmond area, and
while they typically do not cause significant damage; they are frequent and have the
potential to impact economic activity. Road closures on Highway 97, or the passes to the
Willamette Valley (Highways 58 and 126), due to winter weather are a common occurrence
and can interrupt commuter and large truck traffic. The city budgets funds for seasonal
winter storm needs, such as clearing roads.
For more information on the Winter Storm Hazard (including history and extent) see the
Winter Storm Annex in Volume It
Summary
The figure below presents a summary of the hazard analysis for the City of Redmond and
compares the results to the assessment completed by the Deschutes County NHMP Steering
Committee.
Page 258 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
In terms of history, probability, vulnerability, and maximum threat, the hazard analysis for
the city overall rated their threat to the drought, flood, landslide, and wildfire hazards lower
than the county while all other hazards were rated the same as the county's ratings.
Figure RA-2 Overall Hazard Analysis Comparison — Redmond and Deschutes
County
240 #1 #1
#2
#3 #2
#4 #3
tt 5 #q
#5
#S
120 #/
nF
tr tt 7
#9
#8 NH
Drought Earthquake Earthquake Flood Landshdc Volcano Wildfire Windstorm Winter Storm
(Casradia) ((:roslal)
County 44i-in-mod
Source:City of Redmond NHMP Steering Committee and Deschutes County NHMP Steering Committee,2015.
Page 259 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
MITIGATION
STRATEGY
Mitigation Plan Mission
The plan mission states the purpose and defines the primary functions of Deschutes
County's NHMP. It is intended to be adaptable to any future changes made to the plan and
need not change unless the community's environment or priorities change.
The mission of the Deschutes County NHMP is:
To promote sound public policy designed to protect citizens, critical facilities,
infrastructure, private property, and the environment from natural hazards.
This can be achieved by increasing public awareness, documenting the resources for risk
reduction and loss---prevention, and identifying activities to guide the county towards
building a safer, more disaster resistant community.
The Redmond steering committee reviewed the 2015 NHMP plan mission statement and
agreed it accurately describes the overall purpose and intent of this plan. The Steering
Committee believes the concise nature of the mission statement allows for a comprehensive
approach to mitigation planning.
Mitigation Plan Goals
Mitigation plan goals are more specific statements of direction that Deschutes County
citizens, and public and private partners can take while working to reduce the county's risk
from natural hazards. These statements of direction form a bridge between the broad
mission statement and particular action items. The goals listed here serve as checkpoints as
agencies and organizations begin implementing mitigation action items.
The Redmond Addendum steering committee reviewed and agreed to the 2015 Deschutes
County NHMP plan goals. All the plan goals are important and are listed below in no
particular order of priority. Establishing community priorities within action items neither
negates nor eliminates any goals, but it establishes which action items to consider to
implement first, should funding become available. Below is a list of the 2015 NHMP goals:
Goal 1: Protect life and reduce injuries resulting from natural hazards.
Goal 2: Minimize public and private property damages and the disruption of essential
infrastructure and services from natural hazards.
Goal 3: Implement strategies to mitigate the effects of natural hazards and increase the
quality of life and resilience of economies in Deschutes County.
Goal 4: Minimize the impact of natural hazards while protecting, restoring, and
sustaining environmental processes.
Page 260 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Goal 5: Enhance and maintain local capability to implement a comprehensive hazard
loss reduction strategy.
Goal 6: Document and evaluate progress in achieving hazard mitigation strategies and
action items.
Goal 7: Motivate the public, private sector, and government agencies to mitigate the
effects of natural hazards through information and education.
Goal 8: Apply development standards that mitigate or eliminate the potential impacts of
natural hazards.
Goal 9: Mitigate damage to historic and cultural resources from natural hazards.
Goal 10: Increase communication, collaboration, and coordination among agencies at all
levels of government and the private sector to mitigate natural hazards.
Goal 11: Integrate local NHMPs with comprehensive plans and implementing measures.
(Note: although numbered the goals are not prioritized-)
Mitigation Plan Action Items
Short---and long---term action items identified through the planning process are an important
part of the mitigation plan. Action items are detailed recommendations for activities that
local departments, citizens and others could engage in to reduce risk. They address both
multi---hazard(MH)and hazard---specific issues.Action items can be developed through a
number of sources. The figure below illustrates some of these sources. A description of how
the plan's mitigation actions were developed is provided below.
Figure RA-3 Development of Action Items
711)1
Potential Action Item
Pool
AP
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience(2008)
Page 261 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Action Item Worksheets
Each action item has a corresponding action item worksheet describing the activity,
identifying the rationale for the project, identifying potential ideas for implementation, and
assigning coordinating and partner organizations. The action item worksheets can assist the
community in pre---packaging potential projects for grant funding. The worksheet
components are described within Volume I, Section 3 (Mitigation Strategy). The City specific
action item worksheets are located in Attachment 1, Action Item Forms.
The City is also a party to several actions described in the County NHMP; each jurisdiction
listed on the County Action Item Forms as an "Affected Jurisdiction" will contribute to and
work towards completion of that action as it pertains to their jurisdiction. There are 15
County Action Items that included Redmond as an "Affected Jurisdiction". For detailed
information on each County level action item form see Volume I, Section 3, Mitigation
Strategy and Volume IV, Appendix A, Action Item Forms.
Action Item Development Process
Development of action items was a multi---step, iterative process that involved
brainstorming, discussion, review, and revisions. Action items were developed by the
steering committee and were influenced by actions identified as part of the Sustainable City
Year work program. A number of actions identified by the County steering committee
include the City as an affected jurisdiction; these actions are broad actions that include
implementation components at both the county and city level. All actions were reviewed by
the committee and revised as necessary before becoming a part of this document.
Page 262 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
ATTACHMENT I :
ACTION ITEM FORMS
Action Item Forms
The action item forms portray the overall action plan framework and identify linkages
between the plan goals, partnerships (coordination and partner organizations), and actions.
Table RA---9 provides a list of actions for the city.The pages that follow include individual
forms for each mitigation action.
Table RA-9 Mitigation Actions
Related Hazards F' ';P` "''
h t ''' I h :''''
Z i 4 W "'A') ,J a r
Action High r. + �p, c,. c
4 ��tds 8�il;; ,r
Item Priority Ti line Stat ,,; §,
ate �., t � �,, � �,.
MH#1 X Short'Term New X X X X X X X X
EQ#1 X Short'Term New X
FL#1 Long'Term New X
Source: City of Redmond NHMP Steering Committee
Page 263 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Mitigation A�i 3 "" rd;#1 b Priority
AI meat-with Plan.Goals:
( want',t�r CIO
t " " ,f' Action Item?
(Wheat 'A f'9 d,c9 §" ,'nr,e,
Participate in emergency preparedness and disaster 1111 •2 •3 U 4
planning with the County, Redmond School District and
other organizations to ready the City and Citizens for U 5 •6 117 8 Yes
emergency situations.
11 9 10 11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City/ County Comprehensive Plans and Development Codes
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Public awareness of external events and how to prepare for and deal with them is critical to community
preparedness.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
The department will work with the U of 0 Added in 2015
Sustainable Cities Initiative in developing a
comprehensive emergency preparedness plan for
the Cascadia Event.
Champion/
Responsible Organization: Community Development
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Police Department, Public Works Deschutes County Emergency Services, Redmond F & R
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
Sustainable City Year---Budgeted $15,000 •Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term (3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 264 el/69- E>XC1--I-I-BIT 13 to RESO-LUTl4 N 2015 087
Mitigation t nr k .,, 414 Priority
�+ yg�� rM" ! i # " / lir�mnt with Plan +rol t a
,,( V at:cd wan} O,do?) ■ y s■,i, k AF A,1'Ky 111
•1 •2 •3 •4
Examine the airport facility needs related to emergency
preparedness and its regional designation in the Oregon ■5 ■6 ■7 ■g •Yes
Resiliency Plan and the Cascadia Event.
•9 •10 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Airport Master Plan, Comprehensive Plan, Facilities Plan
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Redmond's airport serves all of central Oregon and is the site of the command center.
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Examine operational readiness and development of Added in 2015
the emergency plans.
Program needed expansion and key maintenance Added in 2015
effots.
Champion/ Redmond Airport
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, Engineering, Public Deschutes County Community Development, Deschutes
Works County Emergency Services
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
II Ongoing
Local Resources---Grants, Bonds To be determined •Short Term(1---2 years)
Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Pag, . . _ 1 I. r . "l - • I1
Mitigation Action: Flood #1 High Priority
Alignment with Plan Gcleis: A�tlon Item?
(What do we want to doe)
•1 •2 •3 •4
Complete a stormwater drainage study and mitigate ■5 6 7 8 Yes
problem areas.
•9 • 10 • 11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Stormwater Master Plan
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Flash floods due occur in Redmond and have the potential to damage structures; the most recent large event
occurred in August 2013 and the event of record occurred on June 10---17, 2006.The event of record caused
flooding in the streets of downtown and other parts of Redmond.
The City does not have an extensive stormwater collection system, rather the city has uses underground
injection controls (dry wells) and valved interconnections between the storm and sanitary system. During
large storm events street flooding is relieved by opening valves to divert stormwater to gravity sanitary
sewer pipelines as allowed per the city's discharge permit for the Redmond WPCF. Other areas are relieved
with the use of the city's vacuum trucks. (Redmond Wastewater (Collection System) and Water System
Master Plan, 2007)
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Update existing Stormwater Master Plan Added in 2015
Champion/ Public Works
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, Engineering Oregon Water Resources Department
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Ongoing
SDC's, grants, Local Resources $125,000 •Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 246 of/169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 0g7
ATTACHMENT 2:
ACTION ITEM FORM TEMPLATE
p pa �ti�
ts t7d �t� ,r
Mitigation Action:[Number] ail'; x wii � Prlority r.
r Alignment with,Man,poi
( ) urs Action Ite ;;',G
Mit ion'Action:: What do we want to do?
, Gk�H sn i.
•1 112 •3 �4
•5 ■b •7 ■g •Yes
•9 1110 •11
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Rationale for Proposal(Why is this important?):
Ideas for Implementation (How will it get done?): Action Status Report
Champion/
Responsible Organization:
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Ongoing
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
•Long---Term(3---5 years)
Form Submitted by:
Action Item Status:
Page 267 of X169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
ATTACHMENT 3:
CWPP MAP
This page intentionally left blank. See next page for a map from the CWPP that shows the CWPP
subregions. For more information see the community wildfire protection plan located on the Project
Wildfire website: http://www.proiectwildfire.org/
Page 268 of 469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN BOUNDARY !I
1
1
w ii w
1
2 1
0 Fes^ s 1,1' w x °o
O o E i £ 'E v,
CC O E [ r z N
- rv� II
iiir /•
P t dk, rc
1
I
a I
i
1
i iy wawBK�� gip} W
O o
w O
u_ � .s,
WV F
7 N
W
re
0
z F
y
W
if,II/
2-' `
I c
T co
n
i I
0
NI
F
, W
rt
a 1
v I
ro
� ', ..-'
..........__.. .._.... .._. ...._. .. -.-f
Volume IV:
Mitigation Resources
Page 272 of 469- EXHIBI"1' 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
APPENDIX A:
ACTION ITEM FORMS
The following table lists the action item number, timeline, status, priority, affected
jurisdictions, and applicable hazards.
Note: See addenda for each city's action item forms and action item prioritization.
Table A---1 Action Item Table of Contents and Affected Jurisdiction
giA° ' ",, Jurisdiction �at-194.,.-ti" d
i
An(� 7�r�leli � 1} Pr�orrty A a a cc °.v G y ru ¢
r .
MH#1 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X X X X X X X X
MH#2 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X X X X X X X X
MH#3 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X X X X X X X X
MH#4 Long Term New X X X X X X X X X X X
MH#5 Long Term New X X X X X X X X X X X X X
MH#6 Long Term New X X X X X X X
MH#7 Long Term New X X X X X X X X
EQ#1 Long Term Deferred X X X X X X
EQ#2 Long Term New X X X X X X
FL#1 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X
FL#2 Long Term Deferred X X X
FL#3 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X
FL#4 Long Term Ongoing X X X X X
FL#5 Long Term Ongoing X X X X X
FL#6 Long Term New X X X
FL#7 Long Term New X X X
VE#1 Long Term Ongoing X X
WF#1 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X
WF#2 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X
WF#3 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X
WS#1 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X
WS#2 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X
WS#3 Ongoing Ongoing X X X X X X
Note: Deschutes County has not identified highest priority action items at this time; the
Steering Committee will identify prioritized actions during one of their semi---annual
meetings following adoption and approval of the NHMP.
Page 275 of4e9 EXIT 4 to RESOLUTION 20-15 0447
Action!teen:Multi---hazard#1 Alignment with Plan Goals: High Priority
Action Item?
Integrate training and education initiatives from the •1 •2 •3 NI 4
Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan into
existing regulatory documents and programs where •5 6 •7 •8 •Yes
appropriate.
•9 • 10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City/ County Comprehensive Plans and Development Codes
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
The extreme population growth in the County and the region continues to bring people to the area who are
not familiar with the climate, terrain, culture, etc.
Additionally, this growth has placed new demands on the capacity of existing systems of support such as
volunteer fire departments, city governments, and the service industry including hospitals, Red Cross and
others.
It is critical that the majority of the population be informed and skilled in mitigation efforts, particularly
related to wildland fire and severe winter storms. Efforts placed in public awareness, education and training
will strengthen the County's capacity to address an event should it happen; heighten understanding and
knowledge of how to prevent and mitigate impacts; and strengthen the culture and sense of responsibility
for life, property and safety.
Ideas for Implementation:
Public education and training for staff should routinely be conducted. Resorts and other businesses related
to tourism should be included.
Distribute education materials to home and business owners that support initiatives to reduce the risk of loss
from natural hazards.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Committee
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Emergency Services, Community ODF, American Red Cross, OSU Cascades
Development, County Forester, Road
Department, Public Works, Cities
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
IS 1
Short Term(1---2 years)
Partner with OSU Cascades, Local Funding
Resources •Long Term (3---5 years)
•Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
-Page 276 of469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION ION 2015 487
High pggrity
�► r , Itern:.IVIL:I1 i4-ha a 'd 2 Aflg4 rr ► , r Plan G+ dis
A
+;4 ga ,aaP��4� a r s�,aa�kb�l„ .,r, s>, jf h, l;..r�l''r'
1111 .2 U3 U4
Pursue coordination of mitigation initiative
development, planning, and resource allocation •5 •6 .7 M8 II Yes
(funding).
MI 9 •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County • Bend •Redmond
■ La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City/ County Comprehensive Plans and Development Codes
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
The County has a good history of working together and building and sustaining systems of coordination. This
is a result of facing events such as severe wildland fires and winter storms historically and recently.
Stakeholders developing this plan concur that placing emphasis on coordinating efforts among public---
private, geographic, and multi--- interests is a sound investment in building capacity to mitigate hazards, using
all resources to their greatest potential, and providing a basis for good communication among a wide range
of individuals, groups, agencies and businesses.
Ideas for Implementation:
Establish a clear role for the Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Committee that results in a
sustainable process for implementing, monitoring and evaluating mitigation activities.
Integrate hazard mitigation initiatives into City and County Comprehensive Plans. Completed in 2011 for
Deschutes County (review of natural hazards regulations is underway, 2015)
Integrate planning between cities and county where appropriate. Integrate
other possible natural hazards not specifically included in this plan.
Advance coordination of resource and fund development among cities and private land owners where
appropriate mitigation plans mutually benefit.
Advance coordination efforts among and with home and business owners and emergency management
actions that result in reducing risk of loss from natural hazards.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Committee
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Emergency Services, Community ODF, American Red Cross, OSU Cascades, USFS
Development, County Forester, Road
Department, Public Works
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
County and Cities, Grants, Local Funding
Resources •Long Term (3---5 years)
▪Ongoing
Page 277 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 278 of 169- EXHIBIT B to RESOLLITIOI•I 2045 087
it
A nice O Multi 'hazal,rd#3 Alignment with'$ a s,, 's ro �,,,
� 3 , .,. ,r a,��i.a r+w�":¢,rv.µ n,v. a,u"mM.0 747DE
�1 •2 3 U4
Strengthen understanding of the probability of natural
hazards, by continuing to support research specific to 5 IV 7 •g Yes
the region.
•9 •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
II La Pine ■Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan (2007) Currently in process of updating 2015 CCVC Plan
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
While indicators of the potential for earthquake and volcanic eruption events are evident, the probability of
these events occurring is low based on current studies. Scientists continue to study activities surrounding
these hazards and document their findings. It will continue to be a priority for this research to continue in
order to learn more about the vulnerability of the region, potential impact, and recommendations for
additional mitigation actions.
The Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan (2007) is complete but does not currently have a local
champion and has not been authorized by the participating jurisdictions. Kickoff meeting was 02/27/15
Ideas for Implementation:
Continue to work with the scientific community to review existing and emerging conditions related to natural
hazards identified in the Deschutes County NHMP
Integrate research findings into county and local planning efforts.
Integrate natural hazards not included in this plan that are identified by research.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Committee
Internal Partners: External Partners:
OSU Cascades, DOGAMI, USGS, ACOE, FEMA, DLCD, OEM,
University of Oregon
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
USGS, Counties (Deschutes, Jefferson, Linn,
Lane), OSU Cascades, Local Funding Resources •Long Term (3---5 years)
▪Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 279 of/169 EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 20-15 007
High.Priority
Action Item:Multi• .ohazard,i#4 Alignment with Ptan.Goals:
*Von Item?
•1 •2 •3 l4
Assess Power Grid and Determine Methods to Improve
Resiliency •5 16 •7 r 8 •Yes
•9 110 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
The County relies on a range of energy sources to support and protect local residents, businesses, and
government facilities. Accordingly, secure supplies of energy (e.g., electricity, gasoline, diesel fuel, natural
gas, propane) to critical facilities/infrastructure, especially during emergency events, are of crucial
importance to all segments of the community. An energy assurance plan is essentially a plan for how the
County will recover and restore energy services to critical functions and facilities/infrastructure within a
predetermined time after a partial or complete energy supply interruption. The Plan identifies critical
facilities and critical infrastructure needing back---up power generation capacity to ensure continued
operation during emergency events. The Plan establishes short---term communication protocols, actions and
priorities by which critical facilities/infrastructure will be re---energized after a disruption, as well as long---term
strategies for making critical facilities and critical infrastructure less vulnerable to disruptions of mainline
energy sources.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Develop a Local Energy Assurance Plan Added in 2015.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Public Works, Planning, Roads Utility Companies, U.S. DOE, OEM
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
FEMA PDM, U.S. Department of Energy's •Short Term(1---2 years)
Local Energy Assurance Planning Initiative, •Long Term (3---5 years)
other grants, Local Funding Resources
Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 280 of/169 EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
; t t 'w wort , !Ac ion eMulti -hax rd#5 Alignment wth nG 1 u
•1 •2 •3 •4
Develop continuity of operations plans to ensure
continued operation in the event of a natural hazard •5 •6 •7 M8 U Yes
emergency.
•9 •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
• La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City and County Emergency Operations Plans
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Deschutes County is vulnerable to a number of different natural hazards that could affect the administration
and management of local government. Developing continuity of operations plans for the County will assist in
maintaining a basic level of government to continue to provide needed services within the community.
According to the Florida Division of Emergency Management, continuity of operations is accomplished
through the development of plans, comprehensive procedures, and provisions for alternate facilities,
personnel, resources, interoperable communications, and vital records/databases. The plan establishes
policy and guidance to ensure the execution of the organization's most essential functions in any event
which requires the relocation of selected personnel and functions to an alternate facility.
Research conducted by Richard Wilson has shown that staff turnover is likely to occur after a disaster.
Veteran staff is critical after a disaster. It is important to prevent turnover so that existing personnel do not
have to take on extra responsibilities during an already stressful time. Continuity planning can also help
lessen turnover by ensuring competitive salaries and benefits and by reducing the amount of stress staff will
have to endure.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires communities to develop actions that reduce the impact of a
g q p p
natural hazard [201.6(c)(3)(ii)]. Developing a continuity of operations plan will diminish the effects of a
natural disaster by providing the cities and County of Deschutes with a framework for continuing operations
in a potentially chaotic situation.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Research and review completed continuity of Added in 2015.
operations plans to provide a foundation of expected
content and issues to review.
Utilize existing OEM Manuals and Templates Added in 2015.
available on their website
(http://www.oregon.gov/OMD/OEM/pages/plans_tr
ain/coop.aspx)
The COOP should ensure shelter housing for critical Added in 2015.
staff and family members such as County officials,
public works employees, emergency response, and
others.
Page,: : . _ - 1?SOLUI'ION 2015 087
Assess and prioritize critical positions and resources Added in 2015.
vital to the continuance of important County
functions.
Incorporate COOP into the existing Emergency Added in 2015.
Operations Plans where applicable.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Public Works, Planning, Roads OEM
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
State Homeland Security Project, Local
Funding Resources Long Term (3-5 years)
▪Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 282 of469 EXHIBIT B to R-1-;SOLUTION 2015 0.87
. �. m—
'Amon Item Mult1,. ha d#6 F aka r
tfigl it'rent;with Plan Goal A dory Ntern
,47i,Mi., ,� I., t, r�s� t .� YL I
•1 •2 3 U 4
Develop code language to mitigate the harmful impact
of hazard trees located on private and/ or vacant •5 •6 •7 •8 •Yes
property.
•g •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
II Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Deschutes County Code
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Educating property owners about how to prevent power outages on their private property can help reduce
impacts of windstorm events on these homeowners.
Overhead electrical lines are subject to high winds and winter storm damage. The risk is higher on the lines
going to a mountaintop or peak.
All of Deschutes County is at risk for winter storms. Due to the multitude of variables, such as wind speed,
direction, and temperature, each storm is capable of causing extensive damage in any part of the County.
High winds can topple trees and break limbs which in turn can result in power outages and disrupt
telephone, computer, and TV and radio service.
Windstorms affect Deschutes County on nearly a yearly basis.
During winter storm access to the line by the utility is difficult. This difficulty delays the time for restoration
of power to Deschutes County residents.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires communities to develop comprehensive actions to reduce the
impacts of natural hazards.[201.6(c)(3)(ii)] Educating property owners on how to properly maintain trees to
prevent power loss on power lines off the right of way will reduce the impact of severe weather in Deschutes
County.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Gather information about the maintenance and Added in 2015.
removal of hazardous trees.
Work with the community and partners to identify Added in 2015.
areas that are prone to damage from nearby trees
and perform the necessary maintenance or removal
of those e trees.
Create a hazardous tree inventory. Added in 2015.
Work with the community and Public Works Added in 2015.
Department to identify high wind and icing areas
from previous outages and apply for grants to
underground utilities in those areas (see MH #7)
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Page 283 of.169- EXHIBIT B to RL,SOLUTR Ai 2-0-15-087
Internal Partners: External Partners:
County Forester, Community Development, Electric Utilities, ODF
Public Works
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
Local Funding Resources •Long Term (3---5 years)
▪Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 281 of169 EXHIBIT B to P-ESOUJTION 7015-087
r nIS tl4 wbt BS Pd 7 f P d 1
,Aottio.n Item MWIti- laird#7
(i r 9 ! d r 9` s s, r rb�g7" ,i'"b, ,"' 4(µ7I. ! B■
Continue and enhance windstorm resistant construction ■1 2 •3 ■4
methods where possible to reduce damage to utilities
and critical facilities from windstorms. In part, this may ■5 ■6 M7 M8 •Yes
be accomplished by encouraging electric utility providers
to convert existing overhead lines to underground lines. •9 10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County Bend Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Overhead electrical lines are subject to high winds and winter storm damage. The risk is higher on the lines
going to a mountaintop or peak. Most of the services at the top are communication sites. The
communication sites are used by ODOT, State Police, county sheriff, emergency services, telephone utilities
and cell phone companies. During a disaster the sites are vital for communication. During winter storm
access to the line by the utility is difficult and this difficulty delays the time for restoration of power to the
services. The utility company has experienced costs each year to repair and maintain the lines. Converting
the lines to underground would remove the risk of damage from wind and winter storm.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires communities to develop comprehensive actions to reduce the
impacts of natural hazards, with an emphasis on new and existing buildings and
infrastructure.[201.6(c)(3)(ii)] Converting primary electrical overhead lines to mountaintop communication
services with underground lines will reduce the impact of severe weather on power lines, and will continue
power service to rural customers as well as ODOT, State Police, county sheriff, emergency services,
telephone utilities, and cell phone companies.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Work with the consumer---owned electric utility Added in 2015.
providers to identify "undergrounding districts" so
that they can plan for future investments in the area
to be undergrounded. Utilize utility franchise fees,
urban renewal funds and other resources, including
grants, to underground existing overhead lines.
Continue to require that utilities be undergrounded
q g
with new subdivision approvals.
In both rural and urban areas, identify overheard
power circuits particularly vulnerable to downed
trees (where are power outages are likely to occur).
Areas that are difficult to access by power repair
crews will be considered when prioritizing these
areas for undergrounding power lines.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Page 285 of 169- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION! 2015 087
Community Development, City Community Electric Utilities
Development/ Planning, and Public Works
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term(1---2 years)
Electric Utilities, FEMA PDM, landowners,
Local Funding Resources
Long Term (3 5 years)
II Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
I'agc 286 of/169 EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015.087
a Go Item?�m�
ti
• 1 •2 II 3 • 4
Support development of in---depth studies to determine
county and region's vulnerability to earthquake. 5 6 7 8 Yes
•9 •10 • 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Regular meetings and communication with the Oregon Resilience Plan (Cascadia Earthquake scenario).
Possible opportunity to partner with OSU Cascades for research in the region.
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Deschutes County is susceptible to earthquakes from four sources:
Cascadia Subduction Zone: The Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) is the boundary between the descending
oceanic Juan de Fuca Plate and the overriding North American Plate. This area of contact, located off the
Oregon coast, is capable of producing some of the largest earthquakes on Earth with magnitude (M) 9.0 or
greater. Based on historical averages, there is a 10---15% chance that the CSZ could produce a M 9.0
earthquake in the next 50 years, and a 37% chance of a M 8.0 earthquake in the next 50 years. The effects of
a CSZ earthquake would be felt most strongly along the coast and in the Willamette Valley, but strong
shaking would also occur in central Oregon. All parts of Deschutes County are vulnerable to damage from a
CSZ earthquake; unreinforced masonry buildings are especially vulnerable.
Deep intraplate earthquakes: These earthquakes occur within the Juan de Fuca Plate as it descends beneath
the North American Plate. They occur at depths between 30 and 100 kilometers (about 20 to 60 miles) and
can approach M 7.5. Regions in Oregon most vulnerable to these earthquakes include a broad zone from the
coast to the western foothills of the Cascades, but centered in the Willamette Valley. Residents of Deschutes
County might feel some shaking from deep intraplate earthquakes, but the risk of damage is low.
Shallow crustal earthquakes: These earthquakes occur on faults in the North American Plate and are
associated with extension (pulling apart of the crust). They can be so shallow that they rupture or deform the
ground surface, but can also occur up to 35 kilometers deep (about 20 miles) and may not be associated with
faults observed at the surface. These earthquakes can reach M 7.0, causing extensive localized damage.
Significant crustal earthquakes have occurred in central Oregon during historical times, but have been
located in Klamath and Lake Counties. However, crustal fault zones in Klamath and Lake Counties extend into
Deschutes County and all parts of Deschutes County are vulnerable to damage from these earthquakes.
Volcanic earthquakes: volcanic earthquakes are triggered by changes in the magmatic system below
volcanoes. They are common in Deschutes County near volcanic centers in the Cascades and Newberry
Volcano. These earthquakes are typically less than M 2.5 (too small to be felt) but may reach M 5.0. Swarms
of volcanic earthquakes can persist for weeks to months before volcanic eruptions and often serve as
precursors to an eruption. The likelihood of volcanic earthquakes occurring in Deschutes County is very high,
but little to no damage is likely to occur to buildings or communities.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Page 287 of469 EXHIBIT 13 k}RFSOLUTION 2015 087
Work with OEM, DOGAMI, FEMA and USGS and Deferred to 2020 Plan
expand existing studies to address scope of
vulnerability.
Communicate study findings with key stakeholders Deferred to 2020 Plan
affiliated with public awareness, education, policy
and mitigation strategies identified in study.
If needed, make policy and procedures changes that Deferred to 2020 Plan
support study results that mitigate earthquake
hazards.
Determine the impact that an event located outside Deferred to 2020 Plan
the county will have on Deschutes County including
west side evacuation to central Oregon.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development FEMA, DOGAMI, OEM, USGS, OSU Cascades
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
Oregon State University — Cascades, OEM,
Local Funding Resources Long Term (3-5 years)
▪Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Deferred
Page 288 of469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
,ACtIoI1 ' ;ok E , ,Pm Al'gnn'en t with ' l ij��
, ri etlor Item?
Seismically retrofit vulnerable facilities and 1 •2 M3 M4
infrastructure to increase their resiliency to seismic
hazards. Consider both structural and non---structural 5 .6 7 .8 M Yes
retrofit options.
•9 III 10 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine U Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
DOGAMI RVS (2007)
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
The 2007 Statewide Seismic Needs Assessment Study conducted by DOGAMI identified buildings with a high
to very high collapse potential ratings.
Occupants of these buildings are often school age children and are vulnerable to potential injury should an
event occur.
Oregon Senate Bill 2 (2005) directed DOGAMI to develop a statewide seismic needs assessment that includes
a FEMA 154 Rapid Visual Screening survey of specific critical facilities, including schools.
Retrofitting of vital infrastructure, such as schools, emergency service, and other community buildings,
provides important improvements that reduce hazard exposure and the cost and time associated with
recovery (Source: American Planning Advisory Service Report Number 483/484).
Deschutes County has a high vulnerability for seismic hazards (related to the Cascadia Earthquake event) and
a moderate probability of a future seismic event occurring. Retrofitting seismically vulnerable buildings will
significantly reduce the buildings' vulnerability to seismic hazards and improve the safety of occupants
(emergency personnel, students, teachers, and community members that use the buildings).
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires communities to identify actions and projects that reduce the
effects of hazards on the community, particularly to buildings and infrastructure [201.6(c)(3)(ii)]. Identifying
critical and essential facilities for seismic retrofit will help to identify major seismic issues and appropriate riate
mitigation actions to protect critical and essential facilities.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Conduct detailed structural evaluation that outlines Added in 2015
recommendations for building deficiencies, and
provides a cost estimate, incorporating DOGAMI's
seismic assessment data to assist in retrofitting
Apply for grant funding through the Oregon Seismic Added in 2015
Rehabilitation Grant Program
Apply for FEMA project grant funding. Added in 2015
Conduct structural evaluations of critical and Added in 2015
essential facilities (including historical buildings), and
infrastructure and make recommendations
(structural and non---structural)for fix.Align projects
Page 289 of 469 EXHIBIT B to RkSO-1111'1-0-N 2415 947
with regular maintenance programs.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Committee
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Public Works, Community Development, Deschutes County School Districts, Oregon Military
Building, Fire, Police, Sheriff Department--- Office of Emergency Management (OEM),
Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries
(DOGAMI), Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), Oregon Department of Education (ODE); Oregon
Business Development Department --- Infrastructure Finance
Authority (IFA), State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term(1---2 years)
Seismic Rehabilitation Grants (IFA), Local
Funding Resources Long Term (3---5 years)
El Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 290 of469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLU'T'ION 2015-087
A tson item,*000 k enC t r with Ptar o�
A0,011 It Ft�i?
2, d ■, ,
Continue to coordinate mitigation activities with •1 •2 •3 •4
appropriate agencies and home and business
owners/groups that include an inventory of actions to or •5 •6 •7 •8 •Yes
within the floodplain.
•9 •10 • 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
II Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Comprehensive Plan, FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Any mitigation activity within the floodplain will impact multiple stakeholders including property owners and
State and Federal agencies dealing with water usage, recreation, wetlands, and wildlife habitat issues.
Coordination of mitigation activities will ensure that any planned activities obtain required permits, meet the
requirements and goals of relevant agencies.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Establish protocol to regularly update mitigation Deschutes County continues to regulate
actions and activities within the floodplain. development and restoration activities in the
floodplain in accordance with NFIP regulations. Any
development activities in the floodplain are reviewed
for compliance with NFIP regulations and are
coordinated with property owners, the Oregon
Department of State Lands, Army Corps of Engineers,
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest
Service, and other relevant agencies. An inventory of
actions to or within the floodplain is maintained
through a list of land use decision records for these
actions. Ongoing.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Community Development
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Emergency Services, Public Works, Building Oregon Water Resources, DLCD, , USGS, Bureau of
Division Reclamation, Oregon Department of State Lands, Army
Corps of Engineers, Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife, US Forest Service,
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Planning application fees cover stakeholder •Short Term(1---2 years)
coordinations, other Local Funding Resources
LongTerm(3---5 years)
Page 291 of469 EXHIBIT 13 to RI-',SOLUTION 2015 087
Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 292 of/169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Action item f 4.p!o eryX ri+ r r fy y nt l ; k 1 r c 1§ �c MC 'i !'A ionP rhioerrro t
�1 •2 •3 114
Maintain an inventory of all permitted in---water facilities
in Deschutes County. ■5 M6 M7 M8 II Yes
•9 11 10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Craine Prairie Reservoir, Wickiup Reservoir, area canals that are above residential areas are chief concerns
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Update appropriate seismic criteria and procedures Deferred to 2020 Plan.
for evaluating performance of existing dams.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Community Development
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Emergency Services Oregon Water Resources, USGS, Bureau of Reclamation
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Short Term(1---2 years)
Local Funding Resources, Americorps/ RARE •Long Term (3---5 years)
•Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Deferred
Page 293 of X169 EXI-IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Alignment with Plan Goals: 'High Priority
Attian Item?
•1 •2 3 4
Comply with National Flood Insurance Program to
maintain participation in program. •5 •6 M7 •8 M Yes
•9 • 10 • 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend II Redmond
La Pine II Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Comprehensive Plan, FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Compliance with the NFIP is a prerequisite for County residents to receive flood insurance.
The County currently includes about 170 flood insurance policies; roughly half of these are preferred risk
policies (PRP). PRPs are not eligible to receive CRS Premium Discounts. Additionally, the county has a flood
insurance market penetration of approximately 15% (as of 2012).
Increasing flood insurance coverage will allow the county to reduce vulnerability, and facilitate recovery.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Local Floodplain Manager to work with the State In 2007, Staff coordinated with DLCD and FEMA to
Floodplain Manager at DLCD (and federal NFIP update the local NFIP maps to the current version.
liaison, as necessary) to identify any additional This update included a review of County Code by
actions needed to maintain NFIP compliance FEMA and DLCD. A number of relevant updates were
including assessment of staff resources, need for identified and included in the Deschutes County
Community Assistance Visits, and integration of Code. Ongoing.
updated Regulations.
Work with DLCD to better identify and map Staff received preliminary copies of the 2007 map
floodplains. updates and worked with DLCD to comment on
those maps prior to final issuance. Ongoing.
Work with DLCD to offer community education and Community education regarding flood hazard and
outreach. the NFIP is offered to property owners inquiring
about purchasing or developing floodplain mapped
property. A community outreach meeting was
conducted in 2013 in Sunriver in response to high
irrigation flows in the Deschutes River that resulted
in local flooding, but no flood losses. Ongoing.
Outreach to property owners with residences in the Added in 2015.
special flood hazard area and offer education about
the benefits of purchasing flood insurance.
County Staff coordinates regularly with our DLCD
Work with DLCD on any issues that arise from NFIP contact to resolve interpretative questions that arise
implementation monitoring activities.
Page 294 of 469 EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2045 087
during local implementation of the NFIP. Ongoing.
Track all community assistance, education and An inventory of actions to or within the floodplain is
monitoring activities. maintained through a list of land use decision
records for these actions. Community education
activities are conducted as issues arise. A
community outreach meeting was conducted in 2013
in Sunriver in response to high irrigation flows in the
Deschutes River that resulted in local flooding, but
no flood losses. Ongoing.
Participate in and implement the Community Rating Due to the low number of policies that could benefit
System as part of the NAP. from the County's participation in the CRS the
County has deferred participation at this time.
Added in 2015
Note: In 2015 the County is reviewing their land use
codes to determine if flood plain standards are
adequate (elements of the CRS Higher Regulatory
Standards will be considered in the review).
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County C
ommunit Y Development
Internal Partners: External Partners:
DLCD, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term(1---2 years)
Local Funding Resources/ County Floodplain
Manager/ DLCD •Long Term (3---5 years)
Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 295 of 169 EXHIBIT 1-3 to RESOLUTION 2015 087
High Priority
Action Itel'11;''H'Plot Alignment with Plan Goals:
Aeon Item?
•1 •2 3 1114
Update the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Deschutes
County and revisit land use codes to determine if •5 •6 17 •8 •Yes
floodplain standards are still adequate.
•9 •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
La Pine U Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Comprehensive Plan, FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Areas of concern, listed below, are presently not mapped as areas of special flood hazard. In addition,
current flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) may be significantly enhanced by use of existing LiDAR data and
an evaluation of reduced channel capacity in the Deschutes River due to sediment accumulation.
Areas of concern: Indian Ford (west of Sisters), Trout Creek (Sisters), Whychus Creek drainage, Tumalo Creek,
Little Deschutes River (La Pine area), Deschutes River (from Wickiup through the Tumalo area at certain
points).
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Work with appropriate agencies to update Flood In 2007, Staff coordinated with DLCD and FEMA to
Insurance Rate Maps. update the local NFIP maps to the current version.
This update included a review of County Code by
FEMA and DLCD. A number of relevant updates were
identified and included in the Deschutes County
Code. Ongoing.
Revisit and update land use codes to determine if In 2007, Staff coordinated with DLCD and FEMA to
floodplain standards are adequate. update the local NFIP maps to the current version.
This update included a review of County Code by
FEMA and DLCD. A number of relevant updates were
identified and included in the Deschutes County
Code_ Ongoing.
Note: In 2015 the County is reviewing their land use
codes to determine if flood plain standards are
adequate (elements of the CRS Higher Regulatory
Standards will be considered in the review).
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Community Development
Internal Partners: External Partners:
FEMA, DOGAMI, DLCD
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term(1---2 years)
DLCD, Risk MAP Funding Consideration, Local
Funding Resources NI Long Term (3---5 years)
Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Pag- _ '� : - - - " ' - • _ I!
Action Item:,,F100,#5 f1 ,#5 Alignment with Plan Goals: High.Priority
Action Item?
•
■ 1 •2 •3 •4
As funding becomes available, implement mitigation
measures for individual properties adjacent to or within •5 •6 •7 Mg Ekes
the floodplain as appropriate.
■9 ■ 10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County El Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Comprehensive Plan, FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Although the county does not currently have repetitive flood loss properties, or severe repetitive flood loss
properties, there are properties within the special flood hazard area that are vulnerable to flood.
Areas of concern, listed below, are presently not mapped as areas of special flood hazard. In addition,
current flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) may be significantly enhanced by use of existing LiDAR data and
an evaluation of reduced channel capacity in the Deschutes River due to sediment accumulation.
Areas of concern: Indian Ford (west of Sisters), Trout Creek (Sisters), Whychus Creek drainage, Tumalo Creek,
Little Deschutes River (La Pine area), Deschutes River (from Wickiup through the Tumalo area at certain
points).
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Assess individual properties for possible mitigation Deferred to 2020 Plan.
measures (elevation, acquisition, relocation) to
reduce or prevent future flood losses.
Implement mitigation measures (elevation, Deferred to 2020 Plan.
acquisition, relocation) for properties within the
floodplain.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Community Development
Internal Partners: External Partners:
FEMA, DOGAMI, DLCD
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
FEMA Flood Mitigation Assistance Project
Grants; Local Funding Resources Long Term (3-5 years)
▪Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Page 298 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Action Item: Flood #6 Alignment with Plan Goals: High Priority
Action Item?
•1 •2 •3 14
Analyze and implement mitigation measures related to
ice jamming that occurs during winter storm events. •s •6 ■7 ■8 •Yes
•9 • 10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
IN Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Comprehensive Plan, FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Ice jams on the Deschutes and Little Deschutes rivers have created flood conditions in the past and will
continue to do so due to local topography. Ice jams commonly happen during the winter and early spring,
while the river is still frozen. Sudden warming at higher altitudes can melt waters resulting in increased
runoff of water and ice into large reaches of frozen river below. On the way downstream, the ice can "jam"
in narrow places on the river or against a road crossing, effectively damming the river, sometimes followed
by a sudden breach and release of the water and ice.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Added in 2015
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services/ Planning
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Public Works, Bend Parks and Recreation Oregon Water Resources, Pacific Power, Landowners,
District DLCD, DOGAMI
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
•Short Term(1---2 years)
USACE Silver Jackets Program, OWEB, DSL;
Local Funding Resources Long Term (3 5 years)
•Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 300 of 469-EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2(14-5 087
, ti .. '"
i C d 9 ip M A9 ,„ d4ii iu' I rig
Atti n '!te,l'111� ° I , i "° " a Alignment 1Aq hll PI °° °( l5 ' w,
� w„ '�'� 5 < �"ivt,ti:r%@t+ �n d;^. w:
batk
°
Re---evaluate debris flow and flood hazards along Whychus •1 •2 U 3 •4
Creek from moraine---dammed Carver Lake. Depending on
outcome of study, consider suitable mitigative measures in •5 •6 II 7 .8 Yes
City of Sisters and Deschutes County.
•9 •10 • 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Results of a 1987 USGS report(Hydrologic Hazards Along Squaw[Whychus]Creek from a Hypothetical Failure of
the Glacial Moraine Impounding Carver Lake near Sisters,Oregon;USGS,Open File Report 87---41)were
incorporated into the2007 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map for Deschutes County(FIRM,Panel 0245E).USGS
scientists consider the 1987 assessment in need of re---evaluation in light of new research results on past such
events at Central Oregon moraine---dammed lakes and refined flood models that are now available.
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Carver Lake, located at 7,800 feet on the east slope of South Sister volcano,contains about 740 acre---feet(900,000
cubic meters or 32 million cubic feet)of water.The lake is dammed by a glacial moraine formed chiefly during late
19th and early 20th centuries.Several other such moraine---dammed lakes in Central Oregon have experienced rapid
outflows during the past 80 years that resulted in debris flows and floods along streams draining the lakes.Carver
Lake and its outlet stream,a tributary to Whychus Creek,are susceptible to similar debris flows and floods in the
future.The extent and magnitude of such flows will depend on several factors,including amount of water
released,rate of release,and conditions along the flow path.
A 1987 USGS report concluded that the annual probability of a flood from failure of the moraine dam of Carver
Lake is 1 to 5 percent and that the magnitude of the worst---case flow could be ten times that of the 1---percent
probability flood(100---year flood). Sisters would see rising flood waters 1.8 hours after a dam breach and the
flood would peak about 30 minutes later. See P.26 of report for a map of high and low risk areas.
If an event of this magnitude happened,locally high velocities,damming,erosion,and sediment deposition could
cause considerable property damage and possible loss of life in Sisters.
Later research has questioned some aspects of the 1987 report.A report published in 2001 (USGS Professional
Paper 1606,Debris flows from failures of neoglacial---age moraine dams in the Three Sisters and MountJefferson
Wilderness Areas;http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp1606)sheds new light on past events and outlook for
future events.Among its findings:
1. Since early 1920s,at least 11(now 12 with 2012 event at Three---Fingered Jack)rapid water releases
resulted from partial or total breaching of moraine dams.
2. Partial breaches amounting to lake lowering of a few feet to a few tens of feet were halted as large
boulders armored outlets and downcutting ceased.
3. All partial and complete breaches formed debris flows,the farthest reaching about 6 miles from lake;
sediment---ladenfloodsand streamflowcontinuedtensofmilesfarther.
4. Probability of future events depends on such factors as likelihood of rock and ice avalanches reaching the
lake and generating waves that rapidly erode outlets.If Prouty Glacier continues to thin and retreat,the
likelihood of ice avalanches into the lake diminishes;the opposite would be true if Prouty Glacier
Page 301 of469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION ION 2015 087
undergoes a period of substantial thickening and advance.
5. Worst---case scenarios can be defined, but the likelihood of such worst---case events may be vanishingly
small.
Such findings suggest that the 1987 report overstated greatly the degree of hazard and the probability of flows
causing catastrophic impacts in Sisters.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
USGS proposes to apply findings from the 2001 study Added in 2015
and other applicable studies to define realistic
scenarios for partial and complete breaching of the
Carver lake moraine dam and evolution of debris flows
and floods down Whychus Creek.
These scenarios can be combined with modern flood---
routing models and recently obtained detailed,
accurate, lidar digital---elevation models,to provide
refined estimates of potential for flood inundation in
the low---relief fan area around the City of Sisters.
On the basis of results of this study,Sisters and
Deschutes County would be able to develop suitable
mitigative measures,which could include,real time
stream monitoring detection,early warning sirens,
zoning,and planning studies to help prevent loss of life
and property damage in the area downstream of the
lake.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Sisters,Community Development,Public Works USGS,USACE,FEMA, DOGAMI,OEM,OSU Cascades
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term(1---2 years)
USACE Silver Jackets Program; Local Funding
Resources •Long Term (3---5 years)
is Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2015 NHMP Committee
Action Item Status: New
Page 302 RESOLUTION N 2015-087
I arc X02 of X16) E.XH1131 1 B to RESOLC ()
ptwwir,a 1, r, ki "i dg yyy+{.e le
r,� 'ti @ `ja Jmrik7d.r:a WS" �hl`aat>r I • Igrt ;;
Atti M r 14„ ff Alignment
i; �S } ' d " :{u, , '�d�, " ' N /�L°tlOn Itei°n' 'm
Sd^ub.� � ^b
•1 •2 •3 •4
Continue to support on---going study of probability of
volcanic eruption and potential impact. •5 6 U 7 g •Yes
•9 •10 • 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
Deschutes County •Bend ■Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Central Cascades Volcano Coordination Plan (2007) to be updated in 2015, local response plans, National
Response Plan, Oregon State Emergency Management Plan
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Volcanic activity could occur anywhere in Deschutes County. Eruptions are more likely to occur near volcanic
centers in the Cascades and Newberry Volcano, but lava flows and ash deposits from vents located in these
areas could reach all parts of the county.
Lava flows: Future eruptions from the north flank of Newberry Volcano represent the most credible lava---flow
threat to large settled areas in the United States outside of Hawai'i. Lava flows move relatively slowly and
rarely threaten human life, but advancing flows ensure almost total destruction of property and infrastructure
from burial and incineration. Lava flows also pose flooding hazards by damming waterways,
which can initially trigger flooding upstream and later downstream if the lava dam fails. Lava flows can also
initiate multiple forest fires, especially if they occur during dry months.
Ash: Due to prevailing westerly winds, areas east of the Cascades have the greatest probability of being
affected by ash from future eruptions anywhere in the Cascades. Volcanic ash limits visibility and, if wet,
creates slippery road conditions. It is electrically conductive and abrasive, and can severely affect electrical
and mechanical systems and is extremely dangerous to aircraft. Ash and other volcanic products can add
large quantities of sediment to rivers and streams. This can initiate periods of years to decades during which
waterways carry increased sediments loads and river channels become unstable and migrate. Such effects
propagate downstream and can disrupt channels and flood plains far from where the actual eruption
occurred. In particular, the Tumalo Creek watershed that supplies part of Bend's municipal water is likely to
receive ash from any eruption in the Three Sisters area.
Fields of mafic volcanoes: Hundreds of geologically young mafic volcanoes composed of cinders, ash, and
lava flows dot the central Oregon landscape. Future eruptions of mafic volcanoes are possible anywhere in
the central Cascades region, which includes large parts of Deschutes County. These eruptions could last for
months to years or decades, producing ash and lava flows that periodically impact developed areas of
Deschutes County.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Continue to partner with federal and state Ongoing participation.
organizations supporting studies and monitoring
volcanic eruption indicators and activities.
Participate in updating interagency communication Participates regularly in interagency communication
plan for central Oregon volcanic activity. update planning. Ongoing.
Page 303 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Health Department CVO (USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory), FEMA,
DOGAMI, OEM, USGS, OSU Cascades
Potential f=unding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
▪Short Term(1---2 years)
OSU Cascades, USGS; Local Funding Resources •Long Term (3---5 years)
▪Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 301 of169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
/ tt y�, .,pp w3 ' r,' 4 ' , .r' 1 2 wn!a°d"' i'r'ulrA" r"w i't'�'r',� h Rri0I:
A 2ti !!^ �iA+;i ' riW1id f #1 Alignme17fwiVf�`10fPr 1 'd t'� w i 7T `vn,,
x
•1 •2 U3 4
Expand public information/education initiatives in
support of active hazardous fuels treatment. 1115 M6 M7 .8 IIII Yes
•9 •10 • 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
III Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine is Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
Upper Deschutes River Coalition CWPP, Greater La Pine CWPP, Sunriver CWPP, Greater Sisters Country
CWPP, East and West Deschutes County CWPP, Greater Bend CWP, Greater Redmond CWPP
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Explore opportunities to expand the Project Wildfire Project Wildfire maintains regular public awareness
mission addressing public awareness strategies. programs---websites, FireFree, CWPPs, public
education. Completed. Will continue. Ongoing
Project Wildfire has convened all 7 CWPP groups and
kept the plans updated with current priorities and
risk assessments. All plans have been updated in the
last 5 years. See Wildfire Chapter for more
information.
Expand school enrichment education about fuels Regular participation in Team Teaching with COFPC
reduction and wildland fire prevention near home in elementary school.
sites. County Forester and Project Wildfire have
coordinated fuel reduction projects utilizing La Pine
High School forestry students so they have hands on
experience with fuel reduction projects.
County Forester has presented annually to COCC
wildland fire class about WUI fuels treatment in
Deschutes County (Ongoing)
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Forester/ Project Wildfire
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Emergency Services, County Forester Firewise Communities, USES, BLM, ODF, DEQ,
Page 305 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term(1---2 years)
Obtain education funding through federal and
state grants; Local Funding Resources Long Term (3 5 years)
Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 306 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
�
p � 9
Attion Iten� P i #re #2 Algnmeat R�t���Is: °,Actio n
Item?
Review and upgrade existing building and land use codes II 1 •2 •3 •4
to address landscape, fuel amounts and structure detail
•that reduces the incidence or spread of wildland fire in 5 •6 7 •8 Yes
urban/rural interface areas.
•9 •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County •Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
City and County Comprehensive Plans/ Development Codes
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Develop systems to regulate landscape, fuels and Cities continue to require specific fire resistant
structure components for new construction. components on new construction of subdivisions.
County recently implemented similar system for
subdivisions outside City limits.
Completed. Will monitor and update
Develop and adopt countywide defensible space Deschutes County has adopted Senate Bill 360
standards. standards in the unprotected areas within the county
through DCC Chapter 8.21. Completed.
Develop countywide classification system consistent Classification of all private property in Deschutes
with SB 360 to educate individual property owners County during last SB 360 re---classification process.
and encourage compliance with defensible space Completed.
standards.
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Community Development and County Forester
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, County Forester, ODE,
Emergency Services, Project Wildfire
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Funding will be necessary to notify/educate •Short Term(1---2 years)
property owners of their classification and
recommended standards for defensible space.
•LongTerm(3---5 years)
Page 307 of'169 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Obtain grant funding from federal and state U Ongoing
programs, Local Funding Resources, OEM
(Public awareness)
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 308 of 469 EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Pq 111 !jl ' ¢{q ,n jp rl r+aP +r * 7,7 r k' i
A tI. n ; ' �Id 'ire # � Ali rat with r�� ri, �I- N gh i� ig
t whP" �N l�t� "r y:�I titi t
Continue to prioritize and support fuels reduction •1 •2 •3 •4
projects on private lands utilizing FireFree and other •
programs; and identify and prioritize fuels reduction 5 6 y 8 Yes
projects on public lands in the WUI. 9 •10 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County • Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
County CWPPs, City and County Comprehensive Plans
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Provide opportunities for defensible space and fuels Annually provide opportunities for homeowner
reduction through FireFree and Sweat Equity participation in fuels reduction projects and FireFree
Programs. projects. Ongoing
Continue to revisit CWPPs annually and update Annually revisit each CWPP. Conduct new risk
priorities for fuels reduction projects on private and assessments and revise priorities on a three year
public lands. rotation. Ongoing
Biomass accumulation reduction
Coordinating Organization: Project Wildfire
Internal Partners: External Partners:
Community Development, County Forester, Firewise Communities, ODE
Emergency Services, Project Wildfire
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Obtain grants and cost share agreements with •Short Term(1---2 years)
landowners to participate in Sweat Equity
fuels reduction programs. Partner with •Long Term (3---5 years)
collaborators to fund FireFree recycling days. •Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Pag: !' _ .6 _ t _ - _
High.Priority
Action iterm,Winter,Storm, #1
Alignment with Plan Goals: Action Item?
�1 •2 U 3 4
Continue to coordinate mitigation activities to reduce
risk to the public from severe winter storms. •5 6 ■7 •8 Ill Yes
•9 110 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
El Deschutes County El Bend •Redmond
La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
County and City Emergency Operations Plans
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Deschutes County is subject to severe winter storms. Although most residents are generally prepared for
extreme and prolonged winter events can affect our population. These events can prevent access to
healthcare, medications, food, and can interfere with residents' ability to heat their homes.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Continue and expand partnerships with county, city, Continually discuss issues relating to winter storm
homeowner groups, businesses and other preparedness and response through the local
organizations on strategies that mitigate impact of Emergency Management Planning Committee
snow, cold weather, ice and other events related to (EMPC) and Vulnerable Populations Work Group
severe winter storms. (Ongoing)
Provide training for setting---up/operating Emergency Added in 2015.
Operations Center (EOC) and using Incident
Command System (ICS)
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
City and County Public Works, Public Health Utility companies, Vulnerable Populations Work Group,
American Red Cross, other Community Organizations Active
in Disasters.
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
Short Term 1---Z ears
Pursue grant and budgetary funding for � ortTer ( years)
educational outreach and partnership •Long Term (3---5 years)
development, Local Funding Resources
Ongoing
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 310 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015 087
Acti f fit :,Win Storm #2 A0gnnttw tp (s ne q
•1 •2 3 •4
Continue public awareness of severe winter storm
mitigation activities. •5 6 .7 .8 •Yes
.9 ■10 II 11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County II Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
County and City Emergency Operations Plans
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Deschutes County is subject to severe winter storms. Although most residents are generally prepared for
extreme and prolonged winter events can affect our population. These events can prevent access to
healthcare, medications, food, and can interfere with residents' ability to heat their homes.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Target new residents and businesses; continue Formation of the Emergency Management Planning
coordination and expansion of public awareness Committee (EMPC) which includes public safety,
system providing education about protecting life, public health, healthcare, public works, utilities, and
property, and the environment from severe winter business community. Use of media and public
storm events. information. Ongoing.
Distribute educational information about alternative Use of focused media releases, websites, and public
heating sources, equipment and supplies to use information. Ongoing.
during severe winter storm and power outage.
Develop coordinated utility restoration plans with all Currently in discussion with utilities to address this
utility sources. issue as part of the EMPC. Ongoing.
Develop coordinated plan for housing large numbers Collaborated with American Red Cross on a shelter
of residents and tourists. plan. Also coordinate with service organizations and
churches to identify warming shelters. Ongoing.
Develop Coordinated Plan for Outreach to Added in 2015.
Vulnerable Populations
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
City and County Public Works, Public Health Vulnerable Populations Work Group, American Red Cross
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
County and Cities, Pursue grant funding for •Short Term(1---2 years)
Pag ' : - " - - I I:
educational materials and distribution, •LongTerm(3---5years)
Coordinate with OEM (Public awareness), •Ongoing
Local Funding Resources
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 3-12 Q-1469 LXHIBIT B to RESOVUTION•J 2015 087
/ 'ti n It@�11' : W`inter,Storm #3 Alignment with 0,141 41s:,„, ,,,,,, N(gh Priorif, � �
> ,„„,,4„ , Action' It '
.1 •2 •3 •4
Continue to enhance coordination maintenance and
mitigation activities to reduce risk to public •5 •6 ■7 ■g II Yes
infrastructure from severe winter storms.
U 9 •10 •11
Affected Jurisdictions:
•Deschutes County • Bend •Redmond
•La Pine •Sisters
Alignment with Existing Plans/Policies:
County and City Emergency Operations Plans
Rationale for Proposed Action Item:
Deschutes County is subject to severe winter storms. Although most residents are generally prepared for
extreme and prolonged winter events can affect our population. These events can prevent access to
healthcare, medications, food, and can interfere with residents' ability to heat their homes.
Ideas for Implementation: Actions Taken Since 2010
Annually meet with county and city departments Annually meet with all departments to assess and
responsible for maintaining infrastructures including consider upgrades and needs of new and emerging
those addressing emergencies, roads, sewers, water neighborhoods. Ongoing.
etc. to address upgrades and improvements needed
Public Works agencies discuss and coordinate
and needs of new and emerging neighborhoods. cooperative services plan/ agreement. Ongoing
Hold Mini—MACs during severe winter storms.
Ongoing
Coordinating Organization: Deschutes County Emergency Services
Internal Partners: External Partners:
City and County Public Works, Public Health Utilities, Vulnerable Populations Work Group, American
Red Cross
Potential Funding Sources: Estimated cost: Timeline:
With department budgets at an all---time low,
departmental funding is unlikely in the next •Short Term(1---2 years)
five years. Pursue grant funding for
educational materials and distribution. •Long Term (3---5 years)
Coordinate with OEM (Public awareness), •Ongoing
Local Funding Resources
Form Submitted by: 2010 NHMP Committee (Reviewed and Updated by 2015 NHMP Committee)
Action Item Status: Ongoing
Page 313 of 169 EXHIBIT B to RES01.1)T1ON 2015 087
APPENDIX B:
PLANNING AND PUBLIC PROCESS
Table of Contents
Plan Update Changes Memo B---2
2015 NHMP Public Participation Process B---8
Press Release B---9
Steering Committee and Working Group Composition B---10
Meeting #1 Materials (November 4, 2014) B---11
Meeting #2 Materials (December 5, 2014) B---14
City of Bend Addendum Meeting Materials B---17
City of La Pine Addendum Meeting Materials B---21
City of Redmond Addendum Meeting Materials B---23
City of Sisters Addendum Meeting Materials B---25
Tables
Table B.1 Changes to Plan Organization B---3
la g
Page 315 of 469- EXHIBIT F3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
I'ARINI1:SI1I1'I"OR
Memo DISASTER
RESILIENCE
To: Federal Emergency Management Agency
From: Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Date: May 13,2015
Re: List of changes to the 2010 Deschutes County NHMP for the 2015 Plan Update
Purpose
This memo describes the changes made to the 2010 Deschutes County Natural Hazards
Mitigation Plan (NHMP) during the 2015 plan update process. Major changes are
documented by plan section.
Project Background
Deschutes County partnered with the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience (OPDR) and
the Community Planning Workshop to update the 2010 Deschutes County Natural Hazards
Mitigation Plan (NHMP). The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires communities to
update their mitigation plans every five years to remain eligible for Pre---Disaster Mitigation
(PDM) program funding, Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program funding, and Hazard
Grant Mitigation Program (HMGP) funding. OPDR met with members of the Deschutes
County steering committee in September, November, and December of 2014 to update
portions of the county's NHMP. During this update cycle the cities of Bend, La Pine,
Redmond, and Sisters opted to participate; as such the 2015 plan is multi---jurisdictional.
Formal meetings with the working groups for the three participating cities occurred during
January and February 2015. OPDR and the committees made several changes to the 2010
NHMP. Major changes are documented and summarized in this memo.
2015 Plan Update Changes
The sections below only discuss major changes made to the 2010 Deschutes County NHMP
during the 2015 plan update process. Major changes include the replacement or deletion of
large portions of text, changes to the plan's organization, new mitigation action items, and
the addition of city addenda to the plan. If a section is not addressed in this memo, then it
can be assumed that no significant changes occurred.
The plan's format and organization have been altered to fit within OPDR's plan templates.
Table B.1 below lists the 2010 plan section names and the corresponding 2015 section
names, as updated (major Volumes are highlighted). This memo will use the 2015 plan
update section names to reference any changes, additions, or deletions within the plan.
Page 316 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table B-I Changes to Plan Organization
2010 Des es 4u r,Multi iutisd4ctiow !NHMP O .S Des hates Count y;' "x0 ►' ,m ,` GIs` M ,i
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
/ Approval Letters and Resolutions
Table of Contents Table of Contents
/ Volume I!: Basic Plan
Executive Summary Executive Summary
Executive Summary Section 1: Introduction
Risk Assessment Section 2: Risk Assessment
Multi/Hazard Goals and Initiatives Section 3: Mitigation Strategy
Plan Maintenance Section 4: Plan Implementation and
Maintenance
Multi/Hazard Goals and Initiatives Vo46rne 4),,i Hazard
/ Drought
Earthquake Earthquake
Flood Flood
/ Landslide
Volcanic Eruption Volcano
Wildland Fire Wildfire
/ Windstorm
Severe Winter Storm Winter Storm
/ Volume III:Jurisdictional ends
/ City of Bend
/ City of La Pine
/ City of Redmond
/ City of Sisters
/ Volumd'at(!V:,Miti ation Resou es
Multi/Hazard Goals and Initiatives and Hazard
Appendix A:Action Item Fprms
Profiles
Planning Appendix B: Planning and Public Process
County Profile Appendix C:Community Profile
Appendix A: Economic Analysis of Natural Hazard Appendix D: Economic Analysis of Natural
Mitigation Projects Hazard Mitigation Projects
Hazard Profile Mitigation Initiatives Appendix E:Grant Programs and Resources
/ Appendix F: Deschutes County Natural Hazards
Community Survey
Several new sections were added and formatting was changed throughout the 2015
Deschutes County Multi---jurisdictional NHMP.
The 2015 Appendix A is new and incorporates mitigation initiative content previously found
within the Hazard Profiles. Appendix B integrates and updates the Planning section.
Appendix C updates the county community profile. Appendix A from the 2010 Plan was
replaced with 2015 Appendix D. Appendix E: Grant Programs is new and integrates
information previously found in the Hazard Profiles. Appendix F is new.
Front Pages
1. The plan's cover has been updated.
2. Acknowledgements have been updated to include the 2015 project partners and
planning participants.
3. The FEMA approval letter and county and city resolutions of adoption are included.
Page 317 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Volume I: Basic Plan
Volume I provides the overall plan framework for the 2015 Multi---jurisdictional NHMP
update. Volume I contains the following sections: an Executive Summary; Section 1:
Introduction; Section 2: Risk Assessment; Section 3: Mitigation Strategy; and Section 4: Plan
Implementation and Maintenance.
Executive Summary
The 2015 NHMP includes an updated executive summary that provides information about
the purpose of natural hazards mitigation planning and describes how the plan will be
implemented.
Section I : Introduction
Section 1 introduces the concept of natural hazards mitigation planning and answers the
question, "Why develop a mitigation plan?" Additionally, Section 1 summarizes the 2015
plan update process, and provides an overview of how the plan is organized. Major changes
to Section 1 include the following:
1. Section 1 is new to the 2015 plan and includes information formerly provided in the
2. Most of Section 1 includes new information that replaces out of date text found in
the 2010 NHMP. The new text describes the federal requirements that the plan
addresses and gives examples of the policy framework for natural hazards planning
in Oregon.
3. Section 1 of the 2015 update, outlines the entire layout of the plan update, which
has been altered as described above.
Section 2: Risk Assessment
Section 2, Risk Assessment, consists of three phases: hazard identification, vulnerability
assessment, and risk analysis. Hazard identification involves the identification of hazard
geographic extent, its intensity, and probability of occurrence. The second phase, attempts
to predict how different types of property and population groups will be affected by the
hazard. The third phase involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be
incurred in a geographic area over a period of time. Changes to Section 2 include:
1. Hazard identification, characteristics, history, probability, vulnerability, and hazard
specific mitigation activities were updated. More specific information is placed
within the hazard annexes of Volume II and Community Profile of Appendix C.
2. NFIP information was updated.
3. Updated Hazard Analyses were created for each of the identified hazards.
4. Hazard Analyses were created for hazards that were not included in the 2010
NHMP: Drought, Landslide, and Windstorm.
5. Updated hazard assessment (history, maximum threat, probability, and vulnerability
scores) for the county (city information is included in this section and with more
detail within the City Addenda of Volume III).
Page 318 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Section 3: Mitigation Strategy
This section provides the basis and justification for the mission, goals, and mitigation actions
identified in the NHMP. Major changes to Section 3 include the following:
1. The name of the section was changed from "Multi---Hazard Goals and Initiatives" to
"Mitigation Strategy"
2. The goals were reviewed and updated to align with the State NHMP.
3. The previous version of this NHMP prioritized hazards rather than mitigation
strategy. With this version of the plan the steering committee decided to prioritize
mitigation strategies rather than hazards. At this time the prioritization of specific
mitigation strategies has not occurred, the steering committee will prioritize action
items at one of their semi---annual meetings.
4. The previous plan included a section on multi---hazard initiatives, the three initiatives
(Increase Public Awareness, Training and Education; Increase coordination; and
Support research) have been incorporated into multi---hazard actions#1, #2, and #3.
5. The addition of several new action items as documented here and in the table
below (2015 Action Item number shown below):
• MH #4 to #7, EQ#2, FL#6 and #7
6. The revision of existing actions, lead agency and partner designations (as shown in
the updated forms of Appendix A).
7. County level action items designate which cities will also take part in that action;
where designated as an "affected jurisdiction" on the action item form of Appendix
A each jurisdiction will take part in that action (this was done in order to reduce the
duplication of actions within the county and city addenda portions of the NHMP).
On December 5, 2014, the Deschutes County steering committee met to review the 2010
NHMP action items. The Deschutes County steering committee reviewed and identified
which of the 2010 NHMP's action items had been completed or not, or whether they should
be deleted. Action items were deleted for a number of reasons, including not meeting basic
action item criteria such as being measurable, assignable, or achievable. Steering
members next m nh . Th i
Committee e hers reviewed edits to the actions over the ne t o t s e cities
es
of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters met following the county's meeting to review the
county's updates and to add their own action items.
New action items are based upon continuous community needs, the identification of new
hazards, deferred action items, and current needs based upon the community risk
assessment. They are designed to be feasibly accomplished within the next five years, and
can be found in Appendix A. Several of these actions were identified at the steering
committee meeting and later drafted by OPDR and steering committee members, reviewed
and accepted by the committee.
Progress towards action items is provided on the action item forms within Appendix A.
Section 4: Plan Implementation and Maintenance
The steering committee did not formally meet since the previous version of this NHMP.
Progress towards action items is documented in the action item forms of Appendix A. The
steering committee agreed to meet semi---annually(before and after fire/irrigation season)
and the Deschutes County Emergency Manager will continue to be the plan convener
Page 319 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
(documentation for the city conveners is within the jurisdictional addenda of Volume Ill).
The steering committee will discuss options to integrate the NHMP into other planning
documents (including the comprehensive plan) during their semi---annual meetings.
Deschutes County is currently reviewing their Development Code to identify policy options
for flood and wildfire.
Volume II: Hazard Annexes
All hazard annexes were reformatted and updated to include new history, data, maps,
vulnerability information and resources as available. Specific changes are included in a text
box at the beginning to each hazard profile section. New hazard profiles were provided for
the Drought, Landslide, and Windstorm hazards. Action items were updated as referenced
in Volume I, Section 3: Mitigation Strategy and Appendix A.
Volume Ill: Jurisdictional Addenda
The cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters were included in the 2015 version of the
NHMP for the first time.
Volume IV: Mitigation Resources
The previous NHMP included one appendix describing the Economic Analysis of Natural
Hazard Mitigation Projects; that appendix was updated and included as Appendix D in the
2015 NHMP. Below is a summary of the appendices included in the 2015 NHMP:
Appendix A: Action Item Forms
Action item forms were created and utilize updated information provided by the steering
committee and jurisdictional working groups. The action item forms reference the status of
the action item, timeline, and track progress made toward the action since 2010.
Appendix B: Planning and Public Process
This planning and public process appendix reflects changes made to the Deschutes County
NHMP and documents the 2015 planning and public process.
Appendix C: Community Profile
The community profile has been updated to conform with the OPDR template and includes
information for Deschutes County, and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters.
Appendix D: Economic Analysis of Natural Hazard Mitigation Projects
Updates are provided for the economic analysis of natural hazard mitigation projects.
Appendix E: Grant Programs and Resources
Grant programs and resources were previously listed in the NHMP's hazard profiles. Some
of the previously provided resources were deemed unnecessary since this material is
covered within the Oregon NHMP and appropriate resources are provided within the Hazard
Annexes of Volume II. Updates were made to the remaining grant programs and resources.
Page 320 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Appendix F: Deschutes County Natural Hazards Community Survey
This survey was conducted with the 2015 update of the NHMP and was utilized to inform
the development of mitigation strategies and identification of community vulnerabilities. It
is provided herein as documentation and to serve as a resource for future planning efforts.
Page 321 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
2015 NHMP
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
2015 NHMP Update
Deschutes County is dedicated to directly involving the public in the review and update of
the natural hazard mitigation plan. Although members of the steering committee represent
the public to some extent, the residents of Deschutes County, Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and
Sisters are also given the opportunity to provide feedback about the Plan. The Plan will
undergo review on an annual basis.
Deschutes County made the Plan available via the Oregon Partnership for Disaster
Resilience's website for public comment from March 20, 2015 through the FEMA review
period. The cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters were included within the press
release that was provided in local newspapers.
Public Involvement Summary
During the public review period there were zero comments received via the OPDR project
page for the Deschutes County NHMP update. Members of the steering committee provided
edits and updates to the NHMP during this period as reflected in the final document.
Page 322 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Press Release
Deschutes County Sheriff's Office
/0 wtr�:'� • 63333 Highway 20 West
Bend,Oregon 97701
(541)388-6655
MEDIA RELEASE
Deschutes County seeks additional public input on
update to Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan
BY:Sgt.Nathan Garibay,Emergency Services Manager
Deschutes County is currently in the process of updating the existing Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan(NHMP).
This work is being performed in cooperation with the University of Oregon's Community Service Center H Oregon
Partnership for Disaster Resilience and the Oregon Military Department's Office of Emergency Management
utilizing funds obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency's(FEMA)PreHDisaster Mitigation
Grant Program.With reHadoption of the plan,Deschutes County will maintain its eligibility to apply for federal
funding towards natural hazard mitigation projects.
This local planning process includes a wide range of representatives from city and county government,
emergency management personnel,nonHgovernrnental organizations and outreach to members of the public in
the form of an electronic survey.This NHMP also affects the cities of Bend,La Pine,Redmond,and Sisters.
A natural hazards mitigation plan provides communities with a set of goals,action items,and resources designed
to reduce risk from future natural disaster events.Engaging in mitigation activities provides jurisdictions with a
number of benefits,including reduced loss of life,property,essential services,critical facilities,and economic
hardship;reduced shortHterm and longHterm recovery and reconstruction costs;increased cooperation and
communication within the community through the planning process;and increased potential for state and
federal funding for recovery and reconstruction projects.
An electronic version of the updated draft Deschutes County NH MP will be available for formal public comment
beginning March 20,2015.To view the draft please visit
htt.p;[/...csc_uoregon.edu/opdr/deschutes.
If you have any questions regarding the Deschutes County NHMP or the update process in general,please
contact:Nathan Garibay,Deschutes County ErnergencyServices Manager at(541)617H3303 or
Nathan.Garibay @deschutes.org;or Michael Howard,Project Specialist for the Oregon Partnership for Disaster
Resilience at(541)346H8413 or mrhoward@uoregon.edu.
Deschutes County Sheriffs Office
Page 323 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Steering Committee
Steering committee members possessed familiarity with the Deschutes County community
and how it's affected by natural hazard events. The steering committee guided the update
process through several steps including goal confirmation and prioritization, action item
review and development and information sharing to update the plan and to make the plan
as comprehensive as possible. The steering committee met on the following dates:
• Meeting #1: Kickoff, Hazard Identification: November 4, 2014
• Meeting #2: Risk Assessment, Mitigation Strategy, Implementation and
Maintenance: December 5, 2014
In addition several members of the steering committee participated in the FEMA G---318
Workshop—Local Mitigation Planning, held in Bend September 25---26, 2014.
The steering committee formed under the guidance of Nathan Garibay, Deschutes County
Emergency Services Manager. The steering committee invested considerable time into the
mitigation plan. For a full list of steering committee member see the Acknowledgements
section of this NHMP.
The following pages provide copies of meeting agendas and sign---in sheets from county and
city steering committee meetings.
Page 324 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Kick-Off and Hazard Identification and Update
Work Session Materials
C)ISASI''FR
IbNC
/ RI:SILE
1
Meeting: Deschutes County Natural Hazards\litigation Plan Update:Kickoff Meeting
Date: November 4,2014
Time: 1:00 PM—4:00 I'M
Location: 9-1-1 Services Building(20355 Poe Sholes Drive,Bend,OR)
I.Introductions and Background (15 minutes)
a. Community Service Center Introduction
h. Project Context
e. Committee Introductions
II.Natural Hazards Mitigation Planning (20 minutes)
a. Emergency Management Overview
h. Natural I lazard Mitigation Plans(NHMP)Overview
c. NHMP Update I'rocess
Ill.Comm unity Profile Update and Vulnerabilities (35 minutes)
a. Community Profile Overview
b. Vulnerability Inventory
Break (11)minutes)
IV.Work Session
a. Activity 1:Natural Hazards historical Update (80 minutes)
b. Activity 2:Mitigation Actions Review
V.Wrap-Up&Next Steps (20 minutes)
a. Questions
b. Next Steps
c. Schedule Future Meetings
�_........_.._......_ Oregon Parinersh:P./or Disaster Resilience
Community Service Cevnter•1209 University of Oregon
Eugene•Oregon•97403-1209
Photo-.5-1 1.346.7326•Fax:541.346.1040
Page 325 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
a.
2
I
z
4'.•
z
C
L.)
v,
tu
+..
m
_C
V
o
1 cu
O. ^a
a ,„t •■■ (r--,) ".
'• (3
—
1 .: -5
-
CA 63,
`P
„._.
__.z., tv.k,-
a., s M `1
v \.,..e c.. -,.-- _
',7" •.rN q J .- y ----2,
c..., _.L
,,e 4
./...
t-J *.._.5_s. ,, sr,.• -,....,
. c-
..% *--7-ri 0 - c _ '
.; —
-4 ':' '. — . .
7 '0
-,,7,:. •.-.•77,5,.,,„... 6.:,k,1-_.".,.),:,,,-*,.,-,,.
p, :,'. -•-_-,_ °,
4 g ,I,R d
. .1 1
.---1
..-7,.
,,,:,„.4 ••I or,
(/) -11., ■-• ,1
a-
ro
E
, .
• — I , .--- ,
■C-1; ''.) 4., .:
I ) —7 J •sj
./N q ._.$
,I
• P '' ..i ,„o \.).\
ssi
O - -
0 11 .m.
O 1 1
0-4 '6 4 ) .
7-1.' J‘ ' J n
'• 0 .4 , c•-)
'73
,--1 ■-..) .... .Zzt.,,./
IIII
7
-4-- ‘ .1-
"4 0
• c, ,,,, .,„ 6,8 ..1 -,
7 CP I
7 a,• 'OM r. A j I 3 •-$ ,-. a■
0 c.) • _s” ..1• --, J.:, , j\
, -"'---3 ----
Li t
L . )
I- r4
:c2 'a) VI ..1
C.) k j iw„, . ,•:j
"5 < P ....'4.'
...:
V on
CI
,
TT >, '.4 N
.C? cd C >' v) .'61) V ,C
-.,--•
,CeL ''.
T
., .Ti
E— a, ,,,, 471 .„, ,0
''-' M q.),. 6,) _., .E .F.
0 ::.- 4.- t
Cf) C -' ,- C' 8 — -- 6— 0
< 0 0 ..-66 0 I.-. P 0 V 4,1 4,1
,-J (..,.; U 2 r..7. (._, 0 0 X ', , ,•-', ,•-':
03
ci) v
-— — I C E
i '''-' •-1 1... 7ci
i.- -= 0 •:•,• ..=
ct ,.1
._.
a,
a
t
..,.:6, 0
..._ 0
..
d.
1:21
c :
0:1 cf)
1.4
. ,
— --.
dJ
O - w v; 1 _,
A
axe �, t
d4W... . I
t o a r- 0 �,
9g o �3 ��
z
Ci C �' C -
,-• c" s A_ v d "tS
y ci o a , a
v "'
�"
¢ I■
Q «7 C
—71 i- .
vE�7 `t• o 4_ ) t 1
I0. .h "sL
i
�
z
H e> ' - ...,
1 I ? i
1
L � 1 L N
U I
CJ ii_ I
�
1.) _ �_ N 1
c-
SE
tfk 1--- y
r
F. J c J 'A_ N
i
H J
■
(/) ._ - r
i24 u (
Mitigation Strategy, Implementation and Maintenance
Work Session Materials
-..
I DISASTER
Rum I II:NCF
Meeting: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update:Meeting 3
Date: December 5,2014
Time: 1:00 pm A5:00 pm
Location: Deschutes County Sherriff's Office(6333.3 Hwy 20,Bend,OR)
AGENDA
I. Welcome and Meeting Goals 5 minutes
II. Public Involvement Strategies 10 minutes
• Survey Status
III. Proposed Hazards List Changes and History(review) 10 minutes
IV. Risk Assessment and Identification 60 minutes
**5DMinuteBreak**
V. Mission and NHMP Goals Review and Update 15 minutes
• Alignment with State NHMP Goals?
VI. Mitigation Strategies 90 minutes
• Vulnerability Themes?
• Review of existing actions
• New actions
• Prioritization
••SOMinuteBreak**
VII. Plan Implementation and Maintenance 30 minutes
VIII. WrapOUp&NextSteps 10 minutes
• Questions
• WrapAup meeting in January/February,(Date&Location TBD)
• City addenda meetings;January/February(Dates TBD)
Oregon Panne rsinp for l.Ssasler Resilience
Community Service Center•1209 University of Oregon
F.ugene•Oregon•97403-1209
Phone:541.1140.726•Fax.541.3162040
Page 328 of 469- EXHIB-IT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
, _._..
'Ow
.H a)
-1-
c•I 0 '''4 ■.-
I)
E 1..
0 0
a) -16 u o
2 6'
cci 7I _c• eL)
0 .-ci
5
1
..) ..)
I • 0 0 2 15 71E) 0 0
un 0!
:1 TA ,,-:, ''' 73 (•,t)
7::t 0 ..---■ .-
-- 0 0 ( ,) (..,t' g0 •g
0‹ .3 g • I-. •
...., .7j cti 14 4,-. ,.■
r.., •-lz 47: ,
>.--,
k. , ..u. g
0
L. s .1--;"
= 2, ••-•
*CZ r
0
E, ...c - .0
U
0-4 .,-...,?•.,
.:!, t i.1,0" .:;11.1 01 .
I a' <
2 -6.-.
• c..) Ca4 01
' O
0 .m.
cn 3-, H ...,
■-x) 0 0 ta4 a.)
:-...
t ...
d
',7:1 "1"4 " I
dd
...C)
■.,;) '
Q 0 CA
, E •
•1
P. .:.. 0.)
-.'
% -.-
r.i)
4 4' -
= -,--," 4.1 1-1--, ''''. n-' '2 .- z z ..= — ■
U
V., •"..) ,Y) MI CI ,..,-t :e). •.,.3' CV)), "..: Gol 0
U , 0 I—I 0 0, I.) 0 <LW 0
c',3
,..., ''' 0 C: 1:0020,2U
= 3 1
1
O 1-4
U ) ala
...r:
.Q., R,
--,4-?)-- Ci.,
.0 X
t;•'S-.N,--.)1,• `,,".;.-
...-
Ma,I
in I MI
:II: 1 >1
a) , ,. N
— 1—, ..t. 7,1„, ••-'
d
.7 .,.
U U
CO -0 C.) r?•'
:i •.
-4. Fi c cl "-• o c• 2 — FJO c z w
Ts,ce Z 1 ,
L.> 2 r. , {-1-. C 2> (..D 6
crs I i
H -0 s:', c E So
(1) c 4.) 0 cl ca
—± - --; 7_, ,c :--,
::C:;■
a) c ,,-, ,_.
t., (Ci 0 CO '
r1:1 2: 6.' M (D :r. ;:.'•:.
..•i
1
U
r 1i- R
4 ` c
I u -z
_ -.. - O =
U �r r k _
z.
J o �.1
C s-
.e chi - - _ ^ 0 u
U
V 6.--,
c n
L.) = C J O
O
I I ra
a I� J `r' `-" D - 4
_i ` �, CS Ca ~ O
Z c 14 2
Ts v .�
1 W
• cY
N _ 7
0
C a - z a
U T _ Crl
_.. U
tfl
c
0.
City of Bend Addendum Meeting #1 Agenda:
January 28, 2015
j DISASTER
IttS11 Ii NCI'I
Meeting: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update:City of Bend Addendum
Risk Assessment,Mitigation Strategies,Implementation and Maintenance
Date: January 28,2015
Time: 3:00 pm—5:00 pm
Location: City Hall,710 NW Hall St.,Bend,97709
I. Welcome and Introductions (5 minutes)
a. Overview of NHMP process
II. Review Hazard Identification (15 minutes)
a. Jurisdiction Specific Hazard Inventories
III. Review Vulnerability Information (30 minutes)
IV. Jurisdiction Specific Risk Assessment—Exercise (30 minutes)
a. Review 2014 County Assessment
b. Complete City risk assessment
V. Overview of Mitigation Strategies Process Review Mission and Goals (10 minutes)
a. Review County NHMP Mission and Goals
VI. CompleteJurisdiction Specific Mitigation Strategy (20 minutes)
a. Review County action item updates and prioritization
b. Develop jurisdiction specific mitigation actions
c. Prioritize jurisdiction specific action items
VII. Overview of Implementation and Maintenance (5 minutes)
VIII. Next Steps (5 minutes)
a. Complete city addenda
b. Prepare final draft of the NHMP for County and City Review
c. Provide the Office of Emergency Management a Review Opportunity
d. Submit updated plan to FEMA for review
Page 331 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
\o _
<
cli �I
\
& \ �
/
CNI \ |
\ c 2 -Y
/ @ <
• e
Ct
) \ ° �
V a
= )
't', \ %
_
/ '.-7:
\ \ \ /
3 E ~ f \ 2
_ -- (
( 2 ` \ /
y g / 2 H •~ % / -
- < \ -- .
Ll \• \ \
,S• i \ \ \\
� ; 00
/ j
\ / � \ . 7
C7 4. m \ 7
§ V w
» } \ / \ / / V < 2
§ / / / 0 : ' � ^ O
g :
° „ . (2 LI A® C /
/ � . � . .�_�.. ..... . a
= c
» Cr
7 = 2 • »
.: C
- - 2 / m
z : § 2
/ =:,--
» m
X
/ ) u
h\ / 2 ĥ
a he CO$. : r
■ �// / \
- c Q z 2
—.
tz
0
City of Bend Addendum Meeting #2 Agenda:
February I I , 2015
DISASTER
RLS11.IENC'L
Meeting: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update:City of Bend Addendum
Risk Assessment,Mitigation Strategies,Implementation and Maintenance
Date: February 11,2015
Time: 1;30 pm—3:00 pm
Location: City Hall,710 NW Hall St.,Bend,97709
I. Review Hazard Identification (15 minutes)
a. Jurisdiction Specific Hazard Inventories
II. Review Vulnerability Information (15 minutes)
III. Jurisdiction Specific Risk Assessment—Exercise (20 minutes)
a. Review 2014 County Assessment
b. Complete City risk assessment
IV. Overview of Mitigation Strategies Process Review Mission and Goals (10 minutes)
a. Review County NHMP Mission and Goals
V. Complete Jurisdiction Specific Mitigation Strategy (20 minutes)
a. Review County action item updates and prioritization
b. Develop jurisdiction specific mitigation actions
c. Prioritize jurisdiction specific action items
VI. Overview of Implementation and Maintenance (5 minutes)
VII. Next Steps (5 minutes)
a. Complete city addenda
b. Prepare final draft of the NHMP for County and City Review
c. Provide the Office of Emergency Management a Review Opportunity
d. Submit updated plan to FLMA for review
Page 333 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
E 1
C) p @
Ft—
CD 4
/ .
o / ©
2 \
_ ; {
\ Q.
- - ; I + 5
- \ c \ a
\ \ \ \ \ \ < % \
® »® / � ; E - %
� \ / \ 2 -
/ \ / \ .
\ / § \�/
cu c
o / \ R z / ® % 7
7 Z \ > @ ¥
\ / / r y / ~
` 2 U .1 -� !
- -
\ \ \ A
/ \ /
> ® < c -
U
. A I o
\ .. --� ` Q. U ■
- CO=---
x
. \ / . m
./ _ G
\ / _
k\� _ c
cip\5� ~ /
-�_ & 2 e
%
k
City of La Pine Addendum Meeting #1 Agenda:
February I I , 2015
DISASTER
( RESILIENCE I
1 I
Meeting: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update:City of Sisters Addendum
Risk Assessment,Mitigation Strategies,Implementation and Maintenance
Pate: February 11,2015
Time: 4:00—5:30 pm
Location: City Hall,16345 Sixth Street,La Pine,OR 97739
I. Welcome and Introductions (5 minutes)
a. Overview of NHMP process
II. Review Hazard Identification (15 minutes)
a. Jurisdiction Specific Hazard Inventories
III. Review Vulnerability Information (30 minutes)
IV. Jurisdiction Specific Risk Assessment—Exercise (30 minutes)
a- Review 2014 CountyAssessment
b. Complete City risk assessment
V. Overview of Mitigation Strategies Process Review Mission and Goals (10 minutes)
a. Review County NHMP Mission and Goals
VI. Complete Jurisdiction Specific Mitigation Strategy (20 minutes)
a. Review County action item updates and prioritization
b. Develop jurisdiction specific mitigation actions
c. Prioritize jurisdiction specific action items
VII. Overview of Implementation and Maintenance (5 minutes)
VIII. Next Steps (5 minutes)
a. Complete city addenda
b. Prepare final draft of the NHMP for County and City Review
c. Provide the Office of Emergency Management a Review Opportunity
d. Submit updated plan to FEMA for review
Page 335 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
1
8
45
r-. J o
E w
0. Fa r'
O
rn c Q 6
C
ir;
r
O :. W 1• - C,
co
©
U X u
.c -
-,, N
a .. \ r
c n
0. m •
z H
v� . ,w c F �.. I
= v .-
o -
N H U S 44 9
1"-1
L
U Q n OC
A_
❑ H -j O
Z n
c s U c O
v
b
< 0
rrs Q ❑ V -]
t' a, - O
U Cf) W
d '� H
m
- w
ce z
msµ, J
".<w H r O Cr-
CO
City of Redmond Addendum Meeting #1 Agenda:
January 28, 2015
[ ISASTER
RISIl1INCi
1
Meeting: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update:City of Redmond Addendum
Risk Assessment,Mitigation Strategies,Implementation and Maintenance
Date: January 28,2015
Time: 1:00 pm—2:30 pm
Location: City Hall,716 SW Evergreen Ave.,Redmond,OR 97756
I. Welcome and Introductions (5 minutes)
a. Overview of NHMP process
II. Review Hazard Identification (15 minutes)
a. Jurisdiction Specific Hazard Inventories
III. ReviewVulnerabilitylnformation (20 minutes)
IV. Jurisdiction Specific Risk Assessment—Exercise (20 minutes)
a. Review 2014 County Assessment
b. Complete City risk assessment
V. Overview of Mitigation Strategies Process Review Mission and Goals (10 minutes)
a. Review County NHMP Mission and Goals
VI. Completeiurisdiction Specific Mitigation Strategy (10 minutes)
a. Review County action item updates and prioritization
b. Develop jurisdiction specific mitigation actions
c. Prioritize jurisdiction specific action items
VII. Overview of Implementation and Maintenance (5 minutes)
VIII. Next Steps (5 minutes)
a. Completecityaddenda
b. Prepare final draft of the NHMP for County and City Review
c. Provide the Office of Emergency Management a Review Opportunity
d. Submit updated plan to FEMA for review
Page 337 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
0
U
l
a.
0
in "r
o
N
I
N
CCC
ct E .--7
c
ct G QQ
O• ` W
�• --
I
-
1)
p►E o c W an
c H
--0 p,
V c
J
L I
°J c 1�
ax
c . o
= o z
an CA
4-' -
C
U
P4
cn O
o
421 CC
\ CO
z
w V o o 1, ...1 w
cL� o '
�ww Q`
(..n w
u0d N o �. °c
Cn
--- V Cam]
y
CZI
0.
City of Sisters Addendum Meeting #1 Agenda:
February I I , 2015
fl::: _
DISASTER
RI-SISLIEN(j )
1
Meeting: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update:City of Sisters Addendum
Risk Assessment,Mitigation Strategies,Implementation and Maintenance
Date: February 11,2015
Time: 9:00 am-1100 am
Location: City Hall,520 E.Cascade Avenue,Sisters,97759
I. Welcome and Introductions (5 minutes)
a. Overview of NHMP process
II. Review Hazard Identification (15 minutes)
a. Jurisdiction Specific Hazard Inventories
III. Review Vulnerability Information (30 minutes)
IV. Jurisdiction Specific Risk Assessment-Exercise (30 minutes)
a. Review 2014 County Assessment
b. Complete City risk assessment
V. Overview of Mitigation Strategies Process Review Mission and Goals (10 minutes)
a. Review County NHMP Mission and Goals
VI. Complete Jurisdiction Specific Mitigation Strategy (20 minutes)
a. Review County action item updates and prioritization
b. Develop jurisdiction specific mitigation actions
c. Prioritize jurisdiction specific action items
VII. Overview of Implementation and Maintenance (5 minutes)
VIII. Next Steps (5 minutes)
a. Complete city addenda
b. Prepare final draft of the NHMP for County and City Review
c. Provide the Office of Emergency Management a Review Opportunity
d. Submit updated plan to FLMA for review
Page 339 of 469- EXHIBIT B to R1-SOI,LT)ON 2015-087
. ..' _.-"..-
•— .--‘'.-., 1
cs (R„- 1
-3 ,.• \`)
--
, .,
8 (0
;-..,
ca 5 2
. --Ci
c
ca c-,1 .m m
-a - — f..-_ -,,,...,4,
8
._...... -....„
° .-_,. -c) a 1 ■-1 ...._,&77-> ,j -...7"=.
..,-• ,,... ri.., 4.■ , (-- ..-"- cm"1"
CP
= s- '4, . -• 1
co cn (4 cr) t k_12
it.r+ 0 y u
l.. 1
...z ..,., 9
u 4,
...fi' 4'
'I ._.t.'"---4i ...
(21 4A ...6
4, ',..." • ....
••• /(_....-z k_ ) V L
5 --: .
g•0 r.,Li,
co 32
"1:1 .4 L4 la, -74----.>__, ` ....■ ro):-
- o
I
' -a _.:\_. C. •P
i ' 4-. •-.1 ‘--1,:',: -. ., mil
CA
•If. - c:. ra.%1.,1
, l■ '.----1 Z... :--.. gm
....... .—.•
LL?
L)
..`:c.nt_u ,:.
'.,—r, _
'rs.J C:1 wa
. --------_,,,...„....:,
a 2
APPENDIX C:
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Community resilience can be defined as the community's ability to manage risk and adapt to
natural hazard impacts. In order to help define and understand the County's sensitivity and
resilience to natural hazards, the following capacities must be examined:
• Natural Environment
• Social/Demographic
• Economic
• Built Environment
• Community Connectivity
• Political
The Community Profile describes the sensitivity and resilience to natural hazards of
Deschutes County, and its incorporated cities, as they relate to each capacity. It provides a
snapshot in time when the plan was developed and will assist in preparation for a more
resilient county. The information in this section, along with the hazard assessments located
in the Hazard Annex, should be used as the local level rationale for the risk reduction actions
identified in Section 3 — Mitigation Strategy. The identification of actions that reduce the
county's sensitivity and increase its resiliency assist in reducing overall risk of disaster, the
area of overlap in the figure below.
Figure C-I Understanding Risk
MUSGS Understanding Risk I1f11tllal
rabl
Natural Hazard uln e e System
Potential Catastrophic �y �t Exposure,Sensitivity
and Chronic Physical Events r Risk t and Resilience of:
•Past Recurrent.,Intervals ! r •Pupul,Gon
•Future Probability I of I •Economy
•!i1seed of Onset 1 I •Land Iin'and Develupn,enr
Magnitude 'Disaster! •Int,anrr11crurvan<iFatilit+,
•Duration r r •Cultural As,eh
•Spatial Event / •Ecosystem Good snr.t:Nor v:rF
, Ability,Resources
and Willingness to:
•Mitigate•Respond
•Prepare •RKover`
Y'urcO,USG5 Oregon Portnrrshtp for Disaster Hfslliefire Research Collnboratlon,BOSS
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
Page 341 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Natural Environment Capacity
Natural environment capacity is recognized as the geography, climate, and land cover of the
area such as, urban, water and forested lands that maintain clean water, air and a stable
climate.' Natural resources such as wetlands and forested hill slopes play significant roles in
protecting communities and the environment from weather---related hazards, such as
flooding and landslides. However, natural systems are often impacted or depleted by human
activities adversely affecting community resilience.
Geography
Deschutes County is located in Central Oregon along the eastern side of the Cascades, and
covers 3,055 square miles. The region is diverse and comprised of high desert, mountain
ranges, plateaus, river valleys, canyons, lava plains and partly forested mountains, with
elevations ranging from 2,700 feet to 10,358 at the peak of South Sister.
The county is located within several eco---regions: the Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills,
the Cascades, Northern Basin and Range, and the Blue Mountains. The Deschutes River
Valley lies in the northeast section of the county and covers the area of Bend, Redmond, and
Sisters. La Pine is located within the Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills area in the
southwest portion of the county. The Northern Basin and Range eco---region in southeast
Deschutes County consists of pluvial lake basins. In the Eastern Cascades Slopes and
Foothills, located across the County, the eco---region includes ponderosa pine/ bitterbrush
woodland, cold wet pumice plateau basin and pumice plateau forests. Lastly, the Cascades
eco---region in Deschutes County is located along the western border and in some southern
areas in the County. The Cascades eco---region geography includes Cascade Crest Montane
Forests and Cascades Subalpine/alpine. 3
Deschutes River Basin
The Deschutes River Basin covers the majority of the County. Groundwater inflow on stream
flows and volcanic activity influence the characteristics of upper Deschutes River Basin.
Recent geology activity such as lava flows, pumice, and ash along with the glacial movement
has reworked much of the area. It has allowed subsurface flows to travel in large quantities
and at relatively rapid rates. This has resulted in a steady hydrologic flow with minimal
fluctuations compared to rivers dominated by surface runoff.4
Climate
Climate refers to the temperatures, weather patterns, and precipitation in the region. This
section covers historic climate information. Estimated future climate conditions and possible
impacts are also provided (for a more detailed analysis refer to the State Risk Assessment.
Mayunga,J.2007.Understanding and Applying the Concept of Community Disaster Resilience:A capital---based
approach.Summer Academy for Social vulnerability and Resilience Building.
2 Monroe,William.Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan.Resource Element 1979.
s Loy,W.G.,ed.2001.Atlas of Oregon,2nd Edition.Eugene,OR:University of Oregon Press
Deschutes County/City of Bend River Study.April 1986
Page 342 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Temperature
There is a large temperature range in Deschutes County. Deschutes climate is typical of a
high desert with cool nights and sunny days. Mean summer temperatures range from highs
around 90 degrees Fahrenheit to lows around 40 degrees Fahrenheit. Mean winter
temperatures range from highs around 50 degrees Fahrenheit to lows around 10 degrees
Fahrenheit. The table below shows the mean annual rainfall ranges and temperatures for
January and July for the various eco---regions of the county.
Table C-I Average Rainfall and Temperatures
Mean.Annual Mean Temperature Meant Temperature,
Rainfall.Range Range(°F)January : Range (°F)'trily
Ecoregitrrl (inches) min/Max, Min/max
Cascades
Cascade Crest Montane Forest 55 to 100 21/35 43/72
Cascades Subalpine/Alpine 75 to 140 36/48 52/68
Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills
Ponderosa Pine/
Bitterbrush Woodland 16 to 35 20/40 40/82
Pumice Plateau 16 to 30 14/37 38/80
Pumice Plateau Basins 20 to 25 12/38 38/80
Blue Mountains
Deschutes River Valley 8 to 12 22/41 46/84
Northern Basin and Range
Pluvial Lake Basins 8 to 12 17/38 42/82
High Lava Plains 8 to 14 17/35 54/88
Source:US EPA.Ecoregions of Oregon:http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/or_eco.htm
Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest region increased in the 20th Century by about 1.5
degrees Fahrenheit. Climate projection models indicate that temperatures could
increasingly rise by an average of 0.2 degrees to 1.0 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.
Average temperature change is projected to be 3.2 degrees Fahrenheit by 2040 and 5.3
degrees Fahrenheit by 2080. Temperature increases will occur throughout all seasons, with
the greatest differences occurring in the summer months.s
Precipitation
The region receives relatively low levels of precipitation, approximately 8---35 inches per year
(increased levels of precipitation occur in the mountains to the west of the populated areas
of the county). This is in contrast to the 37 to 50 inches normally seen in other parts of the
Pacific Northwest. There is large annual temperature variation with mean temperatures
anywhere from the high fifties to seventies, and the maximum high temperature up to 102
degrees Fahrenheit from June to September, to average highs of low teens in the winter
months. In most winters, there are frequent and severe winter storms characterized by
temperature, wind velocity, ground saturation, and snow pack. Winter storms can slow or
Climate Impacts Group,"Climate Change,"http://cses.washington.edu/cig/pnwc/cc.shtml#anchor6.
Page 343 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
halt traffic, damage power lines, and kill livestock. Summer precipitation is relatively low,
increasing the risk of wildfire and requiring irrigation for crops.
Figure C-2 Deschutes County Average Annual Precipitation
Mean Annual PeeClp1a1ron
Iiii
,,. \--.., "r
• 1\^, i!#I
y 1 4
N M �I -en.
4 r«is x, /' ;' 1t
Source:The Oregon Climate Service,NOAA Climate Stations."1971---2000 Climate of Deschutes County".
Total precipitation in the Pacific Northwest region may remain similar to historic levels but
climate projections indicate the likelihood of increased winter precipitation and decreased
summer precipitation.6
Increasing temperatures affects hydrology in the region. Spring snowpack has substantially
decreased throughout the Western part of the United States, particularly in areas with
milder winter temperatures, such as the Cascade Mountains. In other areas of the West,
such as east of the Cascades Mountains, snowfall is affected less by the increasing
temperature because the temperatures are already cold and more by precipitation
patterns.'
Hazard Severity
Dynamic weather and diverse geography across Deschutes County are indicators of hazard
vulnerability when combined with the changing climate and severe weather related events.
Both wet and dry cycles are likely to last longer and be more extreme, leading to periods of
deeper drought and more frequent flash flooding. Less precipitation in the summers and
subsequently lower soil moisture with hotter temperatures will likely increase the amount
of vegetation, such as rangeland and grasslands, consumed by wildfire.
6 Ibid.
/Mote,Philip W.,et.al.,"Variability and trends in Mountain Snowpack in Western North America,"
http://cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/moteetalvarandtrends436.pdf
Page 344 of 469- EXI-IIBI"I' 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Synthesis
The physical geography, weather, climate and land cover of an area represent various
interrelated systems that affect overall risk and exposure to natural hazards. The projected
climate change models representing Central Oregon indicate the potential for increased
effects of hazards, particularly drought and wildfire due to changing climate of the region.
Central Oregon is projected to have warmer and drier summers with less precipitation. In
addition, winter temperatures will be warmer, which means a decrease in mountain
snowpack. These factors combined with periods of population growth and development
intensification can lead to increasing risk of hazards, threatening loss of life, property and
long---term economic disruption if land management is inadequate.
Page 345 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Social/Demographic Capacity
Social/demographic capacity is a significant indicator of community hazard resilience. The
characteristics and qualities of the community population such as language, race and
ethnicity, age, income, educational attainment, and health are significant factors that can
influence the community's ability to cope, adapt to and recover from natural disasters.
Population vulnerabilities can be reduced or eliminated with proper outreach and
community mitigation planning.
Deschutes CommunitiesDeschutes County has a variety of residential community types:
incorporated cities, unincorporated urban communities, rural communities, rural service
centers, resort communities, and destination resorts.' Listed below are the residential
communities by type:
Incorporated Cities
Incorporated cities can levy taxes on residents and are required to provide services such as
electricity, sewer, and water. The following list shows incorporated cities and their date of
incorporation:
• Bend (1/19/1905)
• La Pine (12/11/2006)
• Redmond (7/16/1910)
• Sisters (4/9/1946)
Urban Unincorporated Communities
Urban unincorporated communities have a minimum of 150 permanent residential
dwellings, have three or more land use types, and are served by community sewer and
water systems. Sunriver is the only unincorporated urban community in Deschutes County.
The community is approximately 3,375 acres, was master planned in 1965, and has an
estimated 1,733 permanent residents (during peak tourist seasons the population expands
to about 12,000 residents). Additional information on Sunriver can be found in the
Deschutes Comprehensive Plan Section 4.5.
Rural Communities
Rural communities are primarily composed of residential land, but also have some
employment land (commercial, industrial), and public land that serve the surrounding area.
There are two rural communities in Deschutes County:
• Terrebone -- Located about six miles north of Redmond, this community was platted
in 1909 and is the gateway to Smith Rock State Park, a premier rock climbing venue.
The community has a population of about 1,100, which is expected to grow 2.2% per
year to a forecasted population of 1,343 by 2025 according to the County
Population Forecast (Ordinance 2004---012). According to a 2009 vacant lands
inventory the community had 322 undeveloped lots (499 developed).
s Deschutes County,Oregon Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2015,
Page 346 o1469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Tumalo---Located about three miles northwest of Bend the community was platted in
1904 and is a small farming community with most farms on fewer than five acres.
The community has a population of about 420, which is expected to grow 2.2% per
year to a forecasted population of 527 by 2025 according to the County Population
Forecast (Ordinance 2004---012). According to a 2009 vacant lands inventory the
community had 122 undeveloped lots (196 developed). The community of Tumalo is
bisected by the Deschutes River and includes land that is within the special flood
hazard area.
Resort Communities
Resort communities were established for recreation or resort purposes predate the
establishment of the destination resort designation. These communities primarily contain
temporary residential units, and some permanent residences, and commercial and industrial
services to support the community. Deschutes County has two resort communities:
• Black Butte Ranch---Founded in 1970 this community has 1,830 acres,with 1,252 lots
for seasonal and permanent residents; in addition there are 82 acres of industrial
uses that support the community.
• Inn of the Seventh Mountain/Widgi Creek---Located about five miles southwest of
Bend, this community was developed in the late 1960's with an expansion that
occurred in 1983. The 260 acre community has 333 condominium units, 107 single
family homes, a golf course, and commercial developed primarily geared towards
residents/ tourists. The community is completely surrounded by the Deschutes
National Forest.
Destination Resorts
Destination resorts communities are self---contained developments that include developed
recreational amenities in a natural setting. These communities were permitted under
revised statewide planning laws in 1982 Within Deschutes County these communities must
be a minimum of 160 acres (half dedicated to open space), include a minimum of 150
overnight units and have no more than twice the number of residential units as overnight
units, commercial uses are limited to serving the resort, and a minimum of$7 million must
be invested in visitor accommodations and recreational facilities. Deschutes County has four
destination resorts:Caldera Springs---Directly south of Sunriver,400 acres with 320
homesites, Eagle Crest, Pronghorn, and Tetherow.
Rural Service Centers
The comprehensive plan designates six areas as rural service centers (unincorporated
communities that were developed prior to 1979 and recognized as exception areas from
Goals 3 and 4): Alfalfa, Brothers, Hampton, Millican, Whistlestop, and Wildhunt.
Page 347 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure C-3 Deschutes County Map
r
_ ,-. I `� -
�I
r61:. 7;. T r T
v C
N I �, _
ot "F4 2
_ I
ii y ci
'712
!I
�
(
- t
a
7d E
g-,ua %
it a i I , ;I
r
71'i 't co
0.
4 4.
S I,p.,. ..-,p 1, i rf H ! ..,,5..
a 3
mm� 7
3 m
Source:Deschutes County Fiscal Year 2015 Adopted Program Budget
Page 348 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Population
The majority of people across Deschutes County reside in Bend or within the unincorporated
areas of the county. Between 2000 and 2013, Deschutes County experienced a 40.9%
increase in population. The County Coordinated Population Forecast projects that by 2025
Deschutes County's population will increase by about 78,300 people, a 48% increase.'
Bend is by far the most populated city in the county, followed by Redmond; Sisters and La
Pine are significantly smaller communities. The table below shows that population growth
between 2000 and 2013 occurred in the cities of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters. La Pine was
incorporated in December 2006; as such there is no data for 2000 to assess growth. Overall,
the population of incorporated areas increased by 63.5% and unincorporated areas grew by
10.2%from 2000---2013. The County Coordinated Population Forecast projects that
Redmond and Sisters will be the fastest growing communities between 2013 and 2025 and
Bend will have the largest growth in population.
Table C-2 Population Estimate and Forecast for Deschutes County Cities
Q00 @2013 2?140 2$`°`''ti
Popuiatipn Percent 2.1125 Pop "a#ton ° cent
J2O00 2013 Change Chang „,",.FbrtR ° fang Change ?,
Deschutes 115,367 162,525 47,158 40.9% 240,811 78,286 48.2%
Bend 52,029 78,280 26,251 50.5% 109,389 31,109 39.7%
La Pine n/a 1,670 1,670 n/a 2,352 682 40.8%
Redmond 13,481 26,590 13,109 97.2% 45,724 19,134 72.0%
Sisters 959 2,115 1,156 120.5% 3,747 1,632 77.2%
Unincorporated 48,898 53,870 4,972 10.2% 79,599 25,729 47.8%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau.2000 Decennial Census,Table P001,Portland State University,Population Research
Center,"Annual Population Estimates",and 2001 Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County—
updated 2009.
Urban and rural growth patterns can impact how agencies, cities and counties prepare for
emergencies, because changes in development can increase risk associated with hazards.
The table below shows urbanization trends in Region 6, including Deschutes County.
Deschutes County is becoming more urban, and to a greater extent than the state of
Oregon.
9 Deschutes County Community Development Department,2014.
Page 349 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-3 Urban and Rural Populations 2000-2010
Population Change Average
2013 2025 2013/32025 Annual
Percent of Percent of Population. Percent Growth
Jurisdiction Population County Population County Change Change Rate
Bend 78,280 48.2% 109,389 45.4% 31,109 39.7% 2.8%
LaPine 1,670 / 2,352 1.0% 682 40.8% 2.9%
Redmond 26,590 16.4% 45,724 19.0% 19,134 72.0% 4.6%
Sisters 2,115 1.3% 3,747 1.6% 1,632 77.2% 4.9%
Sub$Total 108,655 66.9% 161,212 66.9% 52,557 48.4% 3.3%
Not Incorporated 53,870 33.1% 79,599 33.1% 25,729 47.8% 3.3%
Deschutes Total 162,525 100% 240,811 100% 78,286 48.2% 3.3%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau.2000 Decennial Census,Table P002&U.S.Census Bureau.2010 Decennial Census,
Table P02.Note:The U.S.Census Bureau defines"urban"as either an"urbanized area"of 50,000 or more
people,or an"urban cluster"of at least 2,500 people(but less than 50,000).Wheeler County does not meet
either definition,therefore all of it's populations is considered rural even though the county includes
incorporated cities.
Population size itself is not an indicator of vulnerability. More important is the location,
composition, and capacity of the population within the community. Research by social
scientists demonstrates that human capital indices such as language, race, age, income,
education and health can affect the integrity of a community. Therefore, these human
capitals can impact community resilience to natural hazards. As an example, Deschutes
County's trend towards urbanization suggests that the population may be becoming less
self---reliant and more reliant on external goods and services.
Tourists
Tourists are not counted in population statistics; and are therefore considered separately in
this analysis. Tourism activities in Deschutes County are largely centered on outdoor
activities, touring, and special events. Three---fourths of all trips to the region occur between
April and September.AD The table below shows the estimated number of person nights in
private homes, hotels and motels, and other types of accommodations. The table shows
that, between 2011---2013, visitors in Deschutes County lodge in private homes slightly more
than in hotels/ motels but the share of each lodging type is fairly evenly distributed.
Tourists' lodging in private homes suggests these visitors are staying with family and friends.
For hazard preparedness and mitigation purposes, outreach to residents in Deschutes
County will likely be transferred to these visitors in some capacity. However there has been a
steady increase in visitors lodging in hotel/motels over while private home lodging has
decreased. Visitors staying at hotel/motels are less likely to benefit from local preparedness
outreach efforts aimed at residents. Visitors that stay in other accommodations are
generally staying in vacation homes or at campgrounds.
°Longwoods Travel USA.(2011)Regional Visitor Report 2011,The Central Region.Retrieved April 29,2014 from
http://industry.traveloregon.com/research/archive/
Page 350 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-4 Annual Visitor Estimates in Person Nights
Number Percent ember Percent Number Percent
Deschutes 5,649 100% 5,895 100% 6,058 100%
Hotel/Motel 1,821 32.2% 1,957 33.2% 2,067 34.1%
Private Home 2,040 36.1% 2,104 35.7% 2,148 35.5%
Other 1,788 31.7% 1,834 31.1% 1,843 30.4%
Source:Oregon Tourism Commission,Oregon Travel Impacts:1991---2013,Dean Runyan Associates,
http://www.deanrunian.com/doc library/ORImp.pdf
Tourists are specifically vulnerable due to the difficulty of locating or accounting
for
travelers within the region. Tourists are often at greater risk during a natural disaster
because of unfamiliarity with evacuation routes, communication outlets, or even the type of
hazard that may occur. Knowing whether the region's visitors are staying in
friends/relatives homes in hotels/motels, or elsewhere can be instructive when developing
outreach efforts."
Language
Special consideration should be given to populations who do not speak English as their
primary language. Language barriers can be a challenge when disseminating hazard planning
and mitigation resources to the general public, and it is less likely they will be prepared if
special attention is not given to language and culturally appropriate outreach techniques.12
There are various languages spoken across Deschutes County; the primary language is
English. Overall, 2.7% of the total population in Deschutes County is not proficient in English.
The table below shows that there is about a 3% lower percentage of people who do not
speak English "very well" within the county compared to the state as a whole. Sisters has
the highest percentage of residents who do not speak English "very well"; while Bend has
the largest population. Outreach materials used to communicate with, plan for, and respond
to non---English speaking populations, and those who do not speak English very well, should
take into consideration the language needs of these populations.
11 MDC Consultants(n.d.).When Disaster Strikes—Promising Practices.Retrieved March 18,2014,from
http://www.mdcinc.org/sites/default/files/resources/When%20Disaster%205trikes%20---
%20Promising%20Practices%20-- %20Tourists-pdf
12 State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Region 6 Regional Profile.
Page 351 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-5 Deschutes County Language Barriers
Speak.English Speak English less
Weir than"very well'"
Estimate Percent Estimate Percent
Oregon 3,376,744 93.8% 224,905 6.2%
Region 6 252,787 96.9% 8,096 3,1%
Deschutes 145,397 97.3% 3,989 2.7%
Bend 69,629 96.7% 2,408 3.3%
La Pine 1,394 98.8% 17 1.2%
Redmond 23,274 96.1% 955 3.9%
Sisters 1,890 95.8% 83 4.2%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP02.
Race
The impact in terms of loss and the ability to recover may also vary among minority
population groups following a disaster. Studies have shown that racial and ethnic minorities
can be more vulnerable to natural disaster events. This is not reflective of individual
characteristics; instead, historic patterns of inequality along racial or ethnic divides have
often resulted in minority communities that are more likely to have inferior building stock,
degraded infrastructure, or less access to public services. The table below describes
Deschutes County's population by race and ethnicity.
The majority of the population in Deschutes County is racially white (93.3%). Approximately,
7% of the population is ethnically Hispanic or Latino; the cities of Bend and Redmond have
higher percentages of Hispanic or Latino residents than other parts of the county. It is
important to identify specific ways to support all portions of the community through hazard
mitigation, preparedness, and response. Culturally appropriate, and effective outreach can
include both methods and messaging targeted to diverse audiences. For example,
connecting to historically disenfranchised populations through already trusted sources or
providing preparedness handouts and presentations in the languages spoken by the
population will go a long way to increasing overall community resilience.
Table C-6 Deschutes Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin
/da(k
fib r
Race Des(chu ee Berm La Pine Redmond Sisters
Total Population 158,884 77.063 1,671 26,186 2,115
One Race 97.7% 97.5% 98.3% 97.9% 98.3%
White 93.3% 93.2% 93.6% 91.3% 94.7%
Black or African American 0.3% 0.4% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native 0.8% 0.4% 1.4% 0.7% 0.2%
Asian 1.1% 1.5% 1.8% 0.6% 0.0%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.2% 0.1% 1.8% 0.3% 0.0%
Some Other Race 2.0% 1.9% 1.0% 4.4% 3.3%
Two or More Races 2.3% 2.5% 1.7% 2.1% 1.7%
Hispanic or Latino(of any race) 7.4% 8.3% 5.1% 12.6% 6.8%
Not Hispanic or Latino 92.6% 91.7% 94.9% 87.4% 93.2%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DPO5.
Page 352 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Age
Of the factors influencing socio demographic capacity, the most significant indicator in
Deschutes County may be age of the population. As depicted in the table below, as of 2012,
15.1% of the county population is over the age of 64, a percentage that is projected to rise
to 20.8% by 2020 and to 25.5% by 2030. The Deschutes County age dependency ratio13 is
51.7, which is higher than the State of Oregon, 48.6; La Pine has the highest ratio for the
cities at 73.2. The age dependency ratio indicates a higher percentage of dependent aged
people to that of working age; this trend is projected to continue with Deschutes County
rates in 2020 of 58.9 and 69.7 in 2030.
Table C-7 Deschutes Population by Vulnerable Age Groups
1G�ar,�i >64 Years ,
laP v- Age
Dependency
,I.Urtsdittion pdtat Number- ,Percent Number percent 15 t ,> 4„ Ratio
Oregon 3,836,628 714,810 18.6% 540,527 14.1% 2,581,291 48.6
Deschutes 158,884 30,187 19.0% 23,965 15.1% 104,732 51.7
Bend 77,063 15,383 20-0% 10,225 13.3% 51,455 49.8
La Pine 1,671 48S 29.0% 221 13.2% 965 73.2
Redmond 26,186 6,033 23.0% 3,088 11.8% 17,065 53.4
Sisters 2,115 357 16.9% 333 15.7% 1,425 48.4
0.40s'
Oregon 4,252,101 741,416 17.4% 787,928 18.5% 2,722,757 56.2
Deschutes 182,455 29,716 16.3% 37,941 20.8% 114,798 58.9
10,30a , .ti .. ,yi }AI ^:t i.;P
flip JA�P: k w ..
Oregon 4,768,000 819,851 17.2% 1,021,190 21.4% 2,926,959 62.9
Deschutes 214,289 33,413 15.6% 54,575 25.5% 126,301 -69.7
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP05;Office of Economic Analysis,
Department of Administrative Services,Long Term County Forecast, "State and County Population Forecasts by
Age and Sex,2000---2040",accessed July 2014.
The age profile of an area has a direct impact both on what actions are prioritized for
mitigation and how response to hazard incidents is carried out. School age children rarely
make decisions about emergency management. Therefore, a larger youth population in an
area will increase the importance of outreach to schools and parents on effective ways to
teach children about fire safety, earthquake response, and evacuation plans. Furthermore,
children are more vulnerable to the heat and cold, have few transportation options and
require assistance to access medical facilities.14 Older populations may also have special
needs prior to, during and after a natural disaster. Older populations may require assistance
in evacuation due to limited mobility or health issues. Additionally, older populations may
13 The age dependency ratio is derived by dividing the combined under 15 and 65---and---over populations by the
15---to---64 population and multiplying by 100.A number close to SO indicates about twice as many people are of
working age than non---working age-A number that is closer to 100 implies an equal number of working age
population as non---working age population.A higher number indicates greater sensitivity.
14 State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Region 6 Central Oregon Regional Profile.
Page 353 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
require special medical equipment or medications, and can lack the social and economic
resources needed for post---disaster recovery.''
Gender
Deschutes County has slightly more females than males (Male: 49.4%, Female 50.6%), which
is a similar ratio to that of the state.'5 It is important to recognize that women tend to have
more institutionalized obstacles than men during recovery due to sector---specific
employment, lower wages, and family care responsibilities.'
Families and Living Arrangements
Two ways the census defines households are by type of living arrangement and family
structure. A householder may live in a "family household" (a group related to one another
by birth, marriage or adoption living together); in a "nonfamily household" (a group of
unrelated people living together); or alone. Deschutes County is predominately comprised
of family households(67.8%).Of all households, 25.2%are one---person non---family
households. Bend has the highest percentage, and largest population, of non---family
households, while La Pine and Sisters have the highest percentage of people 65 years or
older living alone.
Table C-8 Family versus Non-family Households
Total Family Nonfamily Householder Living Alone
HOU5eholds Households Households All Ages >64
Estimate Estimate Percent Estimate Percent Estimate Percent Estimate Percent
Oregon 1,512,718 964,274 63.7% 548,444 36.3% 421,620 27.9% 150,529 10.0%
Region 6 113,148 76,376 67.5% 36,772 32.5% 28,515 25.2% 11,126 9.8%
Deschutes 64,459 43,686 67.8% 20,773 32.2% 15,759 24.4% 6,215 9.6%
Bend 32,362 19,891 61.5% 12,471 38.5% 9,408 29.1% 3,438 10.6%
La Pine 663 442 66.7% 221 33.3% 201 30.3% 112 16.9%
Redmond 9,964 6,959 69.8% 3,005 30.2% 2,372 23.8% 945 9.5%
Sisters 821 571 69.5% 250 30.5% 200 24.4% 99 12.1%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP02
The table below shows household structures for families with children. Nearly 305 of all
households within the county are family household that have children; Bend has the lowest
percentage of family households with children (28.9%) and Redmond has the highest
percentage (35.3%). There are about twice as many single parent households that are
headed by females than by males; Redmond has the highest percentage of single parent
households. These populations will likely require additional support during a disaster and
will inflict strain on the system if improperly managed.
Wood,Nathan.Variations in City Exposure and Sensitivity to Tsunami Hazards in Oregon.U.S.Geological
Survey,Reston,VA,2007.
U.S Census Bureau.Census 2010---Total Population,2010.Prepared by Social Explorer.
http://www.socialexplorer.tom/6f4cdab7a0/explore(October 20,2014).
17 Ibid.
Page 354 of 469- PXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-9 Family Households with Children by Head of Household
Family
Totait,, Households with ,Single Parent Married duple
P + ; 4 h$idren (male) ( tl leJ With Chllderfl
estimate Percent Estimate Percent Estimate( 'ffircof kotWikpoikpot
Oregon 1,512,718 415,538 27.5% 35,855 2.4% 93,575 6.2% 286,108 18.9%
Region 6 113,148 31,005 27.4% 3,373 3.0% 6,349 5.6% 21,283 18.8%
Deschutes 64,459 18,223 28.3% 1,805 2.8% 3,273 5.1% 13,145 20.4%
Bend 32,362 9,368 28.9% 820 2.5% 1,688 5.2% 6,860 21.2%
La Pine 663 211 31.8% 12 1.8% 12 1.8% 187 28.2%
Redmond 9,964 3,515 35.3% 555 5.6% 954 9.6% 2,006 20.1%
Sisters 821 260 31.7% 31 3.8% 71 8.6% 158 19.2%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP02
Note:The table shows the percent of total households represented by each family household structure category.
Income -
Household income and poverty status are indicators of socia demographic capacity and the
stability of the local economy. Household income can be used to compare economic areas
as a whole, but does not reflect how the income is divided among the area residents. The
2012 median household income across Deschutes County is $51,468; this is slightly higher
than the State of Oregon median income of$50,036. The table below shows decreses in real
incomes across Deschutes County and cities. Bend has the highest median household
income, followed by Sisters.
Table C-I0 Median Household Income
09 O Percent Change
Oregon $52,474 $50,036 +4.6%
Deschutes $57,697 $51,468 +10.8%
Bend $57,719 $52,601 +8.9%
La Pine $32,765 $28,942 +11.7%
Redmond $46,915 $41,021 +12.6%
Sisters $53,025 $49,306 +7.0%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American CommunitySurvey,Table DP03.
Note:2009 dollars are adjusted for 2012 using Bureau of Labor Statistics'Consumer Price Index Inflation
Calculator.
Page 355 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The table below identifies the percentage of individuals and children under 18 that are
below the poverty level in 2012. It is estimated that 13.1% of individuals and 18.3% of with
children under 18 live below the poverty level across the county. Poverty rates in Deschutes
County are lower than that of Oregon State. La Pine and Redmond have rates that are
slightly higher than the county rates for the same two categories. While Sisters does not
have the highest rate for either category, it is notable that the total population in poverty
and children under 18 in poverty has more than tripled from 2009---2012.
Table C-1 I Poverty Rates
1t1 I�ri�iation in Poverty Children Under 18 in Poverty
r,,. I I wi
Percent Percent
Number Percent Change* Number Percent Change*
Oregon 584,059 15.5% 17.7% 175,303 20.6% 17.6%
Region 6 41,857 15.3% 28.3% 13,224 21.5% 22.1%
Deschutes 20,633 13.1% 53.9% 6,559 18.3% 60.5%
Bend 9,248 12.1% 47.1% 2,943 16.5% 44.8%
La Pine 460 27.7% 6.7% 208 39.7% 15.6%
Redmond 5,616 21.6% 102.7% 2,064 29.2% 110.0%
Sisters 311 14.7% 314.7% 131 26.8% 336.7%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2005---2009&2008---2012 American Commun itySurvey,TableS1701.
Cutter's research suggests that lack of wealth contributes to social vulnerability because
individual and community resources are not as readily available. Affluent communities are
more likely to have both the collective and individual capacity to more quickly rebound from
a hazard event, while impoverished communities and individuals may not have this capacity
-leading to increased vulnerability. Wealth can help those affected by hazard incidents to
absorb the impacts of a disaster more easily. Conversely, poverty, at both an individual and
community level, can drastically alter recovery time and quality.18
Federal assistance programs such as food stamps are another indicator of poverty or lack of
resource access. Statewide social assistance programs like the Supplemental Nutritional
Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) provide
assistance to individuals and families. In Deschutes County, TANF reaches approximately 922
families per month and SNAP helps to feed just fewer than 31,000 people (17,000
households) per month (about 19% of the region's population).'9 Those reliant on federal
assistance are more vulnerable in the wake of disaster because of a lack of personal financial
resources and reliance on government support.
18 Cutter,S.L.(2003).Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.Social Science Quarterly.
19 Sabatino,J.(2014).Oregon TANF Caseload, "One and Two Parent Families Combined", District 10;November
2014 data,and Sabatino,J.(2014).Oregon SNAP Program Activity, "SSP,APD and AAA Combined", District 10;
November 2014 data.Retrieved from State of Oregon Office of Business Intelligence website:
http://www.oregon.gov/dhs/assistance/Pages/data/main.aspx, November 2014.
Page 356 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Education
Educational attainment of community residents is also identified as an influencing factor in
socio demographic capacity. Educational attainment often reflects higher income and
therefore higher self---reliance. Widespread educational attainment is also beneficial for the
regional economy and employment sectors as there are potential employees for
professional, service and manual labor workforces. An oversaturation of either highly
educated residents or low educational attainment can have negative effects on the
resiliency of the community.
According to the U.S. Census, 93% of the Deschutes County population over 25 years of age
has graduated from high school or received a high school equivalency, with approximately
30.5% going on to earn a Bachelor's Degree. La Pine has the lowest rate of high school
graduates. Bend and Sisters have the highest percentages of their populations with a
Bachelor's degree or higher. Conversely, La Pine and Redmond have significantly lower
percentages of their populations that have Bachelor's degrees or higher.
Table C-12 Educational Attainment 2012
& ' Deschutes „ ° may°z Pk, y, ry(yr d ' ?r r
Jurisdiction Oregon 'RC iOn 6 County, Renr 1;,1" , i'h 3k'R.' r �Y;ll�P! a,;,, T0 s 0;1„ y1
Population 25 years and over 2,612,044 192,919 110,886 53,314 990 16,187 1,335
Less than 9th grade 4.1% 2.9% 2.0% 2.3% 2.9% 2.1% 2.0%
9th to 12th grade,no diploma 6.8% 7.0% 5.0% 3.5% 17.2% 9.1% S.5%
High school graduate or GED 24.8% 27.4% 23.3% 17.7% 35.6% 30.0% 21.9%
Some college,no degree 27.0% 28.2% 29.0% 28.4% 27.8% 31.5% 21.9%
Associate's degree 8.1% 9.4% 10.1% 1.0.4% 5.8% 10.1% 12.2%
Bachelor's degree 18.5% 16.7% 20.3% 26.1% 8.7% 12.1% 18.7%
Graduate or professional degree 10.8% 8.4% 10.2% 11.6% 2.1% 5.0% 17.8%
Percent without Highschool Degree 10.8% 9.9% 7.0% 5.8% 20.1% 11.2% 7.6%
Percent High School Graduate or Higher 89.2% 90.1% 93.0% 94.2% 79.9% 88.8% 92.4%
Percent Bachelor's Degree or Higher 29.2% 25.1% 30.5% 37.7% 10.8% 17.1% 36.5%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP02.
In relation to the high school graduation rate, it is important to note the progress ratings of
the county school districts. The Oregon Department of Education Federal Adequate Yearly
Progress Report(2011---2012) indicates that three schools in the County have a federal
designation for Title I schools; the majority of other schools received an Outstanding or
Satisfactory score.20 The quality of education received at K---12 area schools likely influences
the level of higher education achieved. These circumstances can have long---term impacts on
future regional employment, income and ultimately community stability and resilience.
7p Oregon Department of Education.Adequate Yearly Progress(AYP)Reports and Report Card Download.
http://www.ode.state.or.us/data/reportcard/ReportArchive.aspx.Deschutes County school districts include:
Bend---LaPine Administrative School District(1 out of 28 is Priority,2 out of 28 are Focus schools,16 out of 28 are
Outstanding,10 of 28 are Satisfactory,and 1 out of 28 Needs Improvement),Redmond School District(2 out of
11 are Outstanding,9 out of 11 are Satisfactory),Sisters School District(3 out od 3 schools are Oustanding).
Page 357 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Health
Individual and community health play an integral role in community resiliency, as indicators
such as health insurance, people with disabilities, dependencies, homelessness and crime
rate paint an overall picture of a community's well---being. These factors translate to a
community's ability to prepare, respond to, and cope with the impacts of a disaster.
The Resilience Capacity Index recognizes those who lack health insurance or are impaired
with sensory, mental or physical disabilities, have higher vulnerability to hazards and will
likely require additional community support and resources. The percentage of population in
Deschutes County without health insurance (20%) is the same percentage as that of the
State. All cities within Deschutes County, except La Pine, have lower rates of uninsured
individuals than Oregon. The percentage of uninsured changes with age, the highest rates of
uninsured are within the 18 to 64 year category; La Pine has the highest rate of this age
group that is uninsured. Overall the county has a higher percentage of people under age 18
that are uninsured than Oregon; Bend and Sisters have the highest rate of this age group
that is uninsured. The ability to provide services to the uninsured populations may burden
local providers following a natural disaster. Since the survey was conducted more than
200,000 Oregonians have enrolled in health care coverage through the Affordable Care Act
(ACA) coverage expansion; future surveys should capture the effects of this coverage
expansion21.
Table C-I3 Health Insurance Coverage
Without Health Insurance
Total Population Under 18 18 to 64 65 years
JurisdlCLien Population Number Percent years years and older.
Oregon 3,829,588 603,893 20.0% 7.7% 22.1% 0.5%
Deschutes 159,714 28,734 20.0% 10.5% 25.2% 0.4%
Bend 77,653 14,387 18.5% 11.3% 25.1% 0.4%
La Pine 1,625 347 21.4% 7.3% 31.9% 3,0%
Redmond 26,423 4,788 18.1% 4.8% 28.3% 0.0%
Sisters 2,262 427 18.9% 10.1% 27.0% 0.0%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2009---2013 American Community Survey,Table 52701.
21 Oregon Health Authority,Oregon Health Insurance Survey:2013 Data Reports,
http://www.oregon.gov/oha/ohpr/rsch/pages/insurance_data.aspx#State_Health_Insurance_Program
Page 358 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The table below describes disability status of the population. As of 2012, 12.1% of the
Deschutes County population, 19,066 people, identifies with one or more disabilities; this
rate is below the State percentage. La Pine has the highest percentage of it's total
population with a disability (22.7%) and also the highest percentage of individuals 65 years
and over with a disability (61%). The county's percentage of individuals under 18 years with
a disability (5.8%) is greater than the state percentage by more than one percentage point;
Sisters is the only city without a higher percentage.
Table C-14 Deschutes County Disability Status
6 (a,r
' si ,i t'i°p"al Under 18 years ' ' , q� , i
pC�, ppktia �t� with a disability with a disability , ;, � „� ,� � �
,' ", sti►i,st"e Estimate Percent estimate Pe�rcdnt� ' l:stii�iil `e� -Ye�''
Oregon 3,796,881 511,297 13.5% 39,439 4.6% 200,374 37.8%
Region 6 274,535 39,778 14.5% 3,558 5.7% 15,570 34.9%
Deschutes 158,076 19,066 12.1% 2,111 5.8% 7,369 31.0%
Bend 76,610 8,524 11.1% 997 5.5% 3,316 32.9%
La Pine 1,663 377 22.7% 30 5.7% 130 61.0%
Redmond 26,029 2,953 11.3% 389 5.4% 938 31.0%
Sisters 2,115 310 14.7% 20 4.1% 153 45.9%
*Non---institutionalized population
**Percent of age group
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP02.
Page 359 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
In 2011, Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) conducted a homeless count to
identify the number of homeless, their age and their family type. The OHCS study found that
1,775 individuals in Deschutes County identify as homeless. The primary age groups of those
identified are adults 24---44 years,children age 6---11 years,and 12---17 years(in order from
most to least).22 The homeless have little resources to rely on, especially during an
emergency. It will likely be the responsibility of the county and local non---profit entities to
provide services such as shelter, food and medical assistance. Therefore, it is critical to
foster collaborative relationships with agencies that will provide additional relief such as the
American Red Cross and homeless shelters. It will also be important to identify how to
communicate with these populations, since traditional means of communication may not be
appropriate or available.
Synthesis
For planning purposes, it is essential Deschutes County consider both immediate and long---
term socio---demographic implications of hazard resilience. Immediate concerns include the
growing elderly population and language barriers associated with a culturally diverse
community. Even though the vast majority of the population is reported as proficient in
English, there is still a small amount of the population not proficient in English. These
populations would serve to benefit from mitigation outreach, with special attention to
cultural, visual and technology sensitive materials. The current status of other Social/---
demographic capacity indicators such as graduation rate, quality of schools, high violent
crime rate, and poverty level higher and median household income lower than the State can
have long---term impacts on the economy and stability of the community ultimately affecting
future resilience.
Z2 Oregon Housing and Community Services,"2011 Point in Time Homeless Count".
http://www.ohcs.oregon.gov/OHCS/RA_2011_Poi nt_In_Time.__Ho meless_Counts.shtm l
Note:More recent counts have occurred,but the data has not yet been approved and released.
Page 360 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLE I ION 2015-087
Economic Capacity
Economic capacity refers to the financial resources present and revenue generated in the
community to achieve a higher quality of life. Income equality, housing affordability,
economic diversification, employment and industry are measures of economic capacity.
However, economic resilience to natural disasters is far more complex than merely restoring
employment or income in the local community. Building a resilient economy requires an
understanding of how the component parts of employment sectors, workforce, resources
and infrastructure are interconnected in the existing economic picture. Once any inherent
strengths or systematic vulnerabilities become apparent, both the public and private sectors
can take action to increase the resilience of the local economy.
Regional Affordability
The evaluation of regional affordability supplements the identification of
Social/demographic capacity indicators, i.e. median income, and is a critical analysis tool to
understanding the economic status of a community. This information can capture the
likelihood of individuals' ability to prepare for hazards, through retrofitting homes or
purchasing insurance. If the community reflects high---income inequality or housing cost
burden,the potential for home---owners and renters to implement mitigation can be
drastically reduced. Therefore, regional affordability is a mechanism for generalizing the
abilities of community residents to get back on their feet without Federal, State or local
assistance.
Income Equality
Income equality is a measure of the distribution of economic resources, as measured by
income, across a population. It is a statistic defining the degree to which all persons have a
similar income. The table below illustrates the county and cities level of income inequality.
The Gini index is a measure of income inequality. The index varies from zero to one. A value
of one indicates perfect inequality (only one household has any income). A value of zero
indicates perfect equality (all households have the same income).23
Deschutes County's income distribution is approximately reflective of the State as a whole.
The cities within the county vary slightly with the greatest income equality within the cities
of Bend, La Pine, and Sisters. Based on social science research, the region's cohesive
response to a hazard event may be affected by the distribution of wealth in communities
that have less income equality'.
23University of California Berkeley.Building Resilient Regions,Resilience Capacity Index.
hup://brr.berkeley.edu/rci/.
14 Susan Cutter,Christopher G.Burton,and Christopher T.Emrich.2010."Disaster Resilience Indicators for
Benchmarking Baseline Conditions,"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 7, no.1: 1---22
Page 361 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-15 Regional Income Equality
Jurisdiction ; ,a ,Inco'me Inequality Coefficient
Oregon 0.4517
Deschutes 0.4460
Bend 0.4558
La Pine 0.4426
Redmond 0.3981
Sisters 0.4400
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table B19083.
Housing affordability is a measure of economic security gauged by the percentage of an
area's households paying less than 35% of their income on housing.75 Households spending
more than 35% are considered housing cost burdened. The table below displays the
percentage of homeowners and renters reflecting housing cost burden across the region.
In comparison to the State, Deschutes County has a greater percentage of homeowners with
a mortgage spending more than 35% of their income on housing. Among homeowners
without a mortgage, La Pine has the greatest rate of households with housing cost burdens.
Amongst homeowners with a mortgage, La Pine and Redmond have the highest rates of
housing cost burden. Among renters, La Pine, Redmond, and Sisters residents have the
greatest rates of households with housing cost burdens. In general, the population that
spends more of their income on housing has proportionally fewer resources and less
flexibility for alternative investments in times of crisis.'6 This disparity imposes challenges
for a community recovering from a disaster as housing costs may exceed the ability of local
residents to repair or move to a new location. These populations may live paycheck to
paycheck and are extremely dependent on their employer, in the event their employer is
also impacted it will further the detriment experienced by these individuals and families.
Table C-I6 Households Spending > 35% of Income on Housing
Owners
Jurisdiction With Mortgage Without Mortgage Renters
Oregon 30.8% 11.6% 41.8%
Deschutes 38.5% 11.1% 40.9%
Bend 36.1% 11.8% 38.0%
La Pine 54.5% 24.8% 52.8%
Redmond 43.0% 10.0% 46.3%
Sisters 36.4% 3.3% 46.8%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Tables B25070&B25091.
25 University of California Berkeley.Building Resilient Regions,Resilience Capacity Index.
http://brr.berkeley.edu/rci/.
'6!bid_
Page 362 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Economic Diversity
Economic diversity is a general indicator of an area's fitness for weathering difficult financial
times. One method for measuring economic diversity is through use of the Hachman Index, a
formula that compares the composition of county and regional economies with those of
states or the nation as a whole. Using the Rachman Index, a diversity ranking of 1 indicates
the Oregon County with the most diverse economic activity compared to the state as a
whole, while a ranking of 36 corresponds with the least diverse county economy. Deschutes
County ranked 4`" out of the 36 counties in the state overall. The table below describes the
Nachman Index Scores for counties in the region. Another measure of economic diversity is
the Herfindahl Index, which ranks Deschutes County 4thout of 36 Oregon counties in terms
of the economic diversity of the county's 240 industries."
Table C-17 Regional Rachman Index Scores
2009 2012
is ,
County �� Value R,pnk
Crook 0.29 24 0.29 24
Deschutes 0.75 4 0.76 4
Jefferson 0.08 35 0.07 34
Klamath 0.57 8 0.62 8
Lake 0.09 33 0.10 32
Wheeler 0.16 29 0.15 29
Source:Oregon Employment Department
While illustrative, economic diversity is not a guarantor of economic vitality or resilience.
For example as of 2014, though Deschutes County is ranked #4 in the state for economic
diversity per the Rachman Index, it is listed as "economically distressed" by the Oregon
Business Development Commission. The economic distress measure is based on indicators
of decreasing new jobs, average wages and income, and is associated with an increase of
unemployment.28
°Oregon Employment Department,2013.
Business Oregon—Oregon Economic Data"Distressed Communities List",
http://www.oregon4biz.com/Publications/Distressed---List/
Page 363 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Employment and Wages
According to the Oregon Employment Department, unemployment has declined since 2009.
However, the central region of Oregon including Deschutes County remains higher than the
State unemployment rate.
Table C-18 Unemployment Rates in Region 6
Change
t 9 010, 2011 2012 2013 (2009-2013)
Oregon 11.1% 10.8% 9.7% 8.8% 7.7% (3.4%
Region 6 14.7% 14.2% 12.8% 11.8% 10.1% (4.6%
Crook 17.9% 17.1% 15.3% 14.2% 12.3% (5.7%
Deschutes 14.7% 14.3% 12.7% 11.4% 9.5% (5.2%
Jefferson 14.8% 14.4% 13.4% 12.3% 10.7% (4.1%
Klamath 13.9% 13.3% 12.4% 11.9% 10.7% (3.2%
Lake 12.4% 13.6% 13.3% 12.8% 11.1% (1.3%
Wheeler 9.0% 10.6% 9.8% 73% 7.1% (2.0%
Source:Oregon Employment Department,"Local Area Employment Statistics".
http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/labforce.Accessed July 2014.
The table below displays the payroll and employee figures for Deschutes County. As of 2013,
there were 63,294 individuals employed in the County, with an average wage of$37,751.
Deschutes County, and every other county in the region except for Klamath, has gained
employment since the last update of this plan. In addition, average pay has decreased for
counties in the region except for Crook and Lake County during this time period.
Table C-I 9 Deschutes Employment and Average Pay
Employment Percent Average Pay 2009 Percent
Jurisdiction 2009 2013 Change 201 Change
Region 6 95,922 99,434 3.7% $37,022 $36,869 .0.4%
Crook 5,192 5,827 12.2% $33,871 $40,154 18.5%
Deschutes 60,564 63,294 4.5% $38,338 $37,751 .1.5%
Jefferson 5,725 6,170 7.8% $35,124 $34,194 .2.6%
Klamath 21,858 21,504 .1.6% $35,070 $34,548 .1.5%
Lake 2,308 2,334 1.1% $34,012 $34,626 1.8%
Wheeler 275 305 10.9% $26,567 $25,871 .2.6%
Source:Oregon Employment Department,"2009 and 2013 Covered Employment and Wages Summary Report".
http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/labforce.Accessed October 2014.
Note:2009 dollars are adjusted for 2013 using Bureau of Labor Statistics'Consumer Price Index Inflation
Calculator.
In 2012, there were 741 employment establishments of which about 91% had fewer than 20
employees.29 The prevalence of small businesses in Deschutes County is an indication of
29 U.S.Census Bureau,2012 County Business Patterns(NAICS).
http://censtats.census.gov/cgibin/cbpnaic/cbpsect.pl,accessed August 2014.
Page 364 of 469- EXI-11131T B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
sensitivity to natural hazards because small businesses are more susceptible to financial
uncertainty. If a business is financially unstable before a natural disaster occurs, financial
losses (resulting from both damage caused and the recovery process) may have a bigger
impact than they would for larger and more financially stable businesses.
Industry
Major Regional Industry
Key industries are those that represent major employers and are significant revenue
generators. Different industries face distinct vulnerabilities to natural hazards, as illustrated
by the industry specific discussions below. Identifying key industries in the region enables
communities to target mitigation activities towards those industries' specific sensitivities. It
is important to recognize that the impact that a natural hazard event has on one industry
can reverberate throughout the regional economy.
This is of specific concern when the businesses belong to the basic sector industry. Basic
sector industries are those that are dependent on sales outside of the local community; they
bring money into a local community via employment. The farm and ranch, information, and
wholesale trade industries are all examples of basic industries. Non---basic sector industries
are those that are dependent on local sales for their business, such as retail trade,
construction, and health services.
Employment by Industry
Economic resilience to natural disasters is particularly important for the major employment
industries in the region. If these industries are negatively impacted by a natural hazard, such
that employment is affected, the impact will be felt throughout the regional economy. Thus,
understanding and addressing the sensitivities of these industries is a strategic way to
increase the resiliency of the entire regional economy.
The table below identifies Employment by industry. The top five industry sectors in
Deschutes County with the most employees, as of 2013, are Trade, Transportation &
Utilities (12,337), Education & Health Services (10,333), Leisure & Hospitality (9,909),
Professional & Business Services (6,879) and Local Government (6,385). While Deschutes
County has some basic industries, such as Natural Resources and Mining and Manufacturing;
four out of their five largest employers are of the non---basic nature and thus they rely on
local sales and services. Trending towards basic industries can lead to higher community
resilience. The sectors of growth within Deschutes County are Education & Health Services
(14.1%), State Government (12.5%), Other Services (14.0%) and Leisure and Hospitality
(10.2%).
Page 365 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-20 Total Employment by Industry 2013, Expected Growth 2022
2013 Percent
Change in Employment
Percent Average Employment Forecast •
Jurisdiction ;.r`',01.1e:";:-:'''!'',,''''' Firms Employees Workforce Pay (2009@2013) (2012®2022)
Total Payroll Employment 6,669 63,294 100% $37,751 4.5% 16%
Total Private 6,440 54,800 86.6% $36,568 5.0% 18%
Natural Resources and Mining 75 533 0.8% $35,577 3.3% 20%
Construction 856 3,513 5.6% $38,919 H7.0% 26%
Manufacturing 283 4,209 6.6% $41,389 7.4% 19%
Trade,Transportation&Utilities 1,216 12,337 19.5% $32,459 0.3% 12%
Information 125 1,406 2.2% $51,604 1.4% 4%
Financial Activities 698 3,207 5.1% $48,700 H7.2% 14%
Professional and Business Services 1,170 6,879 10.9% $41,948 4.1% 24%
Education and Health Services 723 10,333 16.3% $49,128 14.1% 24%
Leisure and Hospitality 580 9,909 15.7% $18,322 10.2% 20%
Other Services 695 2,457 3.9% $26,978 14.0% 13%
Private NonHClassified 21 18 0.0% $45,631 H18.2% H
Government 229 8,494 13.4% $45,383 1.4% 7%
Federal 39 864 1.4% $63,360 H5.5% H6%
State 40 1,245 2.0% $41,558 12.5% 12%
Local 150 6,385 10.1% $43,696 0.4% 8%
Source:Oregon Employment Department,"2009 and 2013 Covered Employment and Wages Summary Reports"
and"Regional Employment Projections by Industry&Occupation 2012---2022".http://www.qualityinfo.org.
Accessed October 2014.
High Revenue Sectors
In 2007, the three sectors with the highest revenue were Health Care & Social Assistance,
Retail Trade, and Manufacturing. The table below shows the revenue generated by each
economic sector (Note: not all sectors are reported, i.e., Professional, Scientific & Technical
Services). All of the sectors combined generated almost $1,256,184 billion in revenue for the
County.
Deschutes County relies on both basic and non---basic sector industries and it is important to
consider the effects each may have on the economy following a disaster. Basic sector
businesses have a multiplier effect on a local economy that can spur the creation of new
jobs, some of which may be non---basic. The presence of basic sector jobs can help speed the
local recovery; however, if basic sector production is hampered by a natural hazard event,
the multiplier effect could be experienced in reverse. In this case, a decrease in basic sector
purchasing power results in lower profits and potential job losses for the non---basic
businesses that are dependent on them.30
i0 State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Region 4 Southwest Oregon Regional Profile.
Page 366 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
•
Table C-2I: Revenue of Top Sectors in Deschutes County (Employer)
ii Sector RevelnMe r rit of Total,
Sector Meaning (NAICS}code) ($1,000)° R .venue
Retail Trade $271,931 21.6%
Manufacturing $201,741 16.1%
Health Care and Social Assistance $351,476 28.0%
Wholesale Trade $93,917 7.5%
Accomodation and Food Services $121,088 9.6%
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services D M
Real Estate & Rental & Leasing $48,236 3.8%
Administrative and Support and
Waste Management and Remediation Services $89'917 7.2%
Other Services (except Public Administration) $46,489 3.7%
Arts, Entertainment and Recreation $31,389 2.5%
Information $96,728 7.7%
Total $1,256,184 100%
Note:D=Withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual companies
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2007 Economic Census,Table EC0700A1.
Health Care & Social Assistance was the largest revenue generator in 2007, generating
$351.5 million that year or 28% of revenue in the County. Health Care and Social Assistance is
a relatively stable revenue sector. It largely relies on the local presence of older residents
and elderly facilities. It is likely the populations that require such services on a daily basis will
continue requiring assistance, such as those living in residential care facilities. With
Deschutes County's elderly population expected to increase, growth in this sector will likely
continue. However, in the event of a disaster medical needs may increase due to physical or
stress induced injuries and trauma. The physical infrastructure of this sector will be essential
in maintaining the capacity of service that they currently exhibit.
In 2007, the Retail Trade sector generated $271.9 million, making it among the largest
earning sectors in Deschutes County.31 The Retail Trade sector typically relies on local
residents and tourists and their discretionary spending ability. Residents' discretionary
spending diminishes after a natural disaster when they must pay to repair their homes and
properties. In this situation, residents will likely concentrate their spending on essential
items that would benefit some types of retail (e.g., grocery) but hurt others (e.g., gift shops).
The potential income from tourists also diminishes after a natural disaster as people are
deterred from visiting the impacted area. Retail trade is also largely dependent on wholesale
trade and the transportation network for the delivery of good for sale. Disruption
of the transportation system could have severe consequences for retail businesses. In
summary, depending on the type and scale, a disaster could affect specific segments of
retail trade, or all segments.
R'U.S.Census Bureau,2007 Economic Census. I able 1 Selected Statistics by Economic Sector.
Page 367 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The Manufacturing sector was the third largest revenue generator in 2007, generating
$201.7 million, or 16.1%, of the county's revenue. It is highly dependent upon the
transportation network in order to access supplies and send finished products to outside
markets. As a base industry, manufacturers are not dependent on local markets for sales,
which contribute to the economic resilience of this sector.
In the event that any of these primary sectors are impacted by a disaster, Deschutes County
may experience a significant disruption of economic productivity.
Future Employment in Industry
Sectors that are anticipated to be major employers in the future also warrant special
attention in the hazard mitigation planning process. Between 2012 and 2022, the largest
employment growth is anticipated within Construction (26%), Professional and Business
Services (24%) and Education and Health Services (24%).32 Natural Resources and Mining is
expected to increase by 20% while manufacturing is expected to increase by 19%.
Synthesis
The current and anticipated financial conditions of a community are strong determinants of
community resilience, as a strong and diverse economic base increases the ability of
individuals, families and the community to absorb disaster impacts for a quick recovery.
Because the Health and Social Assistance industry as well as the Government sector are key
to post---disaster recovery efforts, the region is bolstered by its major employment sectors.
The county is expected to grow at a high rate over the next 10 years with much of the
growth within the healthcare and construction industries." It is important to consider what
might happen to the county economy if the largest revenue generators and employers are
impacted by a disaster.
Oregon Employment Department,"Employment Projections by Industry and Occupations:2012---2022 Oregon
and Regional Summary",http://qualityinfo.org/pubs/projections/projections.pdf,accessed October 2014.
State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Region 6 Central Oregon Regional Profile
Page 368 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Built Environment Capacity
Built Environment capacity refers to the built environment and infrastructure that supports
the community. The various forms, quantity, and quality of built capital mentioned above
contribute significantly to community resilience. Physical infrastructures, including utility
and transportation lifelines, are critical during a disaster and are essential for proper
functioning and response. The lack or poor condition of infrastructure can negatively affect a
community's ability to cope, respond and recover from a natural disaster. Following a
disaster, communities may experience isolation from surrounding cities and counties due to
infrastructure failure. These conditions force communities to rely on local and immediately
available resources.
Land Use and Development Patterns
The majority of the county has a low population density. Sixty---six percent of the population
resides in the four incorporated cities. Three of the incorporated cities are located in the
northern half of the county and one is located in the southern half. The majority of land
(about 80% of 1,529,522 acres) in Deschutes County is publicly owned (76.6% Federal
Government, 2.8% State Government, 0.6% County Government); the remaining lands are
owned privately.31 About 91% of the county lies within the Deschutes Basin, which covers
10,000 square miles throughout Central Oregon.Other land uses include agriculture and
surface mining.'Wildfires pose a threat for the forested areas of the high desert Western
ecosystem; of particular concern are the areas within the Wildland---Urban Interface.
According to the Draft State Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (2015):
Development pressure has been high in the Bend, Sisters, and Redmond areas in the past few
decades. Between 1974 and 2009, the Bend area lost 13 percent of its land in resource land uses
to more developed uses. However, since 1984 that rate has declined ---annual average rates of
conversion of land in resource land uses to low---density or urban uses in Deschutes County was
88 percent less in the 2005---2009 period when compared to the 1974---1984 period.Similar trends,
although less pronounced, are seen in Klamath County.
Responding to rapid growth and changing demographics,in 2011 Deschutes County completed a
multi---year effort to establish the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update(Plan 2030).This new plan
incorporates updated goals and policies,community plans,and new projects like the South
County Plan,destination resort remapping,a 2030 Transportation System Plan,and a South
County Local Wetland Inventory.'6
Housing
In addition to location, the characteristics of the housing stock affect the level of risk posed
by natural hazards. The table below identifies the types of housing most common
34 Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan.2011.
31 Ibid.
36 Department of Land Conservation and Development,Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan(Draft),2015
and Land Use Change on Non---Federal Land in Oregon and Washington,September,2013,USES,ODF
Page 369 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
throughout the county. Of particular interest are mobile homes, which account for about
9.1% of the housing in Deschutes County. Mobile homes are particularly vulnerable to
certain natural hazards, such as windstorms, and special attention should be given to
securing the structures, because they are more prone to wind damage than wood---frame
construction.3' In other natural hazard events, such as earthquakes and floods, moveable
structures like mobile homes are more likely to shift on their foundations and create
hazardous conditions for occupants. La Pine (12.5%) and Sisters (12.3%) have a higher
percentage of mobile structures than other parts of the county; while Bend (2,042) and
Redmond (706) have the greatest number.
Table C-22 Housing Profile
Total Single Family MultiBFamily Mobile Homes.
Housing Percent of Percent of Percent of
Units Number Total Number Total Number Total
Oregon 1,673,593 1,140,319 68.1% 460,852 27.5% 139,768 8.4%
Region 6 138,082 102,288 74.1% 17,474 12.7% 18,017 13.0%
Deschutes 80,039 61,145 76.4% 11,557 14.4% 7,308 9.1%
Bend 36,562 26,938 73.7% 7,568 20.7% 2,042 5.6%
La Pine 885 663 74.9% 111 12.5% 111 12.5%
Redmond 10,654 7,878 73.9% 2,070 19.4% 706 6.6%
Sisters 1,232 926 75.2% 155 12.6% 151 12.3%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP04.
Note:the percentages listed in the table above do not reflect the number of structures that are built within
special flood hazard areas,or that are at risk of seismic damage.
Aside from location and type of housing, the year structures were built has implications.
Seismic building standards were codified in Oregon building code starting in 1974; more
rigorous building code standards were passed in 1993 that accounted for the Cascadia
earthquake fault.38 Therefore, homes built before 1993 are more vulnerable to seismic
events. Also in the 1970's,FEMA began assisting communities with floodplain mapping as a
response to administer the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973. Upon receipt of floodplain maps, communities started to develop
floodplain management ordinances to protect people and property from flood loss and
damage. The table below illustrates the number and percent of homes built between 1970
and 2012. Regionally about one---quarter of the housing stock was built prior to 1970, before
the implementation of floodplain management ordinances; however, within Deschutes
County less than 13% of the housing stock was built prior to 1970. Countywide, just under
44% of the housing stock was built before 1990 and the codification of seismic building
standards. Approximately 57% of the county's housing stock was built after 1990 (Redmond
and Sisters have about two---thirds of their housing units built after 1990).
37 Ibid.
38 State of Oregon Building Codes Division.Earthquake Design History:A summary of Requirements in the State
of Oregon,February 7,2012.http://www.oregon.gov/OMD/OEM/osspac/dots/history_seismic_codes_or.pdf
Page 370 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-23 Year Structure Built
r ,.
total ;' °P a J,970 1970 to 1989
+,r� � .
Housing Percent Percetfl;;.d Percent
units, Number of Total Number of Tota r of Total
Oregon 1,673,593 609,062 36.4% 518,569 31.0% 545,962 32.6%
Region 6 138,082 32,008 23.2% 42,128 30.5% 63,946 46.3%
Deschutes 80,039 10,166 12.7% 24,414 30.5% 45,459 56.8%
Bend 36,562 5,808 15.9% 9,610 26.3% 21,144 57.8%
La Pine 885 111 12.5% 258 29.2% 516 58.3%
Redmond 10,654 1,483 13.9% 2,130 20.0% 7,041 66.1%
Sisters 1,232 167 13.6% 258 20.9% 807 65.5%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table DP04.
As the previous table indicates, the majority of the housing stock is single---family homes, a
trend that is continuing with new construction. The table below shows that 17,012 or
approximately 95%of residential permits issued between 2000 and 2013 were for single---
family units. This suggests that hazard mitigation and outreach should specifically address
preparedness for detached housing structures.
Since 2007, residential construction activity has decreased significantly. The table below
shows that within the period 2008 to 2010 construction of residential units declined
significantly when compared with previous time periods. Residential construction activity is
a key indicator of community stability, and can demonstrate positive community growth.
However, in recent years with the downfall of the residential market this is less of an
accurate indicator as activity all across the nation was impacted. As the table shows
residential construction has begun to rebound in recent years but still falls below the levels
of previous periods. Between January 1 and September 30, 2014 there were 1,066 new
houses permitted countywide (658 in Bend, 130 in Redmond, 34 in Sisters, 4 in La Pine, and
240 in unincorporated Deschutes County) suggesting that the trend is continuing.;
Table C-24 Building Permits (Units)
2002 to °2005 to '; 12Q08 to 2011 tO TOtell'`',',y°.
Building Type 2004 2007 � ��;i ,,te s �' (20020013)
Deschutes County 9,570 9,529 1,508 2,577 23,184
Unincorporated 2,102 2,373 476 597 5,548
Bend 5,552 5,146 730 1,707 13,135
Redmond 1,824 1,763 261 221 4,069
Sisters 81 247 41 52 421
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,"Annual New Privately---Owned Residential Building Permits",
http://censtats.census.gov,accessed December 2014.
"Deschutes County Community Development Department(2014)
Page 371 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The table below shows the percent growth of the region's housing units in urban areas
between 2000 and 2010 (40.7%) is almost twice the percent growth in rural areas (21.2%).
Deschutes County gained the most urban housing units (approximately 21,150) and had the
highest growth rate in urban housing (69.0%).
Table C-25 Urban and Rural Housing Units in Region 6
Urban Rurall
Percent 'Percent
2000 2010 Change 2000 2010 Change
Oregon 1,131,574 1,328,268 17.4% 321,135 347,294 8.1%
Region 6 57,098 80,325 ""40.7% 47,792 57,939 21.2%
Crook 4,190 4,884 16.6% 4,074 5,318 30.5%
Deschutes 30,684 51,844 69.0% 23,899 28,295 18.4%
Jefferson 2,735 3,382 23.7% 5,584 6,433 15.2%
Klamath 17,950 18,684 4.1% 10,933 14,090 28.9%
Lake 1,539 1,531 .0.5% 2,460 2,908 18.2%
Wheeler 0 0 . 842 895 6.3%
Source:U.S Census Bureau.2000 Decennial Census,Table H002&2010 Decennial Census,Table H2
The figure below shows population density in Deschutes County. The area's population is
clustered around the Highway 20 and 97corridors and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond,
and Sisters. In addition to the county's incorporated cities there are also significant
populations in the rural communities of Black Butte Ranch and Sun River; the populations in
these two communities are significantly higher during summer than winter.
Figure C-4 Population Density in Deschutes County
r
} ,r
yT i Y F h'7 �.1 .�r..r
ili, a
Source:Integrated Water Resources Strategy:2010 Open House Map Gallery,Water Resources Department,
State of Oregon
Page 372 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP's) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs)
delineate flood---prone areas. They are used to assess flood insurance premiums and to
regulate construction so that in the event of a flood, damage minimized. The table below
shows the initial and current FIRM effective dates for Deschutes County communities. For
more information about the flood hazard, NFIP, and FIRMs, please refer the Flood Hazard
Chapter and Risk Assessment (Volume II).
Table C-26 Community Flood Map History
to al FIRM Current FIRM
Deschutes August 16, 1988 September 28, 2007
Bend September 4, 1987 September 28, 2007
La Pine September 28, 2007 September 28, 2007
Sisters September 29, 1986 September 28, 2007
Source:Federal Emergency Management Agency,Community Status Book Report;
(M)—No elevation determined,All Zone A,C and X
Other Development
Critical Facilities
Critical facilities are those facilities that are essential to government response and recovery
activities (e.g., hospitals, police, fire and rescue stations, school districts and higher
education institutions). The interruption or destruction of any of these facilities would have
a debilitating effect on incident management.
Critical facilities in Deschutes County are identified in table below. Lifelines and other
physical infrastructure, such as transmission lines, power generation facilities, levees and
dams are critical, further information can be obtained in the "lifelines" subsection. This
information provides the basis for informed decisions about the infrastructure and facilities
already in place that can be used to reduce the vulnerability of the county to natural
hazards.
Table C-27 Deschutes County Critical Facilities
Hai ll" w
Fire and
Trauma Law Rescue School y ersl es
#Hospitals #Beds Level Enforce ent Stations pi lricts*; sl;Coll ges
Deschutes 2 274 % 4 11 3 2
Bend 1 226 2 2 3 1 2
La Pine 0 9 % 0 1 1 0
Sisters o 5 % 0 1 1 0
Redmond 1 48 3 1 2 1 0
Source:Oregon Department of Human Services,"Oregon Hospitals:2008-09-20",and USA Cops:The Nations
Law Enforcement Site,and Oregon State Police Oregon Office of State Fire Marshal,"Fire Department List",and
Oregon Department of Education,"Education Institutions".
Note:*The County has three school districts,the Bend---La Pine School District includes the cities of Bend and La
Pine.
Page 373 of 469- EXI IIBI"1' B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Dependent Facilities
In addition to the critical facilities mentioned above in the table above, there are other
facilities that are vital to the continued delivery of health services and may significantly
impact the public's ability to recover from emergencies. Assisted living centers, nursing
homes, residential mental health facilities, and psychiatric hospitals are important to
identify within the community because of the dependent nature of the residents; and also
these facilities can serve as secondary medical facilities as they are equipped with nurses,
medical supplies and beds.
Deschutes County has approximately 28 facilities that provide services for assisted living,
retirement, and nursing homes; in addition there are three residential mental health or
substance abuse facilities'°. Saint Charles Medical Group, located in Bend, is the only
inpatient psychiatric facility east of the Cascades. Most of the dependent facilities are
located within Bend; however, a few are located in Redmond.
Correctional Facilities
Correctional facilities are incorporated into physical infrastructure as they play an important
role in everyday society by maintaining a safe separation from the public. There are two
correctional facilities located in Deschutes County. The Deschutes County Adult Jail, located
in Bend and adjacent to the sheriff's office.'The Juvenile Detention Facility in Bend offers
year---round schooling and self---improvement groups like TruThought,Skill Streaming, and
drug and alcohol information.4'
Infrastructure Profile
Physical infrastructure such as dams, levees, roads, bridges, railways and airports support
Deschutes County communities and economies. Due to the fundamental role that physical
infrastructure plays both in pre and post---disaster, they deserve special attention in the
context of creating resilient communities.
Dams
Dam failures can occur rapidly and with little warning.43 Fortunately, most failures result in
minor damage and pose little or no risk to life safety.44 However, the potential for severe
damage still exists. The Oregon Water and Resources Department has inventoried all dams
located in Oregon and Deschutes County. There are three dams categorized as high hazard;
Wickiup Reservoir, North Unit Diversion Dam, and Crane Prairie dams that are located on
4°Oregon Care Planning Council,http://www.carefororegon.org/,December 2014
41 Deschutes County,County Adult Jail,http://www.deschutescountyjail.org/,August 2014
42 Deschutes County Detention,http://www.deschutes.org/Community-.-Justice/Juvenile---Community---
Justice/Youth---Services/J uvenile---Detention---Facility.aspx.
43
Federal Emergency Management Agency-Dam Failure-www.fema.gov/hazard/damfailure/index.shtm.
Accessed November 18,2011.
4a Ibid.
Page 374 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
the Deschutes River. Wickiup Reservoir is of particular concern since it is the largest dam in
Deschutes County and it was last inspected 14 years ago in July 2000.45
Table C-28 Deschutes County Dam Inventory
IViber f„ ;: :1
Threat Poterttl i 7,77777'.'
ns Rivers °
High 3 Deschutes
Significant 3 Deschutes, Dry River,Whychus
Low 12 Closed Basin (Natural Lake), Off Channel,Whychus,
Three Creek,Tumalo Creek
Total 18 G
Source:Oregon water Resources Department,"Dam Inventory Query",
http://apps.wrdstate.or.us/apps/mist/dam .inventory/,Accessed July 2014.
Railroads
Railroads are major providers of regional and national cargo trade flows. The region's major
(Class I) freight rail providers are the Union Pacific(UP) and the Burlington Northern---Santa
Fe (BNSF) railroads. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway runs through Deschutes
County and along the Oregon Washington border.
Amtrak provides passenger rail service from the Willamette Valley south through Klamath
County and southward to Los Angeles, California via the Coast Starlight line; (the nearest
station is in Chemult)."
Rails are sensitive to icing from winter storms that can occur in the Central Oregon region.
For industries in the region that utilize rail transport, these disruptions in service can result
in economic losses. The potential for rail accidents caused by natural hazards can also have
serious implications for the local communities if hazardous materials are involved.
Airports
Deschutes County has four public airports, twelve private airports, and three private
heliports.47 One heliport is owned by St. Charles Medical Center. Of the public airports, two
are municipal airports, respectively owned and operated by the City of Bend and City of
Redmond. The Redmond Municipal Airport---Roberts Field is the only commercial airport in
the region."The airport serves four passenger airlines (American Airlines, Alaska Air, Delta
Air, United/ United Express) providing direct service to Denver, Los Angeles, Portland, San
Francisco, Salt Lake City, and Seattle.49 Access to these facilities could become closed in the
event of natural hazards. Another important consideration in identifying area air resources
45 Oregon water Resources Department,"Dam Inventory Query",
http://apps.wrd.state.or.us/apps/mist/dam_inventory/,accessed October 2014.
46 State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Region 6 Central Oregon Regional Profile
4'FAA Airport Facilities Data 2014.http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/airportdata_5010/menu/
Accessed August 2014.
48 Redmond Airport Website,http://www.flyrdm.com/
49 Ibid.
Page 375 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
is the type and condition of runway surfaces at these various facilities, as they will impact
the ability to utilize the airport and respond to major disasters.
Energy
There are no power plants located within Deschutes County; however, Pacific Power and
Light (Pacific Power) and Central Oregon Irrigation District have power generator facilities at
some in---water facilities.The county is served by several investor---owned,public,and
cooperative and municipal utilities. The Bonneville Power Administration is the areas
wholesale electricity distributor. Pacific Power is the primary investor---owned utility
company serving Deschutes County. The county's electric cooperatives include: Central
Electric Cooperative, Harney Electric Cooperative, and Midstate Electric Cooperative.
Roads
The region's major expressways are Highway 97 and Highway 20. Highway 97 bisects the
center of Deschutes County and is a main passage for automobiles and trucks traveling from
states to central Oregon. It merges with Highway 26 and connects Bend with Portland, a
distance of 162 miles. It also merges with Interstate---5 and connects Bend with California.
• Highway 20 runs east---west across the State and connects Deschutes County with
Newport on the coast and Idaho.
Other major highways that service this region include:
• Highway 372 also known as the Cascade Lakes Scenic Byway connects Bend to the
Cascade Mountains and access to recreational activities.
• Highway 126 connects coastal, western, and central parts of Oregon.
Daily, transportation infrastructure capacity in the Central Oregon region is stressed by
maintenance and lack of infrastructure in some areas. For example, some county roads are
too narrow for fire equipment vehicles. Additionally, natural hazards can further disrupt
automobile traffic and create gridlock this is of specific concern in periods of evacuation and
there are few alternative routes, especially in remote parts of the county.5°
Bridges
Because of earthquake risk, the seismic vulnerability of the county's bridges is an important
issue. Non---functional bridges can disrupt emergency operations, sever lifelines, and disrupt
local and freight traffic. These disruptions may exacerbate local economic losses if industries
are unable to transport goods. The county's bridges are part of the state and interstate
highway system that is maintained by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) or
that are part of regional and local systems that are maintained by the region's counties and
cities.
The table below shows the structural condition of bridges in the region. A distressed bridge
(Di) is a condition rating used by the Oregon Department of Transportation (000T) indicating
that a bridge has been identified as having a structural or other deficiency, while a
sn State of Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,Region 4 Southwest Oregon Regional Profile.
Page 376 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RI,SOLUTION 2015-087
deficient bridge (De) is a federal performance measure used for non---ODOT bridges; the
ratings do not imply that a bridge is unsafe.51 The table shows that the county has a lower
percentage of bridges that are distressed and/ or deficient (14%), than does the state (21%).
About 31% of the region's county and city owned bridges are distressed, compared to 11%
of ODOT bridges.
Table C-29 Bridge Inventory
**Owned County;Owned • City Owned Other Owned Area Total • Historic
Dh x9 %q• De ST %D De ST %D De ST %D D T %0 cOvere04,;;
Oregon 610 2,718 22% 633 3,420 19% 160 614 26% 40 115 35% 1,443 6,769 21% 334
Region 6 21 144 15% 27 240 11% 8 57 14% 4 9 44% 60 449 13% 12
Deschutes 5 48 11% 8 47 17% .5 35 14% 1 4 25% 19 132 14% 2
Source:Oregon Department of Transportation,2014;Oregon Department of 1 ransportation(2013),Oregon's
Historic Bridge Field Guide
Note:Di=ODOI bridges Identified as distressed with structural or other deficiencies;De=Non---ODOT bridge
Identified with a structural deficiency or as functionally obsolete;D=Total od Di and De bridges;ST=
Jurisdictional Subtotal;%D=Percent distressed(ODOI)and/or deficient bridges;*=0001 bridge classifications
overlap and total(ST)is not used to calculate percent distressed,calculation for ODOT distressed bridges
accounts for this overlap.
Utility Lifelines
Utility lifelines are the resources that the public relies on daily, (i.e., electricity, fuel and
communication lines). If these lines fail or are disrupted, the essential functions of the
community can become severely impaired. Utility lifelines are closely related to physical
infrastructure, (i.e., dams and power plants) as they transmit the power generated from
these facilities.
Deschutes County receives oil and gas from Alaska by way of the Puget Sound through
pipelines and tankers. Most of the natural gas Oregon uses originates in Alberta, Canada.
TransCanada owns the main natural gas transmission pipeline in Central Oregon while
Cascade Natural Gas supplies the greater part of Central Oregon.t7 The electric, oil, and gas
lifelines that run through the County are both municipally and privately owned.53 The
network of electricity transmission lines running through the county may be vulnerable to
severe, but infrequent natural hazards, such as windstorm, winter storms, and earthquakes.
Seismic lifeline routes help maintain transportation facilities for public safety and resilience
in the case of natural disasters. Following a major earthquake, it is important for response
and recovery agencies to know which roadways are most prepared for a major seismic
event. The Oregon Department of Transportation has identified lifeline routes to provide a
'1 Oregon.Bridge Engineering Section(2012).2012 Bridge Condition Report.Salem,Oregon:Bridge Section,
Oregon Department.of Transportation.
s'Ibid.
▪ Loy, W. G., Allan,S., & Patton, C. P. (1976).Atlas of Oregon. Eugene: University of Oregon and Economic
Development for Central Oregon, retrieved from http://www.edcoinfo.com/business—resources/utilities/natural
gas/default.aspx
Page 377 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
secure lifeline network of streets, highways, and bridges to facilitate emergency services
response after a disaster.'n
System connectivity and key geographical features were used to identify a three---tiered
seismic lifeline system. Routes identified as Tier 1 are considered to be the most significant
and necessary to ensure a functioning statewide transportation network. The Tier 2 system
provides additional connectivity to the Tier 1 system, it allows for direct access to more
locations and increased traffic volume capacity. The Tier 3 lifeline routes provide additional
connectivity to the systems provided by Tiers 1 and 2. The figure below shows Tiers 1, 2, and
3 seismic lifeline routes."
The Tier 1 system in Central Oregon consists of the following corridors:
• I---84 from the The Dalles to Biggs Junction
• US 97
There are no Tier 2 corridors in the Central Geographic Zone
The Tier 3 corridor in the Central Geographic Zone consists of:
• US 197
Synthesis
Given the unique dependent, rural nature of Deschutes County, maintaining the quality of
built capacity throughout the area is critical. The planning considerations seemingly most
significant for the county are contingency planning for medical resources and lifeline
systems due to the imminent need for these resources. As mentioned above, functionality
of hospitals and dependent care facilities are a significant priority in providing for Deschutes
County residents. One factor that is critical to consider in planning is the availability of
medical beds in local hospitals and dependent care facilities. In the event of a disaster,
medical beds may be at a premium providing not just for the growing elderly population,
but the entire county. Some of these facilities may run at almost full capacity on a daily
basis, hospitals should consider medical surge planning and develop memorandums with
surrounding counties for medical transport and treatment. Other facilities to consider are
utility lifelines and transportation lifelines such as, airports, railways, roads and bridges with
surrounding counties to acquire utility service and infrastructure repair.
While these elements are traditionally recognized as part of response and recovery from a
natural disaster, it is essential to start building relationships and establishing contractual
agreements with entities that may be critical in supporting community resilience.
sa CH2MHILL,Prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation.Oregon Seismic Lifeline Routes Identification
Project,Lifeline Selection Summary Report May 15 2012.
's Ibid.
Page 378 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Community Connectivity Capacity
Community connectivity capacity places strong emphasis on social structure, trust, norms,
and cultural resources within a community. In terms of community resilience, these
emerging elements of social and cultural capital will be drawn upon to stabilize the recovery
of the community. Social and cultural capitals are present in all communities; however, it
may be dramatically different from one city to the next as these capitals reflect the specific
needs and composition of the community residents.
Social Systems and Service Providers
Social systems include community organizations and programs that provide social and
community---based services, such as employment, health, senior and disabled services,
professional associations and veterans' affairs for the public. In planning for natural hazard
mitigation, it is important to know what social systems exist within the community because
of their existing connections to the public. Often, actions identified by the plan involve
communicating with the public or specific subgroups within the population (e.g. elderly,
children, low income, etc.). The County can use existing social systems as resources for
implementing such communication—related activities because these service providers
already work directly with the public on a number of issues, one of which could be natural
hazard preparedness and mitigation. The presence of these services are more
predominantly located in urbanized areas of the County, this is synonymous with the
general urbanizing trend of local residents.
The following is a brief explanation of how the communication process works and how the
community's existing social service providers could be used to provide natural hazard
related messages to their clients.
There are five essential elements for communicating effectively to a target audience:
• The source of the message must be credible,
• The message must be appropriately designed,
• The channel for communicating the message must be carefully selected,
• The audience must be clearly defined, and
• The recommended action must be clearly stated and a feedback channel established
for questions, comments and suggestions.
An example of an existing social system whose communication system can be linked to
natural hazard mitigation is the Bend Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber (the source)
p rovides local businesses (the audience) with information on business contingency planning
(the message) through speakers at meetings (the channel). To target small businesses,
Deschutes County can provide the Chamber with information on developing business
continuity plans and strategies for recovering from a natural hazard. When local small
businesses attend the Chamber's luncheons and seminars they can pick up this natural
hazard mitigation information. This example is graphically presented in the following figure:
Page 379 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure C-5 Communication Process
Source Message \ Channel N Audience
SBDC Business Continuity Workshops and Local
Planning "k Seminars Small Businesses
FEEDBACK
(Evaluation)
Source:Adapted from the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Radon Division's outreach program
The following table provides a list of existing social systems within Deschutes County. The
table provides information on each organization or program's service area, types of services
offered, populations served, and how the organization or program could be involved in
natural hazard mitigation. The three involvement methods identified in the table are
defined below:
• Education and outreach — organization could partner with the community to
educate the public or provide outreach assistance on natural hazard preparedness
and mitigation.
• Information dissemination= organization could partner with the community to
provide hazard related information to target audiences.
• Plan/project implementation — organization may have plans and/or policies that
may be used to implement mitigation activities or the organization could serve as
the coordinating or partner organization to implement mitigation actions.
The information provided in the table can also be used to complete action item worksheets
by identifying potential coordinating agencies and internal and external partners.
Page 380 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-30 Deschutes County Social Service Providers
r r p latlon
i I d
6 � titi
4k ' 'I
3dxr � l r
•
G ,IttWr°1iv A1RnYwith 1{ural�'
g
Noma and Contact .� �u.
Information Description Service Area o. Mitlitatt*n
Boys&Girls Club.Redmond To inspire and enable all young people, I
Revs SW 15th Street especially those from disadvantaged •Education and outreach
circumstances,to realize their full potential Redmond X X •Information
Redmond,OR 97/S6 Phone.
as productive,reopens10le,and caring dissemination
54111504119060
t it1Zen`.
Girls Club.East Bend I u urspre and era l?Ip all young people,
1/01 Tempest Drive Rend, especially those from disadvantaged •Education and outreach
OR 97702 Phone'. Circumstances,In realize their full potential Bend X X •Infonrration
as productive,responsible,and caring dissemination
54111385113009
Citizens
Crook,Doss holes
Central Oregon .Ind Jefferson
Intergovernmental Council cone ies and the
2363 SW Glacier Place Iu provide education,retraining and •Information
cities of Bend,Culver, X
Redmond,OR 97756 economic development services dissemination
Mochas,Metalius,
Phone:5411154118167 Prin,viu,Redmond
Fax'.541614899548 and Sisters
—
Healthy Beginnings Provides physical,developmental and
1029 NW 14th Street behavioral screenings to children age ice Deschutes County X X
Bend,OR 97701 and younger.
Money Management
International Offers financial counseling and workshops. Deschutes County X X X
1010 NW 14th Street,buil,
100 Bend,OR 97701
CaCoon
7577 NE(:ow stray Drive CaCoon(Care COordinal iON)program that •Fducatinn and outreach
Bend,Oft 97701 Phone. serves families with children who have a Deschutes County X X X X •Informal inn
541637767400 chronic health condition or disability. dissemination
fax'541932797461
Veterans Services The Veterans'Service Office assists
11.30 NW Harriman Sheet veterans and their dependents with •InfurrnaLiun
Rend,OR9/301 Phone. submitting,claims In the Veterans' Jefferson County X X
.541 H:38H3214 Administration for several benefit dis5clllillltl011
programs related to disability.
Deschutes Onsite Clinic
1340 NW Wall Street. Provides health care to Deschutes County •Educalinn and outreach
Bend,OR 97701 Phone: employees and tier r family members. Uex'1 t SCouty X X X X •Information
dissemination
5416317631%
Economic Development for E DCO is a private nnndpmofil organization
Central Oregon(EDCO) dedicated to building'a vibrant and thriving Coordinating mitip,at.inn
109 NW Greenwood Ave regional economy by attracting new Jefferson County, X X activities with economic
Suite 101 Bend,OR 97701 investment and jobs through marketing, Crook,Deschutes development in Jefferson
Phone: recruitment and working,wit h existing County.
.541430893236 employers.
Girl Scouts of Oregon and l o provide numerous volunteer services to
SW Washington •Education arid outreach
unity members in addition to
908 NE 4th Street,Suite 101 rnmnr Central Oregon X X X X X X •Information
Bend,CH 9)/(11 Phone. dissemination
err Is arid young women for active
dissemination
participation in community Ii(...
541E138048146
OSU Extension Service Provide research))based objective
Deschutes Counnty information to help people solve problems, •Education and outreach
38935W Airport Way develop leadership,and manage resources •Information
wisely surrounding the topics of Deschutes County X X x dissemination
Redmond,OR 9775fi horticulture,forestry and natural •Plan/project
Phone:541454846088
resources,youth development,family and implementation
community development,and nutrition
Page 381 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Table C-30 Deschutes County Social Service Providers (continued)
^ � ., Populetlona Served
a; '�f} I{ n
4f r, {t r ;, n 7 °
Ir Iii. 1
h"Itj¢iPf "1 h,ti' a C 1 L:y
Name and t Ati4�t ,a ,,f t 1 I r +a, °10,0010,6 int with Natural
Informatlpn: z 4,Racr7pdi�n 11 l'; Sails eArde �. �,,. a cT µ .5 ,r°' zaed.l�l4Htion�.,
High Desert Food and Farm The High Desert Food arid Fa ern Alliance is
Alliance a nonl prof it whose mission is to support a
sustainable community based food system •Fdurarinn and outreach
P.O.Box 1/82 in Central Oregon su that community Deschutes County X X •Information
Bend,OR 9//01 members can have access to fresh arid
dissemination
Phunu:S411S041330/
healthy food.
The Rotary Club of Greater Rotary is a worldwide organization of
business and professional leaders that
Bend •Fduration and outreach
plovides hoirianitarran service,encourages
P.U.Box(LEA. Deschutes County X X X X X X •Information
Bend,OR 97708 high ethical standards in all Vocations,anti
dissemination
helps build goodwill arid peace ill the
world.
.'The mission of the Foundation is to
Deschutes County Search of •Ldcauun a
rrd outreach
increase resources, fronds,and
and Rescue Foundation •Information
promote public awareness in su ppn n
PO Box 5722 Bend, Deschutes County X X X X X dissemination
OR 9//08 Phone: search and rescue Volunteer'activities •Plan t
conducted by the Deschutes County /prole(
54 1135/1/2/3 Sheriffs Office." implementation •
Redmond Area Park and
Recreation District 2241 •Education and outreach
SW(:anal Blvd Provides park and recreation facilities for Redmond Area X X •Information
Redmond,OR 97756
community members in the lhedrIrond Area dissemination"
Phone:541152611847
Sisters Park and Recreation Provides youth and adult programs in
District Sisters.The park districit is annul profit •Fducalior and outreach
11050 W.McKinney Butte Rd organiaaLion which provides sports and Sisters X X X •Information
Sisters,OR 9//59 Phone: recreation opportunities to community dissemination"
541154917091 nlenlbers.
La Pine Park and Recreation Provides adult educatio0 oppolturi ties, •Education and outreach
P.O Box 664 La Pine, after school for children,and I aPine X X X •Information
OR 97739 Phone: progre ins
activities for seniors. dissemination"
541153612223
Bend Park and Recreation
District Maintains parkland around the corrrrrrurnty •Education and outreach
799 SW Columbia Street and offers recreational activities for Bend X X X •Information
Bend,OR 97702 Phone: children,families,and seniors dissemination"
541139917275
Bend Senior Center
•Lducahun and outreach
1600.SF Reed Markel Rd Provides recreational activities and social Bend X X •Information
Bend,OR 97702 Phone• .activities and events for seniors in Rend.
dissemination
541178011133
The Bend Kiwanis Club The Rend Kiwanis Club supports the •Education and outreach
P.O.Box 107 Bend, purchase park land in the community,Buy Rend X X •Information
OR 9//09 Phone: and Girl Scout clubs,scholarships,and
dissemination
541161710000 other local nonprofits.
-
Bend Elks Lodge 01371 The group,made up of people who work to
03170 Boyd Acred Hd create a.stronper community by supporting •Education and outreach
Herd,OR 9//01 local and Iran 31101 charities that benefit Deschutes C.ounty X X X X X •Information
Phone'5411309174:19 children,the disabled,the elderly and Inwl dissemination
income populations.
Page 382 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-30 Deschutes County Social Service Providers (continued)
.n 4 ,r ,,Populettr nu 5erhdd pr y' + a "f± at p ,,
t S 7t if;.;i�xp,j
m
Name and Contact d o Involvement.with Natural
Information Description See fc,Area m 5 5 . a 2 Ha hol,Mitigafl4R
Sisters Area Chamber of •Education and outreach
Commerce •Information
Provide economic development assistance
291 E Main St Sisters, S Stern X dissemination
to local businesses
OR 9//S9 Phone. •Plan/project
S41GS49602S1 implementation
Redmond Chamber of •Education and outreach
Commerce •Information
Provide economic development assistance
446 SW 7th St. Redmond X dissemination
Redmond,OR 97/SG to local businesses. .Plan/prnjert
Phone'.5416973(55151 implementation
La Pine Chamber of .�....— •Education and outreach
Commerce Provide economic develo [assistance •Information
P.O.Box 516 preen i.a Pine LI dissemination
I a Pine,OR 9//39 to local businesses. •plan/project
Phone 511933699410 implementation
Bend Chamber of Commerce •Education and outreach
7/7 NW Wall Street,Suite •Information
700 Provide economic development assistance Rend X dissemination
Rend,OR 57701 to local businesses. •Plan/project
Phone',547090515997e implementation
Deschutes County Personnel
Office
1300 NW Wall Street,2nd •Information
Floor Employment service Deschutes County X dissemination
Rend,OR 9//01
Phune:541G/1664722
Fax;541633(164676
Mid Oregon Personnel
Services,INC.
2248 NC Division St •Infnrmat inn
Bend,OR 97701 Employment Service Deschutes County X dissemination
Phone:541638760445
fax:541638956094
Opportunity Foundation of
Central Oregon The Opportunity Foundation or-Cunha!
P.O.Box 130 Oregon(OFCO)is a benchmark Jefferson,Crnnk and •Education and outreach
835 Hwy 126 organization that is a leader in providing X •Information
Deschutes Counties
Redmond,OR 97756 .es to people in Central Oregon with dissemination
Phone:.S4ICr54EG7Gli disa6illlies.
fax 5415540C9570
Oregon Council for Hispanic OC.HA is champion for H isp.anics in
Uregun,ensuring equity in education and
Advancement 2600 NW ecommmic opportunity by empowering •Education and outreach
College Way Bend,OR Latino youth.0C110's educational and Deschutes County H X •Information
9//01 Phone:
advocacy activities ern Ilis lobs to dissemination
1241333034363 yac power p.
make positive changes in their lives to
Pea:541(;317(23070
op L irtr oe their rotate success.
Salvation Army
•Educating and outreach
511,NL Uckalb Avenue The group provides emergency assis tance
Bond X •Information
Bend,UR 97701 to people in need.
Phonc541G389G8888 dissemination
Neighborlmpact
Redmond Administrative
Office 2303 SW First The Head Start Program helps make sure Crook and Deschutes •Education and outreach
that children 3G4 yea rsold from luw3 X •Information
Street Redmond,OR County
977.5E Phone: income families are ready for school. dissemination
5416.54802300
Page 383 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RES(.)1,1.1'I'ION 2015-087
Civic Engagement
Civic engagement and involvement in local, state and national politics are important
indicators of community connectivity. Those who are more invested in their community may
have a higher tendency to vote in political elections. The 2012 Presidential General Election
resulted in 80.7% voter turnout in the County as of November 16th, 2012.S6 These results are
relatively equal to voter participation reported across the State (82.8%).57 Other indicators
such as volunteerism, participation in formal community networks and community
charitable contributions are examples of other civic engagement that may increase
community connectivity.
Cultural Resources
Historic Places
Historic and cultural resources such as historic structures and landmarks can help to define a
community and may also be sources for tourism revenue. Protecting these resources from
the impact of disasters is important because they have an important role in defining and
supporting the community. According to the National Register Bulletin, "a contributing
resource is a building, site, structure, or object adds to the historic associations, historic
architectural qualities, or archeological values for which a property is significant because it
was present during the period of significance, related to the documented significance of the
property, and possesses historical integrity or is capable of yielding important information
about the period; or it independently meets the National Register criteria.i58 If a structure
does not meet these criteria, it is considered to be non---contributing.
The table below identifies the number of eligible/significant (ES) and eligible/contributing
(EC) historical sites in Deschutes County. The table also shows how many ES and EC sites are
listed on the National Register and are located and in incorporated cities, and how many
contributing and non---contributing resources are located at ES and EC sites. Overall, there
are a total of 641 historically registered places in Deschutes County.
Table C-3 I Deschutes County Historic Places
Listed on the Located in
National CortribVti `t ' Non8 Incorporated
Eligible Sites Total Sites Register R,esourte : contributing Cities
ES#Significant 64 38 553 294 84%
EC#Contributing 577 244 569 133 94%
Source:Oregon Historic Sites Database
'6 Daily Ballot Return,http://www.Deschutesco.org/dailyballotreturn,accessed March 2013.
s7 Oregon Blue Book,Voter Participation.http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/elections/elections04.htm
"U.S.Department of the Interior,National Park Service,Cultural Resources,National Register Bulletin 16A:
"How to Complete the National Register Registration Form".
Page 384 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Libraries and Museums
Libraries and museums develop cultural capacity and community connectivity as they are
places of knowledge and recognition, t h ey a r e common sp a ce s for th e community t o gather,
and can serve critical functions in maintaining the sense of community during a disaster.
They are recognized as safe places and reflect normalcy in times of distress. There are
currently five community libraries in Deschutes County located in Bend, La Pine, Redmond,
Sisters, and Sunriver. There are approximately three museums in Deschutes County, which
have an emphasis on the history and culture of the region.
Cultural Events
Other such institutions that can strengthen community connectivity are the presence of
festivals and organizations that engage diverse cultural interests. Examples of events and
institutions include the Art in the High Desert on the banks of the Deschutes River and the
Bend Film Festival. Not only do these events bring revenue into the community, they have
potential to improve cultural competence and enhance the sense of place. Cultural
connectivity is important to community resilience, as people may be more inclined to
remain in the community because they feel part of the community and culture.
Community Stability
Residential Geographic Stability
Community stability is a measure of rootedness in place. It is hypothesized that resilience to
a disaster stems in part from familiarity with place, not only for navigating the community
during a crisis, but also accessing services and other supports for economic or social
challenges.59 The table below estimates residential stability across the region. It is calculated
by the number of people who have lived in the same house and those who have moved
within the same county a year ago, compared to the percentage of people who have
migrated into the region. Deschutes County overall has geographic stability rating of about
94% (i.e., 94% of the population lived in the same house or moved within the county). The
figures of community stability are relatively consistent across the region; La Pine (82.8%)
and Sisters (92.8%) show the least geographically stable population while Bend (94%) have
the most geographically stable populations. Bend and Redmond have the greatest percent
of their populations that lived in the same house one year ago; while La Pine and Sisters
have less population that was in the same house one year ago than other cities.
59 Cutter,Susan,Christopher Burton,Christopher Emrich."Disaster Resilience Indicators for Benchmarking
Baseline Conditions".Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management.
Page 385 of 469- EXHIBIT B to R1-SOI IiTION 2015-087
Table C-32 Regional Residential Stability
Moved
Geographic Within Same
Jurisdliet n „' ppU ,ti an Stability ,Sarre House 9;4404::
Deschutes County 157,270 94.1% 83.4% 10.8%
Bend 76,416 94.0% 80.8% 13.2%
La Pine 1,636 82.8% 73.2% 9.7%
Redmond 25,647 93.4% 79.6% 13.7%
Sisters 2,076 92.8% 73.8% 19.0%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey,Table B07003.
Homeownership
Housing tenure describes whether residents rent or own the housing units they occupy.
Homeowners are typically more financially stable but are at risk of greater property loss in a
post---disaster situation. People may rent because they choose not to own,they do not have
the financial resources for home ownership, or they are transient.
Collectively, over two---thirds of the occupied housing units in Deschutes County are owner---
occupied.The county has a 4% higher owner occupied rate than the state. Conversely, one---
third are renter occupied. The cities of Bend and Redmond have the highest percentage of
owner---occupied households in the county.The city of Sisters has the highest renter---
occupied rate. The county has about a 2% higher vacancy rate than the state; Sisters has the
highest vacancy rate, while Bend has the highest number of vacant units. `'° In addition,
seasonal or recreational housing accounts for approximately 11% of the county's housing
stock; Black Butte Ranch, Sisters, and Sun River have the highest percentages.
Table C-33 Housing Tenure and Vacancy
Occupied Owner @occupied. Renter@occupied Vacant^.
Units Estimate Percent Estimate Percent Estimate Percent
Oregon 1,512,718 945,824 62.5% 566,894 37.5% 105,417 6.3%
Region 6 113,148 75,355 66.6% 37,793 33.4% 11,694 8.5%
Deschutes 64,459 42,620 66.1% 21,839 33.9% 6,466 8.1%
Bend 32,362 18,931 58.5% 13,431 41.5% 3,039 8.3%
La Pine 663 311 46.9% 352 53.1% 121 13.7%
Redmond 9,964 5,683 57.0% 4,281 43.0% 583 5.5%
Sisters 821 379 46.2% 442 53.8% 230 18.7%
Source:U.S.Census Bureau,2008---2012 American Community Survey, fables DP04&B25004.
A=Functional vacant units,computed after removing seasonal,recreational,or occasional housing units from
vacant housing units.
According to Cutter, wealth increases resiliency and recovery from disasters. Renters often
do not have personal financial resources or insurance to assist them post---disaster. On the
other hand, renters tend to be more mobile and have fewer assets at risk of natural
"U U.S. Census Bureau, 2008---2012 American Community Survey, Table DP04 and Table B25004.
Page 386 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
hazards.`' In the most extreme cases, renters lack sufficient shelter options when lodging
becomes uninhabitable or unaffordable post---disaster.
Synthesis
Deschutes County has distinct social and cultural resources that work in favor to increase
community connectivity and resilience. Sustaining social and cultural resources, such as
social services and cultural events, may be essential to preserving community cohesion and
a sense of place. The presence of larger communities makes additional resources and
services available for the public. However, it is important to consider that these amenities
may not be equally distributed to the rural portions of the county and may produce
implications for recovery in the event of a disaster.
In the long---term, it may be of specific interest to the county to evaluate community stability.
A community experiencing instability and low homeownership may hinder the effectiveness
of social and cultural resources, distressing community coping and response mechanisms.
Political Capacity
Political capacity is recognized as the government and planning structures established within
the community. In terms of hazard resilience, it is essential for political capital to
encompass diverse government and non---government entities in collaboration; as disaster
losses stem from a predictable result of interactions between the physical environment,
social and demographic characteristics and the built environment.62 Resilient political capital
seeks to involve various stakeholders in hazard planning and works towards integrating the
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan with other community plans, so that all planning approaches
are consistent.
Government Structure
All mitigation is local, and the primary responsibility for development and implementation of
risk reduction strategies and policies lies with local jurisdictions. There are numerous
partners and resources at the state and federal levels that have a role in natural hazards and
natural hazard mitigation.
State and Federal
Key state agencies that are important in assisting Deschutes County include:"
Oregon Military Department's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) is responsible for
disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery at the state level and the
administration of federal funds after a major disaster declaration.
........... .
5'Cutter,S.L.(2003).Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.Social Science Quarterly.
F'Mileti,D.1999.Disaster by Design:a Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States.Washington D.C.:
Joseph Henry Press.
63 2010 Deschutes County Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Page 387 of469- EXHIBIT U to RI SOIAJ LION 2015-087
Building Code Division (BCD) and local Community Development Departments are
responsible for building code construction and for some hazards that are building---specific in
their occurrence (such as earthquakes); also included are provisions for expansive soils, and
damage assessment of buildings following an earthquake.
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) is responsible for all aspects of wildland fire
protection on designated private and state forest lands. Private unprotected lands exist in
central Oregon and are not designated for protection by ODE. ODE administers forest
practice regulations, including landslide mitigation on non---federal lands;
USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management provides wildland fire
protection on the federal lands within Deschutes. Together, they are identified as the Central
Oregon Fire Management Service (COFMS). COFMS includes the Deschutes National
Forest, the Ochoco National Forest, the Crooked River National Grassland, and the Prineville
District of the BLM. These four units are managed cooperatively under combined leadership.
Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) is responsible for
geological hazard characterization, public education, the development of partnerships
aimed at reducing risk, and exceptions (based on science---based refinement of tsunami
inundation zone delineation) to state mandated tsunami zone restrictions.
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) is responsible for planning---
based hazard management including implementation of land use planning and Statewide
Planning Goal 7 (natural hazards), with attention given to hazard assessments and hazard
mitigation.
Oregon Water Resources Department, South Central Region: The State of Oregon Water
Resources Department deals with water supply needs and restores and protects
streamflows and watersheds through enforcing Oregon's water laws.
County
The Board of County Commissioners, comprised of three elected officials, elected at large,
serves as the public's elected advocates and is the policymaking body of Deschutes County
government. The Board's duties include executive,judicial (quasi---judicial) and legislative
authority over policy matters of countywide concern. The executive duties include
establishment of the budget, which is done with the aid of the three lay members of the
Budget Committee.To implement policy and manage the day---to---day operations of the
County, the Board appoints a county administrator.
The Board's charge also includes creation and enforcement of County ordinances and, in
general, the resolution of any problems arising between the citizenry and various County
departments. In addition, the Board is involved in a host of regional and community efforts.
The County Counsel provides legal advice to county employees, elected officials, and county
boards.
Almost all governing departments within Deschutes County have some degree of
responsibility in contributing to community resilience. Every department plays a role in
ensuring that county functions and normal operations resume after an incident, and the
needs of the population are met.
Page 388 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLD I.ION 2015-087
Some divisions and departments of Deschutes County government that have a role in
hazard mitigation are:b4
Economic Development: Supports business and industrial development, performs
demographic and grant research, and is responsible for economic and community
development in the county.
Environmental Health: Issues permits for septic systems and manages solid waste licensing
and consultation programs.
Health Department: Offers preventative and community health services for county
residents, such as immunizations, family planning, HIV testing and counseling, emergency
preparedness, WIC, breast and cervical cancer programming, and maternal child health
nurse home visiting programs.
Geographic Information System (GIS) division: Supports County Government by creating,
managing, and analyzing spatial county data
Community Development Department: Evaluates land use applications and submits staff
report to planning commission, and responsible for zoning permits and facilitating
comprehensive planning process.
Road Department: Responsible for county road and bridge maintenance and construction,
as well as shop and weed control.
Sheriff's Office: Responsible for Sheriff's administration, civil, concealed handgun licenses,
corrections and jail, dispatch, emergency services, patrol, and investigation.
Surveyor: Maintains a record of all surveys performed in the county by the county surveyor
or licensed land surveyor and makes them available to the public. Protects, maintains, and
reestablishes public land survey corners.
4 Ibid.
Page 389 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure C-6 Deschutes County Organizational Chart
cout
7anAndereon
�,,�'praMunlry 1"
hkan&row,C v Shcd MOO OenOrpatorgOptpf Road Depamnanl ,,,� l� d,. Garrx4enlry Justice
Jane 9milfa 7■mm 8pMld+ke Dad;©est�atvptllap, Chris rY NIaR4gUdi Ken Hales
1 ..
�plla�gslth A9®h7�fa!N'',Mealfh IF'"We r I MF'' l �+ Ad&P nna
w ° 1,:200.
., "API.}• ��. ,.��. I�;..L�,,. ", ... +�Pr '. �. ;..
Internal Service Departments
Deputy County
Ad or.,ahwe AdmwWretor F# taCLow6
6erwpPM _ ErlkKropp9'1 4pwry
16 1.•
Prop it � t;
1 P Danie®rgge Jo I
Veterens'9aryiCes a��'lY'tr'.
(f
the
Cxiir
•
1 County&DeputyCounty Adm ni&trator
I Appointed©ffloee
tl M"
Department PUnotton8 Ft '•.,n.�
Source:Deschutes County Fiscal Year 2015 Adopted Program Budget
Page 390 of 469— EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The county's incorporated communities have the following government structures as
illustrated in the table below, for more information see the city addenda.
Table C-34 Participating City Government Structure
Bend La Pine Redmond :t'72 gi tr
Government Form Manager/Council Manager/Council Manager/Council Manager/Council
City Manager/Administrator Yes Yes Yes Yes
Mayor Yes Yes Yes Yes
City Council 7:Person 5:Person 7:Person 4:Person
Building Yes Yes Yes
Parks/Recreation Yes Yes Yes Yes
Planning Yes Yes Yes Yes
Public Works Yes Yes Yes Yes
Police Yes Yes** Yes Yes**
Fire Yes Yes Yes Yes
Information Technology Yes No Yes Yes
Source:City and County Websites
*Deschutes County Building Division provides services to Redmond through a contract
**Deschutes County Sheriff Substations in La Pine and Sisters
Existing Plans and Policies
Communities often have existing plans and policies that guide and influence land use, land
development, and population growth. Such existing plans and policies can include
comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and technical reports or studies. Plans and
policies already in existence have support from local residents, businesses and policy
makers. Many land---use, comprehensive, and strategic plans get updated regularly, and can
adapt easily to changing conditions and needs.t5
The Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan includes a range of recommended
action items that, when implemented, will reduce the county's vulnerability to natural
hazards. Many of these recommendations are consistent with the goals and objectives of
the county's existing plans and policies. Linking existing plans and policies to the Natural
Hazards Mitigation Plan helps identify what resources already exist that can be used to
implement the action items identified in the Plan. Implementing the natural hazards
mitigation plan's action items through existing plans and policies increases their likelihood
of being supported and getting updated, and maximizes the county's resources. In addition
to the plans listed below the county and incorporated cities also have zoning ordinances
(including floodplain development regulations) and building regulations.
The table below is a list of plans and policies already in place in Deschutes County that have
a connection to natural hazards mitigation, for more information on city plans/ policies
review the city addenda:
Burby,Raymond J.,ed.t998.Cooperating with Nature:Confronting Natural Hazards with Land---use Planning
for Sustainable Communities.
Page 391 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table C-35 Existing Plans
Jurisdiction 'Document Year
Deschutes County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan 2010
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan 2011
Deschutes County Newberry Country Plan 2013
Deschutes County Development Code (Flood, Ch. 18.96, 18.108, 19.72) 2007
Deschutes County East& West Deschutes County CWPP 2012
Deschutes County Sunriver CWPP 2010
Deschutes County Upper Deschutes River Coalition CWPP 2013
Deschutes County Emergency Operations Plan 2010
Deschutes County Intelligent Transportation Systems Plan 2011
City of Bend General Plan 1998
City of Bend Development Code (Flood, Section 10.10.22A.4) 2014
City of Bend Emergency Operations Plan 2009
City of Bend Transportation System Plan 2013
City of Bend Greater Bend CWPP* 2011
City of Bend Water Public Facility Plan 2013
City of Bend Sewer Public Facility Plan 2014
City of Bend Stormwater Public Facility Plan 2014
City of La Pine Comprehensive Plan 2010
City of La Pine Development Code (Flood, Section 9-12) 2012
City of La Pine Transportation System Plan 2013
City of La Pine Greater La Pine CWPP* 2015
City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan 2007
City of Redmond Development Code (no mapped SFHA)
City of Redmond Transportation Master Plan 2009
City of Redmond Greater Redmond CWPP* 2011
City of Redmond Wastewater(Collection System) and Water System Master Plan 2007
City of Sisters Comprehensive Plan 2012
City of Sisters Transportation System Plan 2010
City of Sisters Development Code(Flood, Section 2.10) 2012
City of Sisters Greater Sisters Area Emergency Operations Plan 2009
City of Sisters Greater Sisters Country CWPP* 2014
City of Sisters Water System Master Plan 2005
City of Sisters Water Management and Conservation Plan 2011
City of Sisters Wastewater System Capital Facilities Plan 2006
Source:City and County Websites, * ---portions of these CWPPs include lands within County jurisdiction.
Existing Mitigation Activities
Current mitigation programs and activities are being implemented in an effort to reduce the
community's overall risk to natural hazards. Documenting these efforts can assist the
community in better understanding its risk and can assist in documenting successes. The list
below consists of countywide efforts; city---specific mitigation activities are listed in the city
addendums.
Page 392 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Note: OEM has not documented any state---or federally---funded mitigation projects in
Deschutes County(neither pre---disaster nor recovery mitigation).
Deschutes County Community Development Department
The community development department is responsible for providing comments and
expertise on land use applications. The department reviews natural hazard impacts to
development through enforcement of the county comprehensive plan and development
code.
County Forester/ Project Wildfire
The County Forester helps private landowners create defensible space around their homes
and helps coordinate fire adapted communities throughout Deschutes County. The County
Forester works with federal, state, county, and municipality law enforcement agencies to
resolve issues during wildland fires through programs, such as FireFree and Project Impact.
The FireFree program is a nationally recognized model for homeowner education and
mitigation programs in the wildland urban interface. Created in 1997 following the
devastating Skeleton Fire in Bend, FireFree creates awareness and educates residents about
the risks of wildland fire to homes and property and the ten simple steps they can take to
reduce those risks. FireFree encourages homeowners to take responsibility for risk
mitigation by creating defensible space around their property and disposing of debris.
Project Wildfire, is a collaborative effort among local fire agencies, forestry departments,
private businesses, and the insurance industry coordinates FireFree.66
Project Wildfire was established in 2002. Project Wildfire continues to provide coordination
of a variety of wildland fire mitigation activities including the FireFree program, the
facilitation of Community Wildfire Protection Plans, and serves as a source of information
for local groups interested in obtaining grant funding to support mitigation activities.
Project Wildfire has established a web site (www.projectwildfire.org) to help showcase the
wide variety of hazardous fuels treatment, prevention projects and public information and
educational opportunities.'
Deschutes County Emergency Services
� Y
The overall emergency management responsibility rests with the Deschutes County Sheriff.
An appointed Emergency Manager is delegated to oversee the Emergency Management
Program. The position is responsible for coordinating the plans of the different components
of the emergency management system and assist in coordination and support of: fire,
police, emergency medical services, public works, volunteers, and other groups involved
with the community's management of emergencies.
fie Firefree.http://www.firefree.org/(accessed on October 24,2014)
67 Project Wildfire Business Plan,March 2003
Page 393 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Bureau of Land Management (BLM Prineville District)
Deschutes County is located in the Bureau of Land Management's Prineville District.
Prineville is the largest district in Oregon with 1.65 million acres scattered over 13 million
acres. The districts mitigation projects have the potential to positively impact both the
natural and human environment in the county and include the following:68
• Fuels Reduction —Treatments have occurred in the La Pine and Cline Buttes area for
hazardous fuels.
• John Day Basin Resource Management Plan —will provide guidance for any decisions
made about 450,000 acres of public land in the John Day Basin for the next 20 years
• River Management Plans — contains management actions necessary to protect and
enhance resource values and resolve key issues that exist within river corridors
As addressed above, many governmental entities are responsible for work relevant to
hazards planning; however, from this perspective it is challenging to decipher whether these
structures work collaboratively in practice towards improving hazard mitigation. On a similar
note, in short of reviewing each of the relevant policy documents it is questionable whether
the documents effectively integrate hazard initiatives into implementation policy. Further
analysis is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of political capital in terms of community
resilience.
http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/prineville/index.php
Page 394 o1469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Appendix D.
Economic Analysis of
Natural Hazard Mitigation Projects
This appendix was developed by the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience at the
University of Oregon's Community Service Center. It has been reviewed and accepted by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency as a means of documenting how the
prioritization of actions shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are
maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated
costs.
The appendix outlines three approaches for conducting economic analyses of natural hazard
mitigation projects. It describes the importance of implementing mitigation activities,
different approaches to economic analysis of mitigation strategies, and methods to calculate
costs and benefits associated with mitigation strategies. Information in this section is
derived in part from: The Interagency Hazards Mitigation Team, State Hazard Mitigation
Plan, (Oregon Military Department— Office of Emergency Management, 2000), and Federal
Emergency Management Agency Publication 331, Report on Costs and Benefits of Natural
Hazard Mitigation. This section is not intended to provide a comprehensive description of
benefit/cost analysis, nor is it intended to evaluate local projects. It is intended to (1) raise
benefit/cost analysis as an important issue, and (2) provide some background on how
economic analysis can be used to evaluate mitigation projects.
Why Evaluate Mitigation Strategies?
Mitigation activities reduce the cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries,
and the potential for loss of life, and by reducing emergency response costs, which would
otherwise be incurred. Evaluating possible natural hazard mitigation activities provides
decision---makers with an understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as
well as a basis upon which to compare alternative projects.
Evaluating mitigation projects is a complex and difficult undertaking, which is influenced by
many variables. First, natural disasters affect all segments of the communities they strike,
including individuals, businesses, and public services such as fire, police, utilities, and
schools. Second, while some of the direct and indirect costs of disaster damages are
measurable, some of the costs are non---financial and difficult to quantify in dollars. Third,
many of the impacts of such events produce "ripple---effects" throughout the community,
greatly increasing the disaster's social and economic consequences.
While not easily accomplished, there is value, from a public policy perspective, in assessing
the positive and negative impacts from mitigation activities, and obtaining an instructive
benefit/cost comparison. Otherwise, the decision to pursue or not pursue various
mitigation options would not be based on an objective understanding of the net benefit or
loss associated with these actions.
Page 395 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
What are some Economic Analysis Approaches for
Evaluating Mitigation Strategies?
The approaches used to identify the costs and benefits associated with natural hazard
mitigation strategies, measures, or projects fall into three general categories: benefit/cost
analysis, cost---effectiveness analysis and the STAPLE/E approach. The distinction between
the three methods is outlined below:
Benefit/Cost Analysis
Benefit/cost analysis is a key mechanism used by the state Oregon Military Department —
Office of Emergency Management (OEM), the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and
other state and federal agencies in evaluating hazard mitigation projects, and is required by
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93---288, as
amended.
Benefit/cost analysis is used in natural hazards mitigation to show if the benefits to life and
property protected through mitigation efforts exceed the cost of the mitigation activity.
Conducting benefit/cost analysis for a mitigation activity can assist communities in
determining whether a project is worth undertaking now, in order to avoid disaster---related
damages later. Benefit/cost analysis is based on calculating the frequency and severity of a
hazard, avoiding future damages, and risk. In benefit/cost analysis, all costs and benefits are
evaluated in terms of dollars, and a net benefit/cost ratio is computed to determine
whether a project should be implemented. A project must have a benefit/cost ratio greater
than 1 (i.e., the net benefits will exceed the net costs) to be eligible for FEMA funding.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Cost---effectiveness analysis evaluates how best to spend a given amount of money to
achieve a specific goal. This type of analysis, however, does not necessarily measure costs
and benefits in terms of dollars. Determining the economic feasibility of mitigating natural
hazards can also be organized according to the perspective of those with an economic
interest in the outcome. Hence, economic analysis approaches are covered for both public
and private sectors as follows.
Investing in Public Sector Mitigation Activities
Evaluating mitigation strategies in the public sector is complicated because it involves
estimating all of the economic benefits and costs regardless of who realizes them, and
potentially to a large number of people and economic entities. Some benefits cannot be
evaluated monetarily, but still affect the public in profound ways. Economists have
developed methods to evaluate the economic feasibility of public decisions which involve a
diverse set of beneficiaries and non---market benefits.
Investing in Private Sector Mitigation Activities
Private sector mitigation projects may occur on the basis of one or two approaches: it may
be mandated by a regulation or standard, or it may be economically justified on its own
Page 396 01469- I?XH1131'1' 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
merits. A building or landowner, whether a private entity or a public agency, required to
conform to a mandated standard may consider the following options:
1. Request cost sharing from public agencies;
2. Dispose of the building or land either by sale or demolition;
3. Change the designated use of the building or land and change the hazard mitigation
compliance requirement; or
4. Evaluate the most feasible alternatives and initiate the most cost effective hazard
mitigation alternative.
The sale of a building or land triggers another set of concerns. For example, real estate
disclosure laws can be developed which require sellers of real property to disclose known
defects and deficiencies in the property, including earthquake weaknesses and hazards to
prospective purchases. Correcting deficiencies can be expensive and time consuming, but
their existence can prevent the sale of the building. Conditions of a sale regarding the
deficiencies and the price of the building can be negotiated between a buyer and seller.
STAPLE/E Approach
Considering detailed benefit/cost or cost---effectiveness analysis for every possible mitigation
activity could be very time consuming and may not be practical. There are some alternate
approaches for conducting a quick evaluation of the proposed mitigation activities which
could be used to identify those mitigation activities that merit more detailed assessment.
One of those methods is the STAPLE/E approach.
Using STAPLE/E criteria, mitigation activities can be evaluated quickly by steering
committees in a synthetic fashion. This set of criteria requires the committee to assess the
mitigation activities based on the Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
and Environmental (STAPLE/E) constraints and opportunities of implementing the particular
mitigation item in your community. The second chapter in FEMA's How---To Guide
"Developing the Mitigation Plan — Identifying Mitigation Actions and Implementation
Strategies" as well as the "State of Oregon's Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan: An
Evaluation Process" outline some specific considerations in analyzing each aspect. The
following are suggestions for how to examine each aspect of the STAPLE/E approach from
the "State of Oregon's Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan: An Evaluation Process."
Social: Community development staff, local non---profit organizations, or a local planning
board can help answer these questions.
• Is the proposed action socially acceptable to the community?
• Are there equity issues involved that would mean that one segment of the
community is treated unfairly?
• Will the action cause social disruption?
Technical: The city or county public works staff, and building department staff can help
answer these questions.
Page 397 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Will the proposed action work?
• Will it create more problems than it solves?
• Does it solve a problem or only a symptom?
• Is it the most useful action in light of other community goals?
Administrative: Elected officials or the city or county administrator, can help answer these
questions.
• Can the community implement the action?
• Is there someone to coordinate and lead the effort?
• Is there sufficient funding, staff, and technical support available?
• Are there ongoing administrative requirements that need to be met?
Political: Consult the mayor, city council or city board of commissioners, city or county
administrator, and local planning commissions to help answer these questions.
• Is the action politically acceptable?
• Is there public support both to implement and to maintain the project?
Legal: Include legal counsel, land use planners, risk managers, and city council or county
planning commission members, among others, in this discussion.
• Is the community authorized to implement the proposed action? Is there a clear
legal basis or precedent for this activity?
• Are there legal side effects? Could the activity be construed as a taking?
• Is the proposed action allowed by the comprehensive plan, or must the
comprehensive plan be amended to allow the proposed action?
• Will the community be liable for action or lack of action?
• Will the activity be challenged?
Economic: Community economic development staff, civil engineers, building department
staff, and the assessor's office can help answer these questions.
• What are the costs and benefits of this action?
• Do the benefits exceed the costs?
• Are initial, maintenance, and administrative costs taken into account?
• Has funding been secured for the proposed action? If not, what are the potential
funding sources(public, non---profit, and private?)
• How will this action affect the fiscal capability of the community?
Page 398 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• What burden will this action .lace on the tax base or local economy?
Y
• What are the budget and revenue effects of this activity?
• Does the action contribute to other community goals, such as capital improvements
or economic development?
• What benefits will the action provide? (This can include dollar amount of damages
prevented, number of homes protected, credit under the CRS, potential for funding
under the HMGP or the FMA program, etc.)
Environmental: Watershed councils, environmental groups, land use planners and natural
resource managers can help answer these questions.
• How will the action impact the environment?
• Will the action need environmental regulatory approvals?
• Will it meet local and state regulatory requirements?
• Are endangered or threatened species likely to be affected?
The STAPLE/E approach is helpful for doing a quick analysis of mitigation projects. Most
projects that seek federal funding and others often require more detailed benefit/cost
analyses.
When to use the Various Approaches
It is important to realize that various funding sources require different types of economic
analyses. The following figure is to serve as a guideline for when to use the various
approaches.
Figure D-I Economic Analysis Flowchart
Mitigation Plan
Action Items
Activity: Structural
or Non-Structural
Structural
� J :all Y��ft?at ";tMNi' IA��F�.
B/C Analysis
Source:Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience.2005.
Page 399 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Implementing the Approaches
Benefit/cost analysis, cost---effectiveness analysis, and the STAPLE/E are important tools in
evaluating whether or not to implement a mitigation activity. A framework for evaluating
mitigation activities is outlined below. This framework should be used in further analyzing
the feasibility of prioritized mitigation activities.
I. Identify the Activities
Activities for reducing risk from natural hazards can include structural projects to enhance
disaster resistance, education and outreach, and acquisition or demolition of exposed
properties, among others. Different mitigation projects can assist in minimizing risk to
natural hazards, but do so at varying economic costs.
2. Calculate the Costs and Benefits
Choosing economic criteria is essential to systematically calculating costs and benefits of
mitigation projects and selecting the most appropriate activities. Potential economic
criteria to evaluate alternatives include:
• Determine the project cost. This may include initial project development costs, and
repair and operating costs of maintaining projects over time.
• Estimate the benefits. Projecting the benefits, or cash flow resulting from a project
can be difficult. Expected future returns from the mitigation effort depend on the
correct specification of the risk and the effectiveness of the project, which may not
be well known. Expected future costs depend on the physical durability and
potential economic obsolescence of the investment. This is difficult to project.
These considerations will also provide guidance in selecting an appropriate salvage
value. Future tax structures and rates must be projected. Financing alternatives
must be researched, and they may include retained earnings, bond and stock issues,
and commercial loans.
• Consider costs and benefits to society and the environment. These are not easily
measured, but can be assessed through a variety of economic tools including
existence value or contingent value theories. These theories provide quantitative
data on the value people attribute to physical or social environments. Even without
hard data, however, impacts of structural projects to the physical environment or to
society should be considered when implementing mitigation projects.
• Determine the correct discount rate. Determination of the discount rate can just be
the risk---free cost of capital, but it may include the decision maker's time preference
and also a risk premium. Including inflation should also be considered.
3. Analyze and Rank the Activities
Once costs and benefits have been quantified, economic analysis tools can rank the possible
mitigation activities. Two methods for determining the best activities given varying costs
and benefits include net present value and internal rate of return.
Page 400 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Net present value. Net present value is the value of the expected future returns of
an investment minus the value of the expected future cost expressed in today's
dollars. If the net present value is greater than the projected costs, the project may
be determined feasible for implementation. Selecting the discount rate, and
identifying the present and future costs and benefits of the project calculates the
net present value of projects.
• Internal rate of return. Using the internal rate of return method to evaluate
mitigation projects provides the interest rate equivalent to the dollar returns
expected from the project. Once the rate has been calculated, it can be compared
to rates earned by investing in alternative projects. Projects may be feasible to
implement when the internal rate of return is greater than the total costs of the
project. Once the mitigation projects are ranked on the basis of economic criteria,
decision---makers can consider other factors, such as risk, project effectiveness, and
economic, environmental, and social returns in choosing the appropriate project for
implementation.
Economic Returns of Natural Hazard Mitigation
The estimation of economic returns, which accrue to building or land owners as a result of
natural hazard mitigation, is difficult. Owners evaluating the economic feasibility of
mitigation should consider reductions in physical damages and financial losses. A partial list
follows:
• Building damages avoided
• Content damages avoided
• Inventory damages avoided
• Rental income losses avoided
• Relocation and disruption expenses avoided
• Proprietor's income losses avoided
These parameters can be estimated using observed prices, costs, and engineering data. The
difficult part is to correctly determine the effectiveness of the hazard mitigation project and
the resulting reduction in damages and losses. Equally as difficult is assessing the
probability that an event will occur. The damages and losses should only include those that
will be borne by the owner. The salvage value of the investment can be important in
determining economic feasibility. Salvage value becomes more important as the time
horizon of the owner declines. This is important because most businesses depreciate assets
over a period of time.
Additional Costs from Natural Hazards
Property owners should also assess changes in a broader set of factors that can change as a
result of a large natural disaster. These are usually termed "indirect" effects, but they can
have a very direct effect on the economic value of the owner's building or land. They can be
positive or negative, and include changes in the following:
• Commodity and resource prices
• Availability of resource supplies
• Commodity and resource demand changes
Page 401 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Building and land values
• Capital availability and interest rates
• Availability of labor
• Economic structure
• Infrastructure
• Regional exports and imports
• Local, state, and national regulations and policies
• Insurance availability and rates
Changes in the resources and industries listed above are more difficult to estimate and
require models that are structured to estimate total economic impacts. Total economic
impacts are the sum of direct and indirect economic impacts. Total economic impact
models are usually not combined with economic feasibility models. Many models exist to
estimate total economic impacts of changes in an economy. Decision makers should
understand the total economic impacts of natural disasters in order to calculate the benefits
of a mitigation activity. This suggests that understanding the local economy is an important
first step in being able to understand the potential impacts of a disaster, and the benefits of
mitigation activities.
Additional Considerations
Conducting an economic analysis for potential mitigation activities can assist decision---
makers in choosing the most appropriate strategy for their community to reduce risk and
prevent loss from natural hazards. Economic analysis can also save time and resources from
being spent on inappropriate or unfeasible projects. Several resources and models are listed
on the following page that can assist in conducting an economic analysis for natural
hazard mitigation activities.
Benefit/cost analysis is complicated, and the numbers may divert attention from other
important issues. It is important to consider the qualitative factors of a project associated
with mitigation that cannot be evaluated economically. There are alternative approaches to
implementing mitigation projects. With this in mind, opportunity rises to develop strategies
that integrate natural hazard mitigation with projects related to watersheds, environmental
planning, community economic development, and small business development, among
others. Incorporating natural hazard mitigation with other community projects can increase
the viability of project implementation.
Resources
CUREe Kajima Project, Methodologies for Evaluating the Socio---Economic Consequences of
Large Earthquakes, Task 7.2 Economic Impact Analysis, Prepared by University of California,
Berkeley Team, Robert A. Olson, VSP Associates, Team Leader; John M. Eidinger, G&E
Engineering Systems; Kenneth A. Goettel, Goettel and Associates, Inc.; and Gerald L. Horner,
Hazard Mitigation Economics Inc., 1997
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Benefit/Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation
Projects, Riverine Flood, Version 1.05, Hazard Mitigation Economics, Inc., 1996
Page 402 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report on the Costs and Benefits of Natural
Hazard Mitigation. Publication 331, 1996.
Goettel & Horner Inc., Earthquake Risk Analysis Volume lll: The Economic Feasibility of
Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings in the City of Portland, Submitted to the Bureau of
Buildings, City of Portland, August 30, 1995.
Goettel & Horner Inc., Benefit/Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Projects Volume V,
Earthquakes, Prepared for FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Branch, Ocbober 25, 1995.
Horner, Gerald, Benefit/Cost Methodologies for Use in Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of
Proposed Hazard Mitigation Measures, Robert Olsen Associates, Prepared for Oregon
Military Department — Office of Emergency Management, July 1999.
Interagency Hazards Mitigation Team, State Hazard Mitigation Plan, (Oregon State Police —
Office of Emergency Management, 2000.)
Risk Management Solutions, Inc., Development of a Standardized Earthquake Loss
Estimation Methodology, National Institute of Building Sciences, Volume I and II, 1994.
VSP Associates, Inc., A Benefit/Cost Model for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,
Volumes 1 & 2, Federal Emergency management Agency, FEMA Publication Numbers 227
and 228, 1991.
VSP Associates, Inc., Benefit/Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Projects: Section 404 Hazard
Mitigation Program and Section 406 Public Assistance Program, Volume 3: Seismic Hazard
Mitigation Projects, 1993.
VSP Associates, Inc., Seismic Rehabilitation o f Federal Buildings: A Bene fit/Cost Model,
Volume 1, Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA Publication Number 255, 1994.
Page 403 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
APPENDIX E:
GRANT PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES
Introduction
There are numerous local, state and federal funding sources available to support natural
hazard mitigation projects and planning. The Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
includes a comprehensive list of funding sources (refer to Oregon NHMP Chapter 2 Section
F(1)). The following section includes an abbreviated list of the most common funding
sources utilized by local jurisdictions in Oregon- Because grant programs often change, it is
important to periodically review available funding sources for current guidelines and
program descriptions-
Post-Disaster Federal Programs
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides grants to States and local
governments to implement long---term hazard mitigation measures after a major disaster
declaration. The purpose of the HMGP is to reduce the loss of life and property due to
natural disasters and to enable mitigation measures to be implemented during the
immediate recovery from a disaster. The HMGP is authorized under Section 404 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.
http://www.fema.gov/hazard---mitigation---grant---program
Physical Disaster Loan Program
When physical disaster loans are made to homeowners and businesses following disaster
declarations by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), up to 20% of the loan amount
can go towards specific measures taken to protect against recurring damage in similar
future disasters. http://www.sba.gov/categoryZnavigation—str ucture/loans grants/small
business --loans/disaster---loans
Pre-Disaster Federal Programs
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program
The Pre---Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program provides funds to states, territories, Indian tribal
governments, communities, and universities for hazard mitigation planning and the
implementation of mitigation projects prior to a disaster event. Funding these plans and
projects reduces overall risks to the population and structures, while also reducing reliance
on funding from actual disaster declarations. PDM grants are to be awarded on a
competitive basis and without reference to state allocations, quotas, or other formula---based
allocation of funds. http://www.fema.gov/pre-- disaster---mitigation---grant---program
Page 405 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
The overall goal of the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Program is to fund cost---effective
measures that reduce or eliminate the long---term risk of flood damage to buildings,
manufactured homes, and other National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) insurable
structures. This specifically includes:
• Reducing the number of repetitively or substantially damaged structures and the
associated flood insurance claims;
• Encouraging long---term, comprehensive hazard mitigation planning;
• Responding to the needs of communities participating in the NFIP to expand their
mitigation activities beyond floodplain development activities; and
• Complementing other federal and state mitigation programs with similar, long---term
mitigation goals.
http://www.fema.gov/flood---mitigation---assistance- program
Detailed program and application information for federal post---disaster and pre---disaster
programs can be found in the FY13 Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance, available
at: https://www.fema.gov/media---library/assets/documents/33634. Note that guidance
regularly changes. Verify that you have the most recent edition.
For Oregon Military Department, Office of Emergency Management (OEM) grant guidance
on Federal Hazard Mitigation Assistance, visit:
http://www.oregon.gov/OMD/OEM/pages/all_grants.aspx Hazard_Mitigation_Grants
Contact: Dennis Sigrist, dennis.sigrist @oem-state-or.us
State Programs
Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program
The Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program (SRGP) provides state funds to strengthen public
schools and emergency services buildings so they will be less damaged during an
earthquake. Reducing property damage, injuries, and casualties caused by earthquakes is
the goal of the SRGP. http://www.orinfrastructure.org/Infrastructure---ProgramsjSeismic---
Rehab/
Community Development Block Grant Program
The Community Development Block Grant Program promotes viable communities by
providing: 1) decent housing; 2) quality living environments; and 3) economic opportunities,
especially for low and moderate income persons. Eligible Activities Most Relevant to Hazard
Mitigation include: acquisition of property for public purposes; construction/reconstruction
of public infrastructure; community planning activities. Under special circumstances, CDBG
funds also can be used to meet urgent community development needs arising in the last 18
months which pose immediate threats to health and welfare.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/communityde
velopment/programs
Page 406 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board
While OWEB's primary responsibilities are implementing projects addressing coastal salmon
restoration and improving water quality statewide, these projects can sometimes also
benefit efforts to reduce flood and landslide hazards. In addition, OWEB conducts
watershed workshops for landowners, watershed councils, educators, and others, and
conducts a biennial conference highlighting watershed efforts statewide. Funding for OWEB
programs comes from the general fund, state lottery, timber tax revenues, license plate
revenues, angling license fees, and other sources. OWEB awards approximately $20 million
in funding annually. More information at: http.//www.oregon.gov/OWEB/Pages/index.aspx
Federal Mitigation Programs, Activities & Initiatives
Basic & Applied Research/Development
National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP), National Science
Foundation.
Through broad based participation, the NEHRP attempts to mitigate the effects of
earthquakes. Member agencies in NEHRP are the US Geological Survey (USGS), the National
Science Foundation (NSF), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the
National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). The agencies focus on research and
development in areas such as the science of earthquakes, earthquake performance of
buildings and other structures, societal impacts, and emergency response and recovery.
http://www.nehrp.gov/
Decision, Risk, and Management Science Program, National Science Foundation.
Supports scientific research directed at increasing the understanding and effectiveness of
decision making by individuals, groups, organizations, and society. Disciplinary and
interdisciplinary research, doctoral dissertation research, and workshops are funded in the
areas of judgment and decision making; decision analysis and decision aids; risk analysis,
perception, and communication; societal and public policy decision making; management
science and organizational design. The program also supports small grants for exploratory
research of a time---critical or high---risk,potentially transformative nature.
http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm__summ.jsp?pims__id=5423
Hazard ID and Mapping
National Flood Insurance Program: Flood Mapping; FEMA
Flood insurance rate maps and flood plain management maps for all NFIP communities.
http://www.fema.gov/national---flood---insurance---program---flood---hazard---mapping
National Digital Orthophoto Program, DOI — USGS
Develops topographic quadrangles for use in mapping of flood and other hazards.
http://www.ndop.gov/
Page 407 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Mapping Standards Support, DOI-USGS
Expertise in mapping and digital data standards to support the National Flood Insurance
Program. http://ncgmp.usgs.gov/standards.html
Soil Survey, USDA-NRCS
Maintains soil surveys of counties or other areas to assist with farming, conservation,
mitigation or related purposes. http://soils.usda.gov/survey/printed_surveys/
Project Support
Coastal Zone Management Program, NOAA.
Provides grants for planning and implementation of non---structural coastal flood and
hurricane hazard mitigation projects and coastal wetlands restoration.
http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/
Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Communities Program, US
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Provides grants to entitled cities and urban counties to develop viable communities (e.g.,
decent housing, a suitable living environment, expanded economic opportunities),
principally for low and moderate---in come persons.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/H UD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/communityde
velopment/programs/entitlement
National Fire Plan (DOI — USDA)
The NFP provides technical, financial, and resource guidance and support for wildland fire
management across the United States. Addresses five key points: firefighting, rehabilitation,
hazardous fuels reduction, community assistance, and accountability.
http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/
Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, FEMA
FEMA AFGM grants are awarded to fire departments to enhance their ability to protect the
public and fire service personnel from fire and related hazards. Three types of grants are
available: Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG), Fire Prevention and Safety (FP&S), and
Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER).
http://www.fema.gov/welcome assistance- firefighters grant program
Emergency Watershed Protection Program, USDA-NRCS
Provides technical and financial assistance for relief from imminent hazards in small
watersheds, and to reduce vulnerability of life and property in small watershed areas
damaged by severe natural hazard events.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/main/national/programs/landscape/ewpp
Page 408 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201 5-087
Rural Development Assistance— Utilities, USDA
Direct and guaranteed rural economic loans and business enterprise grants to address utility
issues and development needs.
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/Utilities_Programs_Grants.html
Rural Development Assistance— Housing, USDA.
The RDA program provides grants, loans, and technical assistance in addressing
rehabilitation, health and safety needs in primarily low---income rural areas. Declaration of
major disaster necessary. http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/HAD---HCFPGrants-html
Public Assistance Grant Program, FEMA.
The objective of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Public Assistance
(PA) Grant Program is to provide assistance to State, Tribal and local governments, and
certain types of Private Nonprofit organizations so that communities can quickly respond to
and recover from major disasters or emergencies declared by the President.
http://www.fema-gov/public---assistance---local---state---tribal---and---non---profit
National Flood Insurance Program, FEMA
The NFIP makes available flood insurance to residents of communities that adopt and
enforce minimum floodplain management requirements. http://www.fema.gov/national---
flood—insurance---program
HOME Investments Partnerships Program, HUD
The HOME IPP provides grants to states, local government and consortia for permanent and
transitional housing (including support for property acquisition and rehabilitation) for low---
income persons. http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/programs/home/
Disaster Recovery Initiative, HUD
The DRI provides grants to fund gaps in available recovery assistance after disasters
(including mitigation).
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HU D?src=/program_offices/comm_planning/communityde
velopment/programs/dri
Emergency Management Performance Grants, FEMA
EMPG grants help state and local governments to sustain and enhance their all--hazards
emergency management programs. http://www.fema.gov/fy---2012---emergency-
management---performance---grants---program
Partners for Fish and Wildlife, DOI — FWS
The PFW program provides financial and technical assistance to private landowners
interested in pursuing restoration projects affecting wetlands and riparian habitats.
http://www.fws.gov/partners/
Page 409 of 469- EXHIBIT 13 to RI?SOI,UTION 2015-087
North American Wetland Conservation Fund, DOI-FWS
NAWC fund provides cost---share grants to stimulate public/private partnerships for the
protection, restoration, and management of wetland habitats.
http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/index.shtm
Federal Land Transfer/ Federal Land to Parks Program, DOI-NPS
Identifies, assesses, and transfers available Federal real property for acquisition for State
and local parks and recreation, such as open space.
http:j/www.nps.gov_/ncrc/programs/fp/index.htm
Wetlands Reserve program, USDA-NCRS
The WR program provides financial and technical assistance to protect and restore wetlands
through easements and restoration agreements.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/main/national/programs/easements/wetlands
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, US Forest
Service.
Reauthorized for FY2012, it was originally enacted in 2000 to provide five years of
transitional assistance to rural counties affected by the decline in revenue from timber
harvests on federal lands. Funds have been used for improvements to public schools, roads,
and stewardship projects. Money is also available for maintaining infrastructure, improving
the health of watersheds and ecosystems, protecting communities, and strengthening local
economies. http://www.fs.usda.gov/pts/
Page 410 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Appendix F:
Deschutes County Natural Hazards
Community Survey
Survey Purpose and Use
The purpose of this survey was to gauge the overall perception of natural disasters,
determine a baseline level of loss reduction activity for residents in the community, and
assess citizen's support for different types of individual and community risk reduction
activities.
Data from this survey directly informs the natural hazard planning process. Deschutes
County can use this survey data to enhance action item rationale and ideas for
implementation. Other community organizations can also use survey results to inform their
own outreach efforts. Data from the survey provides the county with a better understanding
of desired outreach strategies (sources and formats), a baseline understanding of what
people have done to prepare for natural hazards, and desired individual l and community
strategies for risk reduction.
Background
In addition to establishing a comprehensive community---level mitigation strategy, the
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K) and the regulations contained in 44 CFR 201
require that jurisdictions maintain an approved NHMP in order to receive federal funds for
mitigation projects. Development of the Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan update process for
Deschutes County was pursued in compliance with subsections from 44 CFR 201.6
guidelines.
Citizen involvement is a key component in the natural hazard mitigation planning process.
Citizens should have the opportunity to voice their ideas, interests and concerns about the
impact of natural disasters on their communities. To that end, the DMA2K requires citizen
involvement in the natural hazard mitigation planning process. It states: "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 disasters, 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."
Page 411 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
According to Bierlel, the benefits of citizen involvement include the following: (1) educate
and inform public; (2) incorporate public values into decision making; (3) substantially
improve the quality of decisions; (4) increase trust in institutions; (5) reduce conflict; and (6)
ensure cost effectiveness.
Methodology
In the fall of 2014, the Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience (OPDR) administered a
survey via an on---line survey that was distributed via the county's emergency manager and
placed on city, county, and special district websites. A total of 234 surveys were completed
out of 389 initiated (60% completion rate).
The survey consisted of 44 questions divided into four sections: natural hazard information,
community natural hazard mitigation strategies and priorities, mitigation and preparedness
activities in your household, and general household information. OPDR designed the survey
to determine public perceptions and opinions regarding natural hazards. Questions also
focused on the methods and techniques survey respondents prefer to use in reducing the
risks and losses associated with natural hazards.
The intent of this survey was not to be statistically valid but instead to gain the perspective
and opinions of resident's regarding natural hazards in the region. Our assessment is that
the results reflect a range attitudes and opinions of residents throughout the county.
Survey Results
This section presents the compiled data and analysis for the 2014 Deschutes County Risk
MAP Public Opinion Survey. We provide a copy of the survey instrument as Attachment A of
this report.
Natural Hazard Information
This section reports the experiences of survey respondents involving natural hazards, and
their exposure to preparedness information.
The survey results indicate that about 55---percent of the respondents or someone in their
household has personally experienced natural disasters in the past five years, see Table F---1
below.
Table F---1:Direct Experience with Natural Disasters in Respondent County
Answer Percent Number
Yes 55% 192
No 45% 156
Total 100% 348
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Bierle,T.1999."Using social goals to evaluate public participation in environmental decisions."
Policy Studies Review. 16(3/4),75---103.
Page 412 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Of those respondents who have experienced a natural disaster in the last five years, 76---
percent experienced winter storms(snow/ice),61---percent experienced wildfire,and 39---
percent experienced windstorms. Table F---2 illustrates the disasters experienced in the past
five years in Deschutes County. In addition to the hazards listed below respondents also
experienced: thunderstorms, hail, and extreme cold weather.
Table F---2:Type of Natural Disaster Experienced in Past Five Years
Percent Number
Winter Storm (Snow/Ice) 76% 146
Wildfire 61% 118
Windstorm 39% 74
Drought 8% 15
Flood 6% 12
Avalanche 2% 4
Dust Storm 2% 3
Earthquake 1% 2
Landslide 1% 1
Volcanic Eruption 0% 0
Other 5% 9
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
The survey asked respondents to rank their personal level of concern for specific natural
disasters affecting their community. Table F---3 shows that the hazards of highest concern for
respondents include wildfires, winter storms, and droughts with roughly 70 to 97---percent of
respondents marking the "very concerned" or "somewhat concerned" choices. To a lesser
degree respondents demonstrated concern over windstorm, earthquake, and volcanic
eruption. Of lesser concern was the flood hazard. Dust Storms, landslides, and avalanches
are the hazards respondents are least concerned about with roughly 85---percent of
respondents marking the "not very concerned" or "not concerned" choices.
Table F---3:Level of Concern About Natural Disasters Affecting Deschutes County
Very Somewhat Not Very Not Total ,
Concerned Concerned Concerned Concerned : Responses Mean
70% 27% 1% 2% 330 1.36
Winter Storm(Snow/Ice) 31% 43% 18% 7% 321 2.02
Drought 27% 43% 16% 13% 314 2.16
Windstorm 11% 41% 33% 15% 317 2.52
Earthquake 10% 37% 35% 18% 318 2.61
Volcanic Eruption 7% 35% 37% 21% 316 2.71
Flood 3% 23% 41% 33% 317 3.04
Dust Storm 1% 14% 40% 44% 307 3.27
Landslide 1% 14% 43% 43% 310 3.28
Avalanche 1% 16% 32% 50% 310 3.32
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
In addition to the concerns listed above respondents also listed the following concerns:
severe lightning storms, extreme cold weather, sinkholes and quicksand, ground water
Page 413 of 469- EXHIBIT U to RESOLUTION 2015-087
shortage, canal and dam breeches, and environmental degradation (forest thinning,
development in forest and EFU zones). Non---natural hazard related concerns include
pandemics, rail/ tanker disasters, animal attacks, and economic disasters,
Next, the survey asked if survey recipients had received information about how to increase
the safety of their households and homes from natural hazards. Table F---4 shows that over
three---fourths(76---percent)of respondents indicated that they have received information
regarding home and family safety from natural disasters at some time in the past.
Table F---4:Respondents Who Have Received Information
Concerning Natural Disaster Home Safety
Answer Percent Number
Yes 76% 257
No 24% 81
Total 100% 338
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Of respondents who had received information, 33---percent received the information within
the last six months and 29---percent received information six months to one year ago (see
Table F---5).This suggests that,while outreach is occurring,it is reaching about two---thirds of
the households in Deschutes County, and that more than one---third of the households have
not received any information in over a year.
Table F---5:Most Recent Date of Contact for Information Concerning Natural
Disaster Home Safety
Percent Number
Within the last 6 months 33% 83
Between 6 and 12 months 29% 74
Between 1 and 2 years 21% 52
Between 3 and 5 years 13% 32
5yearsormore 4% 11
Total 100% 252
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Of the respondents who received information on natural hazard preparedness, government
agencies(63---percent) and the news media (58---percent)were cited most often as being the
source of the information.Table F---6 shows the sources most respondents last received
information from. Eighteen respondents cited non---profit organizations as the source of their
information;the cited non---profits include:
• Community Emergency Response Teams (CERTs),
• Homeowners Association,
• LDS Church,
• Neighborlmpact,
• Neighborhood associations,
• OES (Amateur Radio),
• Private School,
Page 414 of 469- EXHIBIT [3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Rural Fire Protection Districts (RFPDs),
• The Shaken seminar at Tower Theater, and
• Southern Baptist Disaster Team.
Additionally, 23 respondents cited an other resource as the source of their information,
including:
• Emergency Personnel and Agencies,
• Employers,
• Fire Free,
• Friends,
• Individual initiative/On---line research(including 72---hour kits,food and water
information
storage information),
• Lectures,
• Oregon State Defense Force (OSDF),
• Project Wildfire, and
• Work (source of employment related to natural hazards).
For detailed information on survey responses see the "other" comments section at the end
of this report.
Table F---6:Most Recent Provider of Natural Disaster Home Safety Information
Percent Number
Government agency 63% 159
News media 58% 147
Utility company 25% 64
American Red Cross 20% 50
Social media (e.g., Face book, Twitter, etc.) 20% 50
Insurance agent or company 19% 47
Neighbor/friend 14% 36
University or research institution 9% 22
Other nonSprofit organization (please specify): 7% 18
Not Sure 6% 15
Elected official 2% 6
Other(please specify): 9% 23
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Note:Total percentage exceeds 100%because respondents had the option to choose more than one category.
Survey respondents provided an interesting contrast between the sources that they had
recently received information from, and those that they perceived to be the most
trustworthy. Not surprisingly survey respondents held the highest level of confidence in
their own research and knowledge. Respondents had more confidence in local government
(87% some or lots of confidence) than state government (72% some or lots of confidence) or
FEMA (66% some or lots of confidence). Friends (69% some or lots of confidence) were seen
with more confidence than neighbors (51% some or lots of confidence). Local utility
companies were perceived with more confidence (69% some or lots of confidence) than
Page 415 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
national utility companies (36%some or lots of confidence). Table F---7 shows the sources
respondents trust the most for providing this information.
Table F---7:Most Trusted Providers of Information for Natural Disaster Home Safety
Lots of Some Not much No Total
Confidence Confidence Confidence Confidence Don't Know Responses Mean
Yourself 40% 53% 4% 1% 2% 288 1.73
Local Government 29% 58% 11% 1% 1% 295 1.88
State Government 18% 54% 24% 3% 1% 296 2.16
Friend 15% 54% 24% 5% 3% 285 2.27
News media 8% 61% 23% 7% 0% 295 2.31
FEMA 17% 49% 23% 6% 5% 298 2.31
Local Utilities 16% 53% 20% 4% 6% 286 2.31
University or research institution 20% 43% 20% 8% 10% 280 2.46
Neighbor 8% 43% 32% 11% 6% 287 2.64
Insurance agent or company 7% 41% 35% 13% 4% 282 2.66
National Utilities 3% 33% 37% 10% 17% 271 3.04
National NonNprofit(pleasespecify): 18% 9% 15% 2% 55% 128 3.68
LocalNonNprofit(pleasespecify): 13% 14% 9% 4% 60% 128 3.85
Local Community Leaders(please specify): 5% 17% 16% 5% 58% 121 3.94
Elected Official(please specify): 5% 10% 13% 14% 58% 135 4.09
Other(please specify): 11% 5% 6% 3% 74% 62 4.24
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
In addition to the named sources in the table above respondents cited the followed specific
agencies, organization, and resources:
National Non---profits: Local Community Leaders
• American Radio Relay League • County Commissioners
• American Red Cross • Search and Rescue
• Firewise • Sheriff
Local Non---profits; Elected Officials:
• Central Oregon Avalanche • All,
Association, • Governor,
• Central Oregon Land Watch, • Mayor,
• Deschutes Collaborative • Search and Rescue, and
Forest Project, • Sheriff.
• Neighborhood Associations,
• Homeowners Associations,
Other:
• Land Trusts, • County government,
• La Pine Community Kitchen, • Fire department/ rural fire
• Neighborlmpact, protection districts,
• Project Wildfire, • Law enforcement/ search and
• Salvation Army, and rescue,
• Southern Baptist Disaster • Project Wildfire, and
Team (High Desert). • Social Media.
For detailed information on survey responses see the "other" comments section at the end
of this report.
Page 416 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
When asked what the most effective way was to receive information, respondents indicated
that television news (54%), emergency services (52%), fact sheets/ brochures (47%), and
email newsletters (46%) were the most effective. Table F---8 shows the effectiveness rating of
information dissemination methods expressed by survey respondents.
Table F---8:Most Effective Method for Respondents to Receive Information
Concerning Natural Disaster---Related Home Safety
. Percent Number
Television news 54% 164
Emergency services (police/fire) 52% 158
Fact sheet/brochure 47% 143
Email newsletters 46% 139
Newspaper stories 40% 120
Online news outlets 38% 116
Radio news 38% 115
Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) 36% 110
Mail 35% 107
Public workshops/meetings 31% 93
University or research institution 18% 54
Radio ads 16% 48
Schools 15% 44
Television ads 14% 41
Outdoor advertisements (billboards, etc.) 11% 34
Books 10% 29
Newspaper ads 8% 24
Magazine 7% 20
Chamber of Commerce 5% 15
Other (please specify): 8% 24
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Community Vulnerabilities, Natural Hazard Mitigation
Strategies, and Priorities
This section outlines the assets that survey respondents felt would be vulnerable to natural
hazards in the region. The section also describes citizens' priorities for planning for natural
hazards and the community---wide strategies respondents support.
The survey asked respondents to rank categories of community assets in terms of their
vulnerability. These questions were intended to help the county determine citizen priorities
when planning for natural hazards, by comparing the level of importance that they attach to
specific community assets and risk reduction activities. Table F---9 illustrates that respondents
found environmental assets to be by far the most vulnerable (over 94---percent marking "very
vulnerable" or "somewhat vulnerable"), followed by infrastructure related assets (over 83---
percent), and then economic assets (over 86---percent). Human related assets were next
(about 73%). Survey respondents found governance assets to be the fourth most vulnerable
(over 61---percent),followed by cultural/historical assets(over 58---percent).
Page 417 of 469- EXHIBIT [3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table F---9:Respondent Perceptions of Community Vulnerability
Very Somewhat Not Very Not Total
Question Vulnerable Vulnerable Neutral Vulnerable Vulnerable Responses Mean
Environmental"Damage or loss of 68% 26% 5% 1% 0% 291 1.40
forests,rangeland,waterways,etc.
Infrastructure " Damage or loss of
37% 46% 15% 1% 1% 293 1.83
bridges,utilities,schools,etc.
Economic" Business closures and/or
33% 53% 12% 1% 1% 291 1.85
lob ls
Humaosn es"Loss of life and/or injuries 27% 46% 24% 3% 0% 293 2.04
Governance"Ability to maintain order
and/or provide public amenities and 15% 46% 33% 4% 1% 293 7.30
services
Cultural/Historic" Damage or loss of
13% 45% 35% 5% 1% 292 2.36
libraries,museums,fairgrounds,etc.
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Next, the survey asked respondents to indicate the importance that they attach to particular
types of public and private community assets. As shown in Table F---10, respondents
indicated that hospitals (89%), and fire/police stations (83%) are "very important" to them.
In addition,69---percent indicated that schools(K---12), highway mountain passes(65%),and
major bridges (61%) are also "very important" to them. Parks were the least important to
survey respondents, followed closely by museums/historic buildings.
Table F---10: Respondent Community Asset Valuation
Very Somewhat Not Very Not Total
Important Important Neutral Important Important Responses Mean
Hospitals 89% 10% 1% 0% 0% 291 1.12
Fire/Police Stations 83% 16% 1% 0% 0% 290 1.18
Schools (0.12) 69% 22% 8% 1% 0% 290 1.41
Highway Mountain Pass 65% 29% 5% 1% 0% 291 1.43
Major Bridges 61% 30% 7% 2% 0% 288 1.49
Eldercare Facilities 44% 38% 13% 2% 2% 290 1.81
Small Businesses 37% 45% 16% 2% 0% 289 1.83
Major Employers 33% 46% 18% 2% 1% 289 1.93
City Hall/Courthouse 29% 44% 22% 4% 1% 290 2.03
College/University 27% 43% 24% 5% 1% 289 2.10
Museums/Historic Buildings 19% 50% 23% 7% 2% 291 2.22
Parks 27% 34% 27% 8% 4% 291 2.26
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
In addition to the assets listed above respondents also listed the following assets as
important: national forests, recreational assets/ parks/trails, natural environment/ wildlife,
utility infrastructure (electric, water, sewer), private residences, water resources/ aquifer,
jails, roads, tourism, and air quality.
To gauge attitudes towards who should engage in different types of mitigation strategies,
the survey asked respondents to indicate who should be responsible for various mitigation
activities. Table F---11 shows that survey respondents overwhelmingly believe the public
sector should be responsible for mitigating fire/ police stations, major bridges, highway
mountain passes, K---12 schools, and city halls/ courthouses. There is general agreement by
respondents that the public sector should be responsible for mitigating parks, and colleges/
universities. However, respondents are split between believing the public or private sector
Page 418 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLU'T'ION 201 5-087
should be responsible for the mitigation of hospitals, elder---care facilities, and museums/
historic buildings. There is general agreement by respondents that the private sector should
be responsible for the mitigation of major employers and small businesses.
Table F---11:Respondent Preferences for Who Should Mitigate Specific Assets
. Non;Profiit
Organizations •
Public Sector Private Sector Individual (NGOs,Churches, Total
• (Government) (Business) . Citizens Red Cross,etc.) Responses
Fire/Police Stations 97% 1% 1% 1% 275
Major Bridges 95% 4% 1% 1% 274
Highway Mountain Pass 97% 2% 1% 0% 269
Schools (KE12) 90% 3% 3% 4% 285
City Hall/Courthouse 93% 4% 2% 1% 274
Parks 67% 9% 13% 12% 299
College/University 68% 17% 6% 9% 286
Hospitals 42% 46% 2% 10% 297
ElderEcare Facilities 31% 53% 4% 12% 293
Museums/Historic Buildings 27% 27% 13% 33% 300
Major Employers 6% 88% 5% 1% 274
Small Businesses 4% 85% 10% 1% 279
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Note:An error in the report occurred with this question.Prior to January 26,2015 survey respondents were not
allowed to mark multiple choices;the error was resolved on January 26,2015 to allow future respondents to
mark multiple choices.
Additional assets listed by respondents include: recreational assets, natural environment,
private residences/ property, and water resources/ aquifer.
Table F---12 summarizes the results for priorities regarding planning for natural hazards in the
region. The survey then asked respondents to indicate the level of importance they would
place on a number of policies and priorities within their communities. The protection of
critical facilities (e.g. transportation networks, hospitals, fire stations) received the strongest
level of support with 96---percent of respondents finding it to be very important. Similarly,
survey respondents found strengthening emergency services (76%), protecting and reducing
damage to utilities (74%), and promoting cooperation among public agencies, citizens, non---
profit organizations, and businesses (73%) to be very important.
Roughly 60---percent of survey respondents felt that disclosing natural hazard risks during
real estate transactions was very important, while protecting private property was
considered very important by 45---percent of respondents. Preventing development in hazard
areas was considered very important by 48---percent of respondents, and enhancing the
function of natural features (e.g. streams, wetlands) was considered very important by 47---
percent of respondents. Protecting historical and cultural landmarks was the lowest priority
for survey respondents.
Page 419 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table F---12:Respondent Natural Hazard Planning Priorities
Very Somewhat Not Very Not Total
Important Important Neutral Important Important Responses Mean
Protecting critical facilities(e.g.transportation
networks,hospitals,fire stations) 96% 4'%, 0% 0% 0% 275 1.04
Strengthening emergency services(e.g.D
police,fire,ambulance)Protecting
76% 20% 4% 1% 0% 275 1.29
and reducing damage to utilities Promoting 74% 23% 2% 0% 0% 273 1.29
cooperation among public agencies,
citizens,nonDprofit organizations,and 73% 24% 3% 0% 0% 275 1.31
businesses Disclosing
natural hazard risks during real estate
60% 29% 9% 1% 1% 276 1.55
transactions Protecting
private property Preventing 45% 45% 8% 2% 1% 276 1.68
development in hazard areas Enhancing 48% .38% 10% 3% 1% 273 1..72
the function of natural features(e.g.
47% 32% 14% 4% 3% 274 1.83
streams,wetlands)Protecting
historical and cultural landmarks 23% 44% 26% 5% 2% 276 2.18
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Only 15—percent of survey respondents believe that Deschutes County is very prepared to
respond to natural hazards, while 71---percent believe that they are somewhat prepared.
About 15---percent of respondents believe Deschutes County is not very prepared or not
prepared to respond to natural hazards.
Table F---13:Perception of Deschutes County's
Preparedness to Respond to Natural Hazards
Answer Percent Number
Very Prepared 15% 38
Somewhat Prepared 71% 177
Not Very Prepared 12% 30
Not Prepared 2% 4
Total 100% 249
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Just over one---half of survey respondents feel they are somewhat aware of mitigation
activities that Deschutes County is taking to reduce individual risk (life or property) from
natural hazards; over 20---percent believe that they are very aware of such activities.
Table F---14:Aware of Deschutes County's Mitigation Activities
Answer Percent Number
Very Aware 21% 47
Somewhat Aware 51% 116
Not Very Aware 29% 65
Total 100% 228
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Mitigation and Preparedness Activities in your Household
This section provides an overview of household level natural hazard mitigation and
preparedness activities in Deschutes County.
Page 420 of469- I,XHIBI'I' B to RESOL,U"I'ION 2015-087
Over 67---percent percent of respondents reported to have talked with members of their
households about what to do in the case of a natural disaster or emergency. In addition, 48---
percent had prepared a "Disaster Supply Kit" which entails storing extra food, water, and
other emergency supplies,while 56---percent were trained in first aid or CPR during the past
year. About 97---percent of respondents had placed smoke detectors on every level of the
home while almost 60% of respondents reported to have attended meetings or received
information on natural disasters or emergency preparedness, 42% developed a
"Household/Family Emergency Plan," and 25% discussed/created a utility shutoff procedure
in the event of a natural disaster. Figure F---15 summarizes all of the activities that
respondents indicated they have done, plan to do, have not done, or were unable to do to
prepare for natural disasters.
Table F---15:Activities that Respondents Have Done,Plan to Do,Have Not Done,or
are Unable to Do
Unable Total
Have Done Plan to Do Not Done to Da Responses Mean
Prepared your home by having smoke detectors on
each level of the house? 97/ 1 1% o% 272 1.04
Talked with members in your household about what
67% 16% 14% 3% 272 1.52
to do in case of a natural disaster or emergency?
Prepared a Disaster Supply Kit(Stored extra food, 48% 28% 24% 0% 272 1.77
water, batteries,or other emergency supplies)?
Attended meetings or received written information
57% 8% 34% 1% 272 1.79
on natural disasters or emergency preparedness?
Developed a Household/Family Emergency Plan in
order to decide what everyone would do in the 42% 32% 24% 1% 271 1.85
event of a disaster?
In the last year,has anyone in your household been
trained in First Aid or CardioUPulmonary 56% 4% 39% 1% 271 1.85
Resuscitation (CPR)?
Discussed or created a utility shutoff procedure in
the event of a natural disaster? 25% 29% 44% 1% 271 2.21
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural HaLards Survey
General Household Information
Demographic questions provide a statistical overview of the characteristics of the
respondents. This section asked respondents about their primary and secondary residences,
work places, age and gender, level of education, median income, race, ethnicity, and length
of residence in the state of Oregon.
PRIMARY HOME RESIDENCY
Table F---16 lists the zip codes reported by survey respondents,97---percent report their
primary residence to be in Deschutes County. Over 70% survey respondents lived within a
Bend zip code.
Page 421 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table F---16:Respondent Zip Code of Primary Home
Zip Location Number Percent
97701 Bend (North) 89 40.1%
97702 Bend (South) 68 30.6%
97707 Sunriver 10 4.5%
97739 La Pine 10 4.5%
97756 Redmond 22 9.9%
97759 Sisters 21 9.5%
Other D 2 0.9%
Total 222 100%
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Fifty---eight---percent of survey respondents with primary homes in Deschutes County have
lived in the county for 11 years or more, while approximately 25---percent have lived in
Deschutes County for five years or less.
Figure F---1:Length of Deschutes County Residency—Primary Home
40%
35%
35%
30%
25% 23%
20%
20% 18%
15%
10%
5%
5% 1ir'; di, , ti
0% i;a
Less than one 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years 11 to 20 years More than 20
year years
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Respondents most frequently indicated that their primary home is located in the winter
storm (snow/ ice), wildfire, and/or windstorm hazard zones. Respondents were least likely
to report that their primary home was located in the flood, landslide, and/ or avalanche
hazard zones. Respondents listed canal breech, sinkholes, and groundwater table loss as
other zones that their primary home is located within (for a complete list see appendices).
Page 422 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure F---2:Respondent Perception of Hazard Zones---Primary Home Location
Winter Storm(Snow/Ice)
Windstorm .. a, ,,,
Volcanic[rupAon
Earthquake eM. „ ,., .
Dust Storm
Landslide
Avalanche
Other
0 50 100 150 200 250
Number of Responses
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
The land area covered by the floodwaters of the base flood is the Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA). The SFHA is the area where the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP's)
floodplain management regulations must be enforced and the area where the mandatory
purchase of flood insurance applies.Table F---17 indicates that only one---percent of
respondents report that their primary home is located within the SFHA; however, 22---
percent of respondents were not aware if their home was located within the SFHA. Of those
that responded that their homes were in the SFHA, two of the three had flood insurance
policies for their primary residences.
Table F---17:Primary Residence Located in SFHA
Answer Percent Number
Yes 1% 3
No 77% 204
Don't Know 22% 59
Total 100% 266
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act defines the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) as an area
within the zone of transition between unoccupied land and human development that is at---
risk of wildfire. Deschutes County identifies WUI areas within Community Wildfire
Protection Plans (CWPPS). Table F---18 indicates that almost 40%of respondents are aware
Page 423 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
that their home is within a WUI (note: the question did not provide a "don't know"
response).
Table F---18:Primary Residence Located in WUI
Answer Percent Number
Yes 38% 62
No 62% 101
Total 100% 163
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Cleaning your property of debris and maintaining your landscaping are important first steps
to minimize damage and loss due to wildfire. Respondents who had their primary residence
located within a WUI most commonly cleared leaves and other debris from gutters, eaves,
porches, and decks (92%), disposed of lawn clippings and other vegetated debris from lawns
and planting areas (91%), removed dead vegetation (88%), and/ or kept lawn hydrated and
mowed (87%). Respondents were less likely to have screened or boxeF---in areas below patios
and decks (34%).
Table F---19:Primary Residence Defensible Space Techniques
Percent Number
Clear leaves and other debris from gutters,eaves,porches,and decks. 92% 237
Dispose of lawn clippings and other vegetated debris from lawns and planting arm. 235
Remove dead vegetation from under deck and/or from within 10 feet of
88% 226
house.
Keep lawn hydrated and maintained(mowed). 87% 224
Remove stored items from under decks or porches. 75% 192
Inspect shingles and roof tiles and replace/repair those that are loose or 73% 187
missing.
Prune trees so lowest branches are 6 to 10 feet from the ground. 67% 171
Enclose underOeave and soffit vents or screen with metal wire mesh to prevent 52% 134
ember entry.
Remove flammable materials(firewood stacks,propane tanks,dry vegetation) 52% 133
from within 30 feet of your home and outbuildings(garages,sheds).
Cover exterior attic vents with metal wire mesh to prevent sparks from
51% 131
entering home.
Screen or boxOin areas below patios and decks metal with wire mesh to
34% 88
prevent debris and combustible materials from accumulating.
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS:PRIMARY HOME IN DESCHUTES COUNTY
Homeownership is an important variable in education and outreach programs, and
knowledge of the percentage of homeowners in a community can help target the programs.
Additionally, homeowners might be more willing to invest time and money in making their
homes more disaster resistant. Almost 90---percent of survey respondents that have a
primary home in Deschutes County are homeowners.
Page 424 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table F---20:Ownership—Prima ry Home
Answer • . Percent Number
Own 88% 231
Rent 12% 31
Total 100% 262
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Ninety---percent of survey respondents who have a primary home in Deschutes County live in
single family homes, 5---percent live in manufactured homes,and one---percent in apartments;
the other four---percent live in duplexes, condo/townhouses, or some other form of housing
(responses for"other" include apartment within a single---family home, and a barn).
Table F---21:HousingType—Primary Home
Housing Type Percent Number
Single'family home 90% 246
Duplex 1% 2
1%Apartment in a 3 to 4 unit structure 1/0 3
Apartment in a 5 or more unit structure 0% 1
Condominium/Townhouse 1% 3
Manufactured home 5% 15
Other: 1% 3
Total 100% 273
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
SECONDARY/VACATION HOME RESIDENCY
Approximately seven---percent of survey respondents own a secondary/vacation home in
Deschutes County. Table F---22 shows the zip codes for the respondents' secondary/vacation
homes; the majority of these residences are within Bend.
Table F---22:Respondent Zip Code of Secondary Home
Zip Location Number Percent
97701 Bend (North) 7 41.2%
97702 Bend (South) 4 23.5%
97707 Sunriver 1 5.9%
97739 La Pine 0 0.0%
97756 Redmond 4 23.5%
97759 Sisters 1 5.9%
Total 17 100%
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Almost seventy---five---percent of survey respondents with secondary homes in Deschutes
County reported owning that home for 10 years or less; while approximately five---percent
have owned their secondary home for 20 years or more.
Page 425 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure F---3:Length of Deschutes County Ownership—Secondary Home
40% 37% 37%
35%
30%
25% 21%
20%
15%
10%
i �- 5%
5% ylt� ',li:i 4'
0%O%
Less than one 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years 11 to 20 years More than 20
year years
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Respondents most frequently indicated that their secondary home is located in the winter
storm, volcanic eruption, and/ or earthquake hazard zones. Respondents were less likely to
report that their secondary home was located in the flood, landslide, or avalanche hazard
zones.
Figure F---4:Respondent Perception of Hazard Zones•--Secondary Home Location
Winter Storm(Snow/Ice) :r ,,..—
VolcanicErupDon „ .,w,,.,. ,WW. ,ti,.,
Earthquake „.P, ,ig..a a ,
Drought
Wildfire
Dust Storm
Flood ,,,,,,n,,,,,,..
Landslide
Avalanche
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Number of Responses
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Page 426 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
The land area covered by the floodwaters of the base flood is the Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA). The SFHA is the area where the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP's)
floodplain management regulations must be enforced and the area where the mandatory
purchase of flood insurance applies. Table F---23 indicates that none of the respondents
report that their secondary/vacation home is located within the SFHA; however, 37---percent
of respondents were not aware if their home was located within the SFHA.
Table F---23:Secondary/Vacation Residence Located in SFHA
Answer Percent Number
Yes 0% 0
No 63% 12
Don't Know 37% 7
Total 100% 19
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act defines the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) as an area
within the zone of transition between unoccupied land and human development that is at---
risk of wildfire. Deschutes County identifies WUI areas within Community Wildfire
Protection Plans (CWPPs). Table F---24 indicates that none of respondents are aware that
their home is within a WUI (note: the question did not provide a "don't know" response).
Table F---24:Secondary/Vacation Residence Located in WUI
Answer Percent Number
Yes 0% 0
No 100% 3
Total 100% 3
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Cleaning your property of debris and maintaining your landscaping are important first steps
to minimize damage and loss due to wildfire. Respondents who had their secondary/
vacation residence located within a WUI most commonly cleared leaves and other debris
from gutters, eaves, porches, and decks (100%), removed dead vegetation (100%), and/ or
removed flammable materials from within 30 feet of the residence (86%). Respondents
were less likely to have enclosed under---eave and soffit vents (14%).
Page 427 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOI,U'IION 2015-087
Table F---25:Secondary/Vacation Residence Defensible Space Techniques
Percent Number
Clear leaves and other debris from gutters,eaves,porches,and decks_ 100% 7
Remove dead vegetation from under deck and/or from within 10 feet of
100% 7
house.
Remove flammable materials(firewood stacks,propane tanks,dry vegetation)
86% 6
from within 30 feet of your home and outbuildings(garages,sheds).
Prune trees so lowest branches are 6 to 10 feet from the ground. 71% 5
Keep lawn hydrated and maintained(mowed). 71% 5
Inspect shingles and roof tiles and replace/repair those that are loose or 71% 5
missing.
Remove stored items from under decks or porches. 57% 4
Dispose of lawn clippings and other vegetated debris from lawns and planting
57% 4
areas.
Cover exterior attic vents with metal wire mesh to prevent sparks from 43% 3
entering home.
Screen or boxNin areas below patios and decks metal with wire mesh to 29% 2
prevent debris and combustible materials from accumulating.
Enclose underNeave and soffit vents or screen with metal wire mesh to prevent
14% 1
ember entry.
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS:SECONDARY HOME IN DESCHUTES COUNTY
Nearly two---thirds of survey respondents with a secondary home indicate that they lease
their home for either short or Iong---term periods.
Table F---26:Lease(short or long)Secondary Home
Answer Percent Number
Yes 63% 12
No 37% 7
Total 100% 19
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Of those that lease their secondary home 75---percent indicate that they do not use the
services of a property management company to manage their rental arrangements.
Table F---27:Secondary Home Rental Managed
by a Property Management Company
Answer Percent Number
Yes 25% 3
No 75% 9
Total 100% 12
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
The majority of secondary homes of survey respondents are single family home (74%);
"other" types include ranch homes/ acreage and rustic cabins.
Page 428 of469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table F---28:Housing Type—Secondary Home
Housing Type Percent Number
Single'family home 74% 14
Duplex 0% 0
Apartment in a 3 to 4 unit structure 0% 0
Apartment in a 5 or more unit structure 0% 0
Condominium/Townhouse 11% 2
Manufactured home 5% 1
Other: 11% 2
Total 100% 19
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
PRIMARY WORKPLACE LOCATION
Eighty---percent of survey respondents work in Deschutes County.
Table F---29:Respondent Zip Code of Primary Workplace
Answer Percent Number
Yes 80% 213
No 20% 54
Total 100% 267
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Of those that responded that they work in Deschutes County over 80---percent reported that
their primary workplace is in Bend.
Table F---30:Respondent Zip Code of Primary Workplace
Zip Location Number Percent
97701 Bend (North) 136 63.3%
97702 Bend (South) 37 17.2%
97707 Sunriver 5 2.3%
97739 La Pine 4 1.9%
97756 Redmond 15 7.0%
97759 Sisters 16 7.4%
Other C 2 0.9%
Total 215 100%
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Respondents most frequently indicated that their primary workplace is located in the winter
storm (snow/ ice), windstorm, and/or wildfire hazard zones. The flood, landslide, and
avalanche hazard zones were the least likely to be reported as a zone that their primary
workplace was located within. Other zones reported by respondents include the sinkhole
and groundwater loss hazard areas.
Page 429 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Figure F---5:Respondent Perception of Hazard Zones---Primary Workplace Location
9 g ,
Winter Storm(Snow/Ice) a �, ..u..,,.,,y,,,,�.:,,:w;�; ,...,,,�,,w,ct.�, ..�;,; ,�w >w,�p.�,u.,x,a
Wildfire Volcanic tea,,,„lr:.' , , :,: .44 e :
Earthquake .;mac,
Drought .:..... . ........ .....a.,, ,F,
Dust Storm ...,.>,.,.n,........ ,
Landslide
Other
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Number of Responses
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
AGE AND GENDER
Table F---31 shows the age range of survey respondents. Fifty---five percent of survey
respondents were between the ages of 45 to 64.
Table F---31:Age of Survey Respondents
Answer Percent Number
18 or under 0% 0
19to24 2% 5
25to34 10% 21
35 to 44 19% 41
45 to 54 26% 56
55 to 64 29% 63
65 or over 13% 29
Total 100% 215
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Table F---32 displays the gender of survey respondents;women accounted for 53---percent of
the sample.
Page 430 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Table 1---32:Gender ofSurvey Respondents
Answer Percent Number
47%Male 47/0 100
Female 53% 112
Total 100% 212
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
LEVEL OF EDUCATION
Survey respondents varied in terms of levels of education. More than 50---percent of survey
respondents reported having a bachelor's degree or higher; 35---percent had some college/
trade school or an associates degree.
Table F---33: Level of Education
Answer Percent Number
Not a high school graduate 0% 0
High school graduate/GED 4% 8
Some college/trade school 22% 48
Associates degree 13% 27
Bachelor's degree 35% 76
Master's degree or higher 25% 54
Other (please specify): 1% 3
Total 100% 216
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
About six---percent of respondents had household incomes of less than$35,000, 35---percent
had incomes from$35,000---$74,999,25---percent had incomes between$75,000---$99,999,
while just over 33---percent had incomes of$100,000 or more.
Table F---34: Household Income
Answer Percent Number
Less 1%
3
than 15 ess t a $ ,000 1%
$15,000 to $34,999 5% 11
$35,000 to $74,999 35% 72
$75,000 to $99,999 25% 51
$100,000 to $199,999 28% 57
$200,000 or more 5% 10
204
100%
Total
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Page 431 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
RACE AND ETHNICITY
Ninety---five---percent of survey respondents specified white as their race;of those that
replied,only 9(roughly five---percent)specified a race other than white.Table F---35 presents
the results.
Table F---35: Respondent Race
Answer Percent Number
White 95% 200
Black or African American 0% 1
American Indian or Alaskan Native 1% 2
Asian 0% 0
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0% 1
Some other race 0% 1
Other(please specify): 2% 5
Total 100% 210
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
With respect to ethnicity,just two---percent of survey respondents self identified as Hispanic
or Latino, whereas US Census figures suggest that the number should be higher for the
county; nearly 8---percent of the population in the county is reported as Hispanic or Latino.
Table F---36: Respondent Ethnicity
Answer Percent Number
Hispanic or Latino 2% 4
Not Hispanic or Latino 98% 191
Total 100% 195
Source:2015 Deschutes County Natural Hazards Survey
Page 432 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Written Responses to Open-Ended Questions
This section includes the transcripts of respondent answers when checking the "other"
option provided in some questions. In addition, we've included comments provided by
respondents at the end of the survey_
Question 2: Which of the following natural hazards have you or someone in your household
experienced during the past five years? Other:
• Thunder storm • Winter Storm---cold
• '---38 freezing • snow avalanche 9 years ago
• Hail Damage • Evacuation due to wildfire
• Severe Hail storm • thunder storm
• extreme cold, blizzard
Question 3: Please indicate your level of concern about the following natural disasters
affecting Deschutes County? Other:
• Cascadia • reckless thinning of forests
• Under "Earthquake" my rather than burns
concern is effects of a quake on • County wanting more
the Cascadia Subduction Zone development in Forest and rural
• Severe Lightning Storm EFU zones
• Zombie Apocalypse • overuse of water
• Rail/tanker disaster • Pandemic
• Wild animal attack • Ground water shortage
• economic disaster • Prineville dam breech
• Canal breech • Hailstorm
• cold • Not enough attention to catch
• Sinkholes arsonists
• quicksand
Question 5: From whom have you received information about how to make members of
your household and your home safer from natural disasters? Other:
• On line research for 72 hour • firefighter in household knows
emergency kits and long term of safety concerns
food and water storage for • Project Wildfire
extended need • Sunriver Police & Fire
• employer • Community organization
• friend • FireFree
• Sunriver Home Owners • HOA
• OSDF---OregonStateDefense • I read a lot and observe.
Force • work
• lectures • homeowners assn
• Desch Co SO • fire dept
• Lane County
Page 433 of469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• Friend • Fire Depatment
• self, I am a medical and • retired 45 yrs USES
disaster professional
• Work
Question 5:Other Non---profit Organization:
• Neighborhood Association • Private school
• CERT • Internet self---research
• Rural FPD • Southern Baptist Disaster Team
• Neighborlmpact • Homeowner's assn
• Shaken seminar at Tower • LDS Church
Theatre • Local HOA
• Dept. of Forestry • Red cross
• Bend Police Dept. • OES (Amateur radio)
• RED CROSS • Orchard District Neighborhood
• fema website Association
Question 6: How much confidence do you have in the following entities regarding their
ability to provide you with information about how to make your household and home safer
from natural disasters? Other:
• Local government, county not • Local Fire Department
city • Social Media
• Rural FPD • president
• There are a variety of prep • Project Wildfire
resources and networks • Sunriver Police & Fire
available that really get detailed • Self---studyvia internet search
about the nuts and bolts of results
disaster preparedness • GIS entreprenuers
• law encorcement/search and • my dad
rescue
Question 6:National Non---profit:
• American • ARC • Am Red
Red Cross • red cross Cross
• American • Red Cross • NOAA
Red Cross • Red Cross • Red Cross
• Red Cross • Public • Red Cross
• American Healthy • Red Cross
Red Cross Department • Red Cross
• Red Cross • Red Cross • Red Cross,
• Red Cross • Am red Cross CDC
• Red Cross • red cross • red cross
• red cross • Red Cross • Red Cross
Page 434 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• red cross • American • American
• Red cross Red Cross Red Cross,
• ARRL Firewise
Question 6:Local Non---profit:
• Neighborhood Association • Central Oregon LandWatch
• Mtn River Red Cross • LaPine Community Kitchen
• American Red Cross • Forest Service
• American RED CROSS • Dept. of Forestry
• Neighbor Impact • Red Cross
• SAlvation Army • ARC
• red cross • CAP
• Red Cross • Deschutes Collaborative Forest
• Southern Baptist Disaster Team, Project
High Desert • Project Wildfire
• Homeowners assn • Fire dept
• red cross • Neighborhood Association
• Central Oregon Avalance • Land Trust
Association
Question 6: Local Community Leaders:
• Search and • Sheriff • fire dept &
Rescue • Mayor Ken odf
• County Mulenex • Neighborhoo
Commisioner • Bend Police d Assoc.
s Dept. • Cindy & Bill
• County • Various Rainey
Commiss • Forest • Church
• search and Service • Police
rescue • Sheriffs
• all Office
Question 6: Elected Officials:
• govenor • Sheriff's • Walden
• all Dept. • Greg Walden
• Search and • County • Deschutes
Rescue Commissione County
• Mayor? rs Sheriff
• governer • Council • Deschutes
• Mayor meetings Sheriff's
• Sheriff • sheriff Dept
• City of Bend • County • County
Mayor Commissione Commissione
• mayor rs r
Page 435 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• City Council • City
• Sheriff Councilor
Question 7: What are the most effective ways for you to receive information about how to
make your household and home safer from natural disasters? Other:
• Online, not • Local • Website
for profit experts, • Neighborhoo
• Online engineers, d Association
disaster prep etc. • search and
forums and • Jack Cohen rescue
websites • websites • Fairs
• community • Home Shows • Mobile
involvement • HOA Phone App
• online • Email alerts • work Email
websites for • Fire as I work for
emergency Department local
preparednes • websites government
s from a • text alert • Internet/Loc
respected system al News
agency would be Website
• Trusted web-- very handy! • Sirius/XM
sites • TV ads on
• CERT Trainng Hulu
Question 9: Next we would like to know what specific types of community assets are most
important to you. (Check the corresponding box for each asset) Other:
• national forest • jail
• Recreational assets (economic • Major roads
driver) • Natural, environmentally
• Natural Environment sensitive areas already stressed
• Utility Company Infrastructure from population
• Healthy forests • Wildlife, this should be in Q#8
• private residences also
• Fresh WATER SOURCES • groundwater table
• Sewer and water utilities • Recreational trail networks
• Aquafer---Ground water • major highways and collectors
• local parks for evacuations
• jails • land closures/gridlock to rivers,
• Water resources • courthouses
• roads • Wildlife
• Potential evacuation routes are • utilities(water,sewer,electric)
very limited here • Forestland, tourism, air quality
Page 436 of 469- EXI IIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Question 10: Now we would like to know whom you think should be responsible for
mitigating the impacts from natural hazards on specific types of community assets. Other:
Note: An error in the report occurred with this question. Prior to January 26, 2015 survey
respondents were not allowed to mark multiple choices; the error was resolved on January
26, 2015 to allow future respondents to mark multiple choices.
• Recreational assets • survey broken can't check
• Natural Environment multiple boxes
• This is not allowing multiple • this page will not allow multiple
choices answers
• I couldn't check more than one • Form would not let me actually
box so please decline entire check more than one box---
page impact mitigation should be
• private residences shared in appropriate
• MOST ASSETS ARE circumstances.
• Playgrounds for Children • jail
• private property/homes • Environmental assets
• Aquafer---Ground Water • multiples not allowed
• impossible to check more than • SDC for emergency mgmt
one box! • groundwater table
• all should be responsible. was • SHARED RESPONSIBILITY
unable to " check multiple • Dog Parks
boxes" • public land fuel hazards
• multiple boxes can not be • arsonists need to be fined
checked
Question 18: Is your primary home located in any of the following hazard zones within
Deschutes County? Other:
• Zombie Apocalypse • blocked North/South highway
• Canal breech corridor---from Train/Hazard
• Sinkholes mat'Is shipped on rail
• groundwater table loss
Question 23: Please tell us your primary home type? Other:
• apartment within a single • barn
family home
Question 28: Is your secondary/ vacation home located in any of the following hazard zones
within Deschutes County? Other:
• Sinkholes
Question 33: Please tell us your secondary/ vacation home type? Other:
• ranch/acreage • rustic cabin
Page 437 of 469- EXIIIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Question 38: Is your primary workplace located in any of the following hazard zones
within Deschutes County? Other:
• sinkholes • groundwater loss
Question 41: Please indicate your highest level of education: Other:
• Doctor
• Keep commercial development in commercial zones, ie.e. not in rural EFU zones
Question 43: Please specify your race: Other:
• human
• american
• mixed caucasian, native
american
• Caucasian
Page 438 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Additional Comments
We received the following comments in response to the "Please feel free to provide any
additional comments in the space provided" box at the end of the survey.
Note: An error in the report occurred with question 10. Prior to January 26, 2015 survey
respondents were not allowed to mark multiple choices; the error was resolved on January
26, 2015 to allow future respondents to mark multiple choices.
• Question 10 claimed to allow for multiple boxes to be checked to indicate shared
responsibility. Unfortunately, they were radio buttons, not check boxes, so I was
unable to do that, which to my mind makes the answers I gave less accurate than
they might have been.
• Where the survey stated that multiple choices could be marked, the survey would
not allow.
• Question 10 did not allow multiple choices as indicated. This affected my responses.
• Not able to check multiple boxes when directions indicated it was possible.
• This is another waste of tax payer money
• Question no. 10 did not allow for multiple selections as instructed. Therefore, I was
not able to mark all that I felt applied. I think a lot of what no. 10 covered applies to
multiple parties (gov't, small business and especially individual citizens). Please
make that note. Thanks!
• On question 10, "Whom you think should be responsible for mitigating the impacts
from natural hazards..." your instructions mention "check multiple boxes if you
consider it to be a shared responsibility" however your form was built with radio
buttons rather than check---boxes, so multiple selection is not allowed.
• In question #10, I was unable to choose more than one answer. The survey was
thought---provoking; I wrote down a few steps that my family needs to discuss.
Thanks for the reminders.
• During the fire last year here in bend, our combined county folks did a wonderful
job keeping us all update by several media outlets. Kudos to Deschutes County.
• Thanks for asking for input
• The area of the test where you asked to identify responsibilities of different parts of
the community it was suggested that if the responsibility is shared that you click
multiple boxes but the survey did not allow me to do this.
• "Thank you! ! "
• "Question #10 does not allow for checking multiple boxes to indicate more than one
entity is responsible.
• My answers may be a bit skewed as a federal wildland firefighter retiree of 34 years
specializing in fire prevention and assessing homes in the WUI.
• Get the Congress to quit raiding wildland fire prevention funds to fight fires that
should have been prevented, or at least prevented from becoming so large due to
neglectful forestry practices.
• My spouse and I are retired/on disability, so do not work in Deschutes County. We
have participated in the Fire Free Program. We live in Romaine Village which is an
urban interface area. A lot of the Bend city area is heavily forested, and considered
urban interface. We get extremely nervous when forest fires get close to the city."
• Unable to check more than one box for the questions that say it can be done."
Page 439 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 201.5-087
• No information was provided about natural hazards during the purchase of my
home last year. The house is located near the Two Bulls fire area.
• Survey is broken. One questions suggests you click multiple boxes to indicate
shared responsibilities. The survey was designed with radio buttons, which does not
allow it.
• "I lived in Alaska (for 30 years) until I moved here in 2009. I learned a lot about
hazard mitigation there, for avalanche, winter storms, earthquakes, wildfires and
volcanic eruptions. Although I am not living directly in an active volcano area, the
ash would most likely affect this area if there were an eruption nearby. That can
significantly effect people with chronic respiratory problems, as well as healthy
people, if it gets into lungs and eyes,
• BTW, the page that asks who should be responsible for hazard mitigation (public,
private sector, individuals, non profits) does not allow multiple answers to the same
item. I would have put multiple responsibilities if possible, as I believe that we
should all pitch in and help before, during and after a disaster, if we are able."
• It appears to me that Deschutes County is more interested in immediate economic
development at the expense of long term protection of natural resources. Water
supply and global warming are going to have devastating long term effects for
future generations if they are not addressed now for the long term. We can't
expect to keep on using and using and ecouraging development that continues to
use these resources and then expect some magic wand to get us out of crisis many
years down the road.
• "Living on the SW side of Bend on the east side of the river, we are concerned with
evacuation procedures should there be a wildfire. South of us it is very dense,
combustible woods. There are very few roads out of this area. Hwy 97 has a cement
strip down the middle of it making it so that cars can only turn south and from very
few roads. If I wildfire came through here it seems like it could be a mass disaster,
potentially with lives lost, as cars jammed up unable to vacate the area.
• With roadwork happening through the summer necessitating detours on
Brookswood, it could potentially even be worse this coming fire season.
• We would like more education and information for people living in this area about
how an evacuation would happen if necessary.
• Thanks, Tim & Susan Higdon"
• retired .... household of 1
• "After being evacuated for 3 days from my home in SW Bend during the Awbrey Hall
fire, I have made certain to fireproof my property which has 30 ponderosas n a half
acre and to remind new neighbors to do so also. I have prepared an emergency kit
and list and revise both periodically.
• One problem that worries me is the HWY 97 barrier south of town that limits
evacuation routes from my neighborhood at the east end of Ponderosa Street.
Eventually, the frontage road and Murphy extension should alleviate that problem
but who knows how long that will take. "
• Retired
• "Deschutes County is pushing for more development irregardless of your topics
above.
• I think there is a systems disconnect because of this.
Page 440 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• For instance, the County approves new homes right along the Deschutes River in
proximity to wintertime freeze/ and wintertime high water---which well be seeing
more of with global warming.
• Additionally, Deschutes County is pushing to legitimize more development in Forest
and EFU zones (places that were platted prior to land use laws) this places more
people in rural areas where there are neither County maintained roads or
fire/emergency management services ---this is dumb.
• Deschutes County does maintain rural roads since 2008 ! think about where growth
is occuring and who is footing the transportation bill.
• Additionally Deschutes County keeps revving up to add more commercial human
population visiting rural farmlands where there is no emergency evacuation plan,
and where agricultural buildings are used for hosting commercial events. (Large
Outdoor Mass Gatherings, Outdoor Mass Gatherings, Vineyards hosting all things
commercial, Weddings, ) These agricultural buildings are not designed for human
fire/life needs, and wells that furnish these rural farm places are not set up for gpm
pumping in the event a fire is needing to be put out by water.
• I suggest that your UofO smart planners engage with Deschutes County to give
some smart planning tips that growth and development should occur where there is
infrastructure and transportation meaning in the Cities and not spread across and
dotting and sprawling across the countryside.
• Thanks"
• "I would like to know how to receive instructions from disaster managers in the
event of any kind of public emergency. I've lived in areas where various hazards
were routine, both natural and manmade, and there were sirens, emergency
broadcasts, and a saturation of instructions about what to do if we heard the sirens
as well as dedicated shelter locations. In Deschutes County, there are none of these
precautions that I know of. We can use common sense, which we have done, to plan
what to do in case of loss of electricity in a winter storm, but that's about the extent
of our disaster planning. We live in a location that could easily fall victim to wildfire,
but we have no instruction about what to do in fact a bordering property
experienced a structure fire a couple of years ago, in the middle of summer, in
drought conditions, that spread rapidly towards us and all we did was spray the
property line to deter spreading to our property, but it was pitifully inadequate and
when firemen arrived, they were so busy with the actual fire that we didn't even
expect to get any information from them. We have no official word about what to
do in the unlikely but possible event of earthquake or volcano activity. How would
we know if our water is safe? Where would we go if we were in danger? I realize
that natural and man---made disasters are thankfully rare in Deschutes County, but it
might be prudent to consider some of these things before the fact. Pm not a fan of
meetings, which invariably tend to be dominated by a handful of people who imagine
their comments to be invaluable. However, printed material made available
to all citizens, with a contact number to answer questions would be really helpful.
And this survey is an excellent idea.
• There is a lot more restoration work that needs to happen in the Deschutes National
Forest to make the surrounding communities safer. Helping facilitate this process
and broader understanding of this need among community members is crucial!
Page 441 of 469- EXHIBIT 1-3 to RESOLUTION 2015-087
• this is a very long survey with no indication anywhere of where one is in terms of
finishing it... Adn if you want my phone number in a specific format, why not set up
tdhe survey form to input it that way?
• one of the major risks to our natural assets is uncontrolled property development,
especially it's impact on surface and groundwater supplies (not to mention
untilities). this is a case of human---made conditions actually creating a hazard."
• "We own two homes and spend 6 months in each property. One home is in
Deschutes County. Fire is our primary concern; wind damage is a secondary
concern. volcanic eruption is another possible hazard. We are not worried by
earthquake hazard.
Another concern that is not listed in your survey is the health hazard caused by natural fires
and those set off by the Forest Service. These have been a major irritation in recent
summers in Sisters."
Page 442 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
Attachment A - Deschutes County
Public Opinion Survey
Page 443 of 469- EXHIBIT B to RESOLUTION 2015-087
4d
a.
CZ.
y
ii
1 -C m
c n--- ..—. --- o_ -5 n < cu
O O
czt ;,j E) C O "a N C _c 7,
co
c. 1 -L...:... -tt N ._ to a o a) C a)
�✓•'"". LL CO c LB 5 O @ ° p N •> O X
( "�f C Y N N O- Y 2 N
1 -'✓.1.
7.) •. O to T U CZ
z.
H Q 7. C .o co `� -° 7
c ° _ C @ C E rn ) 2
O O O -O E .Q 0 r C
U C 0 Y@ `O co a) c u, o
E @ co•C N _C •Q' - C = a)
Q ° >,
_c Cl) m
LLl U co •- 1— 'a O p_ j, 7 N
ca lL N C @ V) @ Q U C T .�.�
lc-
U -p m p a) r@ Q N 0
F C C O) C > '— E N a) O
C aI @ Q)) ._ Q) O 7 0 p E
cd C O a
Q Cl.) tpo O >, 4I O
C T p -c ° N 7. 0. 0 O
s a) E C C s N a)
E C O to p C
[1
@ � @ 3 C CP N
to f0 " ° 7
O
O O � CO CO _c 0
N N D -• "O
c V @ co 11:1 O
U) p U) U C @ o C--
E ui E p 0 E o0
LL1 p 7 a) j Q to •g U p O
O •— U) C N t
@ a) T O C O` "O LU a) a) C n Lu a) N N N Q- C C Ts tS ._
O rn ±.. m .� @ a C C "co •C N
•= 0. m = E 3 ? C co Z
i p CL ° U z
" co r C CI) o a)0 o a N O § U)
rnD m U u 0)) - ° a) 2 Q '- - O
co v)
C O ... C N -o 12 a) m U co ce m
C �. v N N L ° 0 >, 3 W
t = •f1 = 0 co C C = ll. a) c gX
Y d N N a N .0 O ? ,� v) O
p N c 0 - O w " 7 7 O s co
m >-. .— a) Q`) C Q U ++ N 7. Q Q j E^
•C a) a m , ° _ 'a v N CO
O Uw -a d m °. 7, .5w a) = 2 0, m =
N N Q) C N to M C@ d cI) J C N
a) a) @ V) @ a) = to @ i>C
(� -Q 7 Iv - cr @ ❑ 0 O tX 0 o N w
N ❑ N to 7 s c O „ j H O r
co ❑ ° c i- C ap.). > N @ E Z r C t+.
O
0
L CI
a
ri-
r
ti u
o tA
cd
c
C1
C.
VD
VD
CA
U
TO
d
/
/
\
$
{
3
\
o
/ o
\ / 2
a.0- ± 0
‹ o
0 C 8
\ \ \ c
\ f ƒ 0 §
9
_ [ E \
\ ® .. .. U k
S # ) m 5 2
\ \ \ \ 0 0 CO
s \ 0 fk
o \ c
( o co z /
/ / as
2 a) \
o
m = a =
§ §
E
% - 0 0
/ m 0 Io
-
>, 1 0
r-
© / .§ co
} 2 / CO g c
f ƒ / > \ o §
co co c \
E 0 /
_ 4 / O
\ ( >
f g Q
3 9
f Q. \
° o
o / 0 / m
/ U 0 0
0 = 0 0
0 t 0, S » E
° / 0 ƒ E § m
qo 0 CO 7 $ e [ I m [ 0 7 CO k
\ m % k \ ƒ co \ - ° k ® ± a a a
E . 2 3 k 6 c _ # § - » k 6 Q
hi a) k 6 = & m G 2 t $ c # _ _
& \ w \ 0 2 7 = 2 > k \ 3 3
\
/ u
7 /
o
\
ƒ
/
$
%
/
7 I
=
\ # E
/ -
e C % /
0. E CO /
0. o m -
§ ƒ E /
/ \ 0 E
\ a) § 2
n- E >_ 4 \
= -0 y
\ \ \ \
/ _ ƒ \ F m a
3 C 03 ° 2
Ls) $ ) ^ }
- 0 / u / ) Z 0
t g
0 0
0 _ 0
\ Jo /
V.
0 E c o_
= 2 E \ 0
E - k \
0) E 0 0 0
± to _ \ \
E / \ 2 ƒ \
a 3 >, - c \ N
R 0 q Co
2 § k % ƒ o
7 � / ƒ ƒ 3 / o
k ƒ /
o O
\H
co =
c
a)
f >, CA
_� 0 4- _ Q. \ /
» a 0 e o co E
0 E \ 2 m 0 5
e £ E 2 a i 9 £ » / m
> 7 2 2 2 2 0 Cl) \ 0) *
m $ ; E E o m m
G . 0 -C CO ° 0 _ a) ] { ƒ E =
_ 7 ( ) ° © 3 $ � Cl) E 0 0 x
CO \ \ 0 \ j / / \ \ \ ƒ /
» / a 1-'6 o
k\
/
x CI-
0
7
cA
\
9
•
\
?
\
%
$
\
/
_0 o
•
c %
a \ 0
\ E _
f n
\ /
• o a)
• 6 0 f .
• \ / 0
\ 2
o
0
@ = t §
ƒ � §
/ ƒ ko
2
= p e e
it co k \
£ k \ . •
� � 0
t 5 u
% } o
k c N
c as to
o c
� § S /
- E 0-
\
1 al� � j � /
\ k 0 c
H
_c _c
Q
\ \ CD
0 __ -- 9
•
° \
•
c u) / m ` / 0
c = , o Q
f ) ° ) 7 § \
ƒ 0 CD C % ® m 0 k
o E E a - \ \ 7 { 2 2
2 $ k z ® E k \ } ° a ƒ
a E o 0 0 0 .. G .. o ® » 8 - S .� ƒ
O 0 E o o = a w z J 0 2 7 5 2 I )
. 0 § § _ j j \ k \ � ] k k \ c k o
a = z u_ a = = z m = m _i — 2 = 2 » x _ 3 3
\
\ G
¢ f
r
7
vn
\
9
j
:C_.)
y
$
/
7
\ Q
\ d \
k E \ ƒ 3 ƒ _ &)
\ 2 2 / \ - _ j
< = R a) a) a)
/ 2 °
\ g 0 q q @ 0@ \
/ E fR � k k ° � �
E \ } j / D 5 & § -0 §
_ _ _
\ \ ƒ / } 3 3 \ 2 \ �
\ ¥ > E &
) ± •'Q %
> \ & � � 7 ra & f
co e § \ � f ) ui
E
\ \ o 0 j \ N
\ } { 0 } 0 m
® 5 0 $ z 0 2
\ \ _ / E 2 0 E § o c
t z
0 2 i / 2 § } « 8 § &
_ & _ a)
# w ° u o3 2
L - 0 \ • a) m
ƒ 0 _ / E R
e $ k K § k
\ } ƒ / f / _ »
_ ° ° ° ?
2 k / 7 Q o / \ -
_ + 0 $ % e R § 0) G
o / K \ � � / 0 \ / 0_ 7 Z
° w e 0 0 0 0 E § c
% \ \ \ ° -o .o f 2 \ ° [
2 w / co e / » m C E -[ g /
« . E o
¢ » � � \ 7
# O. I 9 $ 2 c
2
O. [ 2 w \ *
j k / § 0 r k k /
E — & .< () 2 co f —
f \ k k a) -o § U) 0 \ m_
k \ \ k k / c k 2 o — » c /
# -2 ° E E ± e ° - = 8 'E /
E % q q - - 0 i § \ 7 E \ 7
E @ k a) / J 2 2 § b \ 6 $ $
K / 0 5 > _
0
¢ /
III
a)
/ czt
/
7
\
2
/
>
• /
•
t
\
/
7
\
\ o
•- a -0 ±
_ / co a -
\ 7 U) k
, o --
7 22
c \ 2 CO e
ƒ ® = e 3
\ $ k 2
o / >
o — CO '6
E q Z'
C
) 7 0 _
u E
/ � � E /\
o # © ° » %
0) E0 % 7 \
\ / 2 q ®
\ 2
0
•
» # q 2
) Z C k *
_
§ § \ 7
k [ \ \
. 2 @ >
0 7
O0 a w
§ q 4- o o
" 0 7
• k 2 £ £ § G
ea§ 0 a) > z
/ C 2
L'' -
2 = >
•
/ / � C
22 22 C
\ ® a) co /
-1:5 Ii 0 a » o } j § E 0 / © 2w k2 � 5 a & 2
co 2 E .e n ! OH !
% k qR § £ _/ ° � 32 '_ = J ;w j 2 / ) a co -
/ . 0 = & ! { / CIo � i \
E bz 2 � � 9 \ & = E2 % c0 ° x
§ 5 � 2 � m E 2 � � 0 § � § \ k m
o 2 '- c .m 'E.' o u) 17:. � tm . o ( a — .o G
oe 2 , _ gym _ › -Ea %
, .D , c m o CO - C m o m
cc;
E I i . w , t0aO .2 wo30Eo. w
0
\ %
/
7 /
P
7
.§
a
/
\
0
\
2
/
/
( J
o \»
ct
c_ j
\ .
G
s )
} i.12 [ E
\ co > E
\ co o \
f t
E E
\ § \
/
di E v. eL
ƒ oE
» L.= ED
E
D r �
E � /
- w
7 CD OC
b k \ /
\ C / ©
E f z
0 > R
7 Z2
CO
\
• 0 % ¢
¥ a) \ « 2
® £ $C\ 2 2 0 \ \ 0 m \ /
2 & \ — 0 / \ a) k `
\ k m \ / ( \ § a)
a) /
» -C 2 / g -- E 2 ¥ o - co — a
a)
G $ \ — k / 5 f >, $ / ƒ - k
6 § \ ƒ 2 ± § 2 \ / 0 Q / 3 3
o
©
\ 7
V
/
\
un
V
9
H
/
\
ƒ
\
/ _
\ 0 §
; 5 _ § 0
ct ƒ ƒ} 7
n %
\ e \ \
J }j
\ (>3 00
= 2 cu
\ m A
m V .\ / t N
( / k \
{ 0 \a)
7 : 5
0
ri
C
/ 2 •-..
\ o q 8 �
2{ 2
2 ® cu mr
@ :oa
o % , al
/
co E a �
t
_
5 u
k 0c cz
f • 2 a) E
`t ® c 2 —
c
k Cl o -.» � i
= R /
§ � § 2
\ E 2 W Q
K § Ca§ Q
0 o
/
/ \ 0k U /
o E O. L. . o
\ 0 \ § c § » m
o =
R \ u / @ \ J } ; 2 \ /
f / 2 § \_ \ / / \ / E E
k k \ , % k \ \ )_ \ \ k
2 f ' 2 w 2 e $ &
— -
k 2 ° \ \ 0) 5 — 2 co / t & k
ƒ / $ f \ I 2 E k 2 \ 0 0 co I 0 0 /
c
2 7
/
7 2
\
j
\
9
\
$
.2
\
-
crirj
ii o :.-
c
\ ƒ
y 0
% C
k \# } >
i a
c ± _
\ � / 2
/ \ § {
\ co p) E
✓ • \ \ Q =
8 \
o \ k % \ ) j E
\ \ § & 2 -
\
0
z / .E CO Z
E c = c RI
¥ a = _
} C C
C (a I _ #
\ a 7 e
Y. _ � \ ) C
ƒ s E E
2 _o2 / ± .2 \
> C CO
2 & e o E
c CO / O-
E / > E e /
S .q k . >
� g c z
o C o ®
0 • § & w z 0 f
E % E III « e \ #) ® § o�_ @ 2 / / \ k k o , co\ \ / /e CO 2 P-D & m
7 CO E o =
o / / - t / co / \ ( Co / /
# f 0. 3 — E § Q \ $ ) / G m
k \ / \ E t a w ) & f 7 2
NJ as \ 0 2 % \ / ® \ E \ Cl) . co m
k \ \ c •
\ / ) ° ° ®
_ £ 80 § _
«
) c E& / Co 2 � / } ƒ \\ E- f
2 » ; \ \ : $ / \ ] { a 3 § » \ 5 > 7
. E 2 $ • S P f ® # 7 k } / co § o & $
E a m = z = u 2 m = m m = t = c
g
\
\ CO
a.
/»
I f
Lo
ƒ
U
d
O
Q- 7.
N
N
cct O
F Q
C fn
-a
5
u "O
N
co
-o
0
v
cn
a>
_c v
O
I
_ (Q n
`6 0
cn
c.f)
f6
C LI
a Ct
a)
Q
G`
Ce7 Id
C C�
C
v i
cn
0
-
c
a-
0
a� o
o m
Vi ? j o
ct v O 4- Q
t O N N D U
G — 0 (1) E
u 111!
- ❑ O
L
O
O a O O
o
v c v ro o ' ❑ 0 v U E C 7G (Q v U
•
O "O 22 (C O (1 -O
v . a) C 0 a C
u a) .- uj N a) @
0 @ 7
C y = c
0
N a) R) O O 0 7•
O d 17 C C O
? O o a) 0
@ o > >
O a) .V E O O > _o T
bA Q7 Y @ >, I @ C
u ❑ a@ N " C V) O
`o
0 cn 0
fr O C C V) v U C t N
E` = V) U @ CO 0 3 O
W N s "O @ `t
Cl, o 7 @ 0 a) D s N I
v U (n >LI) C') @ `Q N r p O p-
O rn vi p _ 0 c 3 0 -o s `�. _co a
v v a, co a) - < a) c o 0
o U Z' 0 Y c rn et-
Z a o c c o m @ cn ai a)
Z 0 `° ea
finn Cn
LA
p 7_c ti 175
I- C O N T c a) C. O - @ O a �) v O 0
o ¢ o _ n o w a) ° E a p
Cl) B- >, >, r_ O U C a) Cs o r -0a a) o Q 0@ H
co C c ai 0 C m ac) s a`) �o o _c d a) CC - iu
m _
0 a .o rn 0 kn a) o N W _m U o O E
< @ v °� 0 v n ro 3 >_ > m > >, a) > 0
0 o CY_
a. a) p_ 5 U o _ c H r o LL o Cl. c c0 ca = J a) U
W is v �_ 7 C 0 0 >. C n 0 V, ^C •' 0 v C 0
a
CC = - m CO o Q) a) C m ca s c tcv v cn .0 03 1
a W O CC
0 ai 3 0 C o) c`va rn a a) m > o a
Q m Y � m a' � o rf6n Q o m t w 0 z __ p7
Z 0 m 0 Cr) o C �) m E - = 0 c cu o u I 3 3
cn > C o a) a) Q E v m o . w a) E 0 o J
0 a w c) a E r p o 3 m > T. . Q v o �C
m
En
C y w m e 3 a c aa) c m a to a is ,
< (pomp o c tR o ) o o o v o m N W ? O,
H � a E v a) m E m u) ate) > � E � ca`l m - u) W c Q
2 m m H a ¢ m M ❑ m v U a o o (g i� .c o
Q A
VD CQ
•, Q
C.)
C/1
v;
M
a
F
a
c..
U
O
c•
s
x
•
v
C
O
U
C
0
U
cC
a)
O T
O N a
G
Q- EN •--
0 N
D
a)
N
r n
t a
c a
ro O V7
0
c
0
o C F-
u, �- 0 7
a; -0
U 0
U G .N
❑ U v
a
a) a) @ ? a)
7 C
.75 L
7
Q
7 C o N O cu N
❑ 7 O _N p u� O W
-O = D O 0 1
Or,
J r (.0
•
U) (D f�
0 �n
kn
v
V, Q.
[/A
0
CC
H
\
\
\
/
\ 1 /
\ )
a o =
\ §
ci
=ƒco\ 2 f
\ \ /
ƒ C / E
( q
/ co (a k) CO
w
7 E\ 22
& %° E
( o . _
LL M
- 0
tab as/ w o ƒ
st \ W n C
ƒ o9m
c £ I .- 03
0 ° .� z o <
_ 0 = �2 2
% o » — e
N 3Ey m
f c o m $ f
o \ \ J k 0
o i / §
© * o @ , /
a u, = 2 m c
m CD n «
7. / z/ k
o r
/ / \ / £ 3
a e (0 g Q
co as £ o o / /
% ® �z $ E /
£ 2
o \ o 2
_ % f .. % £ 03 CU m
b 0 ) @ / ® /
q 2 U) \ \ ° / k m
© f m a C k ° =
\ a o E ) § E [ m ) / § / ® §
© 0 ® ® % 2 0 & g # — m 3 2 m
T.a r k e ƒ t .e ] & ® Z o e ƒ k 3 7
§ § ® -C o c & ¥ Z } '6.-) o £ 2
ƒ / _ / 2 ƒ 2 $ k \ § 3 3 / .§ § /
o
\
} /
&
7
\
9
F-
v
co
aL
•0-
i
V
Q
cd
CCI 0. ON Q o_ ° s
s O t� O to Lo
0 a) a c '(3 a) •C La
ccs c) T U •` '� °
:' C) (a i tr) -o c ° tip-+ - L6
,� c ° 0, >`' T fa a) j u) as
° to o a) No
7-. La 7. U) co O 7 CU ai
c U U a) a N a) 5 - c
C +�
U a N (n E 0 O ul o_ L a
U +J
° _ U r J La =
0 12 c re E o
T @ U
ca c ( Ln fa C rn O.. c m
0- °o `—° - rri La .c Ln f°
c °o °o o „ a 3 -c
:A ,_ o c > >-. . o 0 VU)
-° � �" i- 0 -, mN o > °
c c LL
�
o - w}> o as
a) •
CO C9 0 3 2 u) is c a) 3
t
-o 4_ c -a N H 0
sc
-a Oct a) T. ° U LO � CO
A
N Ln U U 0 ) u) (a
o $. 7 U
N d
C (n c co c O (a CO CO (�
= ° d) as c .E Q a = r-
oc)
(a a) D
co U - to 0 0) c a) a) a) a)
-d C .o-� c c o ° 3 N Lw �
El co (a E
a) a• ° N Ln ••5 N vi o a_ a) O eN
c a) )) - T Z
✓ _°o a E o ja co °a o a a.) c�-• c C co
c ca •E •f0 o = Q) c - ° -° c Ln c F-
v ° Eo ¢ Eas L
° 2
rs c ° o ° (° o .c Q. 3 O
0 'er — 0
— -17-13 � C m v)
s o
o (a co ° T ° La '.7' o
Fs
E
a) m
r ma rn a m o o
_
as c Ln ) Ln
La • a) ra (n
La
co a c a cLi N Lu E
Ln -_
o ° a) a) 0 aw c
) N 0 Q CO a) 7 -a
3 (•) I- C a) E in- n a) o U L 3 m
o C m Eo Lo is a ° o a` >, o . o
Y 3 ° m ai E _ �_ �C
,� ° c.) ° E La c c c
r 0 0 La U) 0 co cc`a (`a ate) 2 a) E >- 0 o° o,.
o N n Ln E c - Z a) 3 E
o • °) o ° ° — a o N o r •
N .
T Lt_ U Q .= I— N F-- s) U N 4.
0
er N
ci t
a)
C to
f et
c P-
6-
;n
V
CC
C
a
C
P
;n
ed
o a) 3 ca m
°_ p, co
r
3 v c c
c 0 o 7.
N a a) m is
C a) •N a E d 07 O C Z 7
N N i_ O r U.. O C 13 a)
ct C E -a m 3 Z (0 a) a) M fn
✓ �_ o aa) aa)) (A c O N - _fn
E N N — Q 4o c
cCd � �$ :� U O i c --cs as °
Q) u
o
•
0 E a) a a RI c p '3 - C
°- ca m a)` ` o 0 3 a) p
V ° a) aa)) ) q°i Y a) C
(o c a o m E n c E as O
E c -o m s a)
oO ` -o c a) �' c O cn cs Y
E `(0 ai °n c Q _ .O a ate)
u 0 -o a) o U) E - a) 0 o) N_ al Q a
f c a (co c o a) c N N .0 •'3 Q -7
o CO -a Q > m a) E ° O O E L.
0- o o a) m m > a) 0_ > ,- r E n
C a) % a) (n m ca d a) o -c 0
N) E a) V! O a) a) j 7+ 0 Q- C
a _ o .o LE °� o D a ICI -C 0 Cl)
U c
a ca a) a N o o a) ) a) o 0 a) 3 — cq
Gi c a Q ° nmi v C)
❑" U N 0 7 co O o O. c a) cn Q
CO• N �) O ccs ° U rn w E Z p N U a) � 0-
C H c a) 0 Q a) T
-0 c ` U N
ca c co- , O a)cr,
d di . c- 2 fn ° a CO N
3 .c a) ca `n Q"
C
Cf) o o '
°- d o E O E ° Q
ui m Q) o O LL n i
cn —
3 a) ° _ E in a- m — CO O C ` Q N Q - .�
C O U 'a Y .0 ui E °� rn .-- co 0 � O
O O a) m a U v O 0 Q) CO C a) m U] O c'•7
E
-0a E as O i 7 o j -- D E Z
o a) 0 cCOo o a co C c a) E O
c _c -a ,[ a3 Cl)) p 7. ry) �, C . a) 0
ca U CO CY .0 �-
a)
03 C a Q1 -aa -oo o ( 3 ° a) a_. c a) Cr is .n a) a U
>., E C •- - a) N a3 C 'p E a)el= fl- _ ui ccnn .-7
_o C Q. 2 7 a) ca E a) o 3 cU I- O E -O i C
- ct" N E c a 0 N p u) c E N O O O N IP
° _ O
O fi Cl) c E a) c ns a 1 c co 2
d LL
a) _ a/ _
O• . o ^k o rn aa)) (`o p ) o 3 N O E in E .0 O co .N Pn
3 U 0 a) . a o 2 o 3 c v U ( F�-
n d o v at -0o X aa)) E c o) v) cca E n E cs .'L) ,ti
n a) a u' `° umi o �° a's E ° m m u. w E cn E o p CO
4) a) a) m C) O O c E O
O• ° y �' o ¢Al c a) ca U ` 0 ca `�° o E Z
c 6 o O 0 0 .0 E o a) 5 v +• rn a) -o O s c {il
c O 4 o E — E 0 a 8 a , o 2 C .3 o C Q' o
w a) z�
• p U -a c �' cr 0 E m cc -o o d o = CO ca c Q) co 0 7i-
U CO CCVV Q mLL •- Q I- Q I-- c
a
I) ao
co (n
i
ti
0
c. CO
te, F^
I-
C
cA
U
.`
C
d
H
cu
.-
\
/
•
7
,
.2
\
_
,
t
7
}
\
\
E-
.
%
.;
o- 0
\
\ ( >
z 2 g o
/ \
S E
o o
/ \
.c ' N-
e ¥ Cc
a ° E \ J
o E - o _
2 0 0 q
m
/ E \ \ �
r > \
/ k \ /
un
. 0 .
C e
% o S / Q
q \ a /
# F \ \ 2 m
/ ° f b o / o o '1z3 2
[ co z e_ - = o /
® f , co
§ \ - - ' k 0 0 / /
ƒ § { \ { { ( \ \ j \ k &
5 \ \ g 2 2 /
% / 2 ƒ\ ¢5 / § \ \ \ /
0
K
C
f
\
\
D
\
o
\
/
\
\
\
C.
C-
;'• >.
/ n \
vs /0 )
\ /
p
✓ 0
vi /
/ 7
\ $
© 0 u N
0 ` N 2
\ ) Q f ,
r,-. / N $
.:5 o _a ° /
\ 2k `
0 \
E / E
\ 5 %
\g c b N
c c 2
a' ° \
%
OS CO
7 /2 r.
2
o c
2 E _
co 2 5
-.
o Q. /
o \ / /
C
\ m k - % .. m
G \ 7 a) 7 % 3 H
r u) % <a o ƒ \ [ -
c 0 % Cl) ƒ 0 0 —
2
ca o / \ / [ ] o 2 F [ i / /
2 0 9 g $ 3 a 3-I 2 \ \ k D -C 2 k \ \ -0 CU > % ƒ
TO R « _ — _ _
I. \ 2 6 0 2 ƒ / \ \ \ 3 3 /
Id
?
\
VD CO
M
\
\
9
H
c)
A:
I'
.7-
a
vs
c.7
o I a) . U O 1
LL -0 a)
U)
(!j N N O N a O
C a) a Q CO -0
-EL t E r- o Q C - c g c
C U O 7. U) 'C Ch (d O C
Q Q O V) TD-
CL O f6 ` (7 C > = �
2 f' a N C O
o U) (o z
ro to E c U N 0 O 7 0 -o "a na)
N L_ 0 a) _c ` -Es a) 7
C o O
U -O E c U co U) E O 0 U) .= d
@ O o E a� E Q C o
(0 Q) C
coil CO (a Q (6 C OU _C =.
C
U 2 a) N 2 >, c fwd -o Ll O E a) U) A U) (=0 0 c a)7,-c (6
_ _ E . E
o c cz (o (n (n
C u_ (d 0 N co O -O IT U) U- f/7
CO -0 U T
Yid 'O a) Q - w O C 7 7.~ O 0
1 bp U O
-� a (� 0 N L . OU CO C LL
a U7 U) co fU 'C C) O -- a) O N a)
Cl)
Ld .E = L fn• s _ 2 o o E
D c0 in o m 0 3 I (n co on
a O o _ a "O V) a) - U_
v=- L). a) C a) •
_O E d (6 N O _c O CO f� V U
U L €) 7,
a) o U 2 C a) E 0 5 .0
u, o U) d a) o 7 v o 4) a)
r U) o E N a. -a O 0)
CL U O o fn c U_) C 4..... (n N
CU a O 2 ' c0 C ' 00
U d 0 U) a) U) c)
C c C U O U co a) a)
o (o _ 2 c a) C _c p o 3 .n
(7 @ § = C.) n C n ._
a) a m
i2 0
CV Z
3 -4 (o E E O cc) 0 N .0 .N a 0
0
p U E L -C (d .E (T) O j o ` a) i.7
O oc E v O E (6 0) T 2 ,l
O
r C O U ,._ 0 C O p a) a3 N 0
O a) m (o o µ= s � O O V]
>' L > > ,� 0) co C 0 O a)
z 3 Z ;, co c .cT3 o m a, Z R!
-o co (a 3 •= fin () N o
O N C +L O
O Q) O D U) C7 7 C o a 0 �_ Oa a) t 0 U a 0 U)a)0 a) to N _C U) _v 0 Q (n Q) = 7
(a U N c a) E C1 0- 2 Gin
N 3 = = 0 7 0 .g_ a) E 2 -o O O 0 0 =
co co >, Y 70, Y 3 N O N O. a) a) E r�
a) O i E a
G 6) O • O p 0 0 — a) 0 O a 't
H -N a) N C-) —) . T LL O Q a.4 .g. I- U) 4..
O
v
C y
o ;p
cn cd
O p.
6
U
O'
U
a
.I-
,1
j,
0
✓
a)
c a)
C @ `7
Q _ _
a t a) E @ 3
o v o
a a)
Q N 3 a 2 •u) oo a' E
c @ N w " CL
@ N C
ca
v £ o r m 3 z
F. @ Q )
7) o M C_ CO 'O N 2 4) a) U'
c5 E 7 co as 3@ E m c
0. o o v U Q) o O
C ^� a) o. '3 o M
y r CO > v V
- c d C
-cs -a @ d
v cv ' o c r c a, n
t o cn a0i •@ o @ E n Q
c _
E co - 3 ai o 0
o C ro U C >•. -c c°' o c = c a) a'
C N ` @ -o a 12 a c v E o
Qm cco - m y d
G) f0 N .E 7 -o a)-c os co c N a) m
o na) ._ t c C - E -o a' Ii
C., co _ 5 •5 a E o c n ca
U 0
U U C N 0 v a) v Y o f C
) (d {y U v N -° coo o R c a) c6
v �' D U co Y O@ ° ° U N W E Z
c a -Up u) r
no w c C o c) ~
a _ S) C EL-) c !`
@ ,_ VJ @ C o a)
-o t° m U aa) u' -- 3 c rn U)
c .- V >, .� ) 3 - v Co
@ t -a o E 3 E c .co N.
Co C 0) 0 ° ac E vo
N C N o N cq c @ E l()
+, o
CD • LE E v' C O 'Es 2 ° .a o v a) ` $o
q a 3 ca c o 0 ? .6 o .- o a)ra
v a) CL a) E o @ a v m @ - Q `
Zi v v ° aE N5 CI- as z
a -vo U o c _ m v RUC) � ?� -o 0 o -_
-0 `•' L al -° U @ p >' co Cyr]as v' o Q1 a) v ° c r-
QEcca a -c T �, E c ° o0 a a) 4) m C -0,-..7
= s c 4 2 o a`' io E ° z
a
lac @ � ro 0 E c 3 0 wo • a) E 0�
co c o r 9 ° o `-° c m C E W
aoi 0 �i v o E co u)i ca . m Cam) N Y
N .a) a' v ° 3 U U -o a) •- c _ o 3 -0 i--
V •- c @ d C-
2' a_s na v >< v • Earn mm
� T Y T-6 7 M co a) s v ° q@ a' a) :a «4. t T X
(0 C U) C N N O p o a) = E o a)'7 a) , �W
z a) E al o o •C o 0. E E �' o � E > � 1
E r Z CO e CV O i m o o a L
I- _0 O m O ca re) Q CO cam.
O
0 N
o '0
5
v
o Gf]
v; CO
H-, a-
0
cn
U
U
cd
a
d
3 ,
\
/
-
_ 7)
D \
^ nu n"
co 0
@ ƒ / #D &ƒ 2 ® CO H ƒ / > e' 2
/ 2 3 E c & \ \ \ ƒ ƒ E § ° /\ 2 \.
a , g o . a e x , cu o,=
a a 3 7 ; \ m ] 0_ 8 ± E _
X / ± E & j & \ / / \ \
7 E. / / ( ) o \ a ] $ §
F / % 2 ® ] E < 2 \ ] o ]
CC \ ° 0 \ / — \ § ƒ k / \
E s % } 7 / T 7 $ %
7 5 -, -. a) 0 /
@
C ( 0 o G 0
o m o +. * k e o
0 0 \ // ]
¥ 0 o ro
o / 0 / % A 2 o cu
/ < 3 c < k » (
0 3 0 03 C 0 (0 �"3
S \ J / > $ 2 / $
2 § = Cl) ° /
v o CD C 8 \ G_ 2
3 co 2 cn � / \ 0
. al \ / -.- ] E
. 2 \ f ° / ƒ
_
p k m
\® \ / a ¢
( o C ( / J Q 73
/ ® = ¥ i \
� 2 � u -w CD
t
= n ƒ \
. \ - ? $ -- ) /
q 8 co o m ° =
< ¥ G
/ & : $� \
/ / / al F 7 \
_ g
p,
C \
CD e'er k
0 S ¥ // k¥. o J n.) /
7 ^ C g —
a / \ \ $
) / / \ 0
f / / 7 n
ƒ
\
/
x
. \
\§
9
.. . .
3
y
FT
\
/
n »
}
0 w u = u
& d 9 0 9
• g F -< 7 % \
m m en
0 0
— — 0
=_
/ / k f
» E & 2
\
$ N 0 S
ƒ 9 cn a)
O
0 ƒ /
0 /3 CD
H O a 3
/ 0 °
S
e
~ W
cb /% /
2-il'k-
r)
co
CD
/ /
k §
/ / K
ƒ
\
\ d }
2 /
$
CD ƒ
n =
E
cii .,
/ /.
/
} \
\
/ \
\
W X
/ \
\•
}
u
\
\
\
n'
cn
C4
r
b `I
W rip
170 o
(D
w
0■ -2
ra
O
w^-ti w O O * C r -n m O o > Co
• -. 4 go O N C O C.1:;:- co S 3 Cl)j j FL D a co
•-• _
\p U1 al (D co l-0 (D CCD y - v Q fB N -0
_ D a n
O O a- O9 -u -Q -0 (/) o fD (� co a- —
M. 0 _ y
X A W N G d co
O fll tD co (D °
a A rn H
co A— co co ch o•
` �' m m o Z. 3
H Q 0_ ci m
CO m - . 2
o . `
c ,
°
z-
,
�
?1 —C CD
r
I con
Q) m
CD 13
-CI CD
,,,E.- o
H
Fli
O 0-
z 5.
Q
CD
Vi * 0
c O o n -a CD
--A v
0
Cl)
5-
iz D-
u,
al o N
0 a a ,�
o a) g
D
u) -,
O
= rj
o W
co CD
n 0-:'
N
C (7
0
CD
0
© 0 0
7 o
,N J Da
o 0
j
P
X
`J
Da..:
0
a
a
(C
'r
`.
0
r
Po'
r
H
, \
•
ro
\
% # - 4s-
\
M e 9
2 69 04 % f 2 0 U] > ® Z ' g
@ S \ g g / / / 7 & § ] % / 2 ) f
6 3 3 3 3 — k E £ n m m m
o S - { E 9 & E (p g n / \ E
E _ J - & _
R E \ / \ ± % % 2 \ \ ƒ E co °. •
- 0 / g 5 ° § 2 co a ° \
° m -CO c c y 7 § % CD E \ a
$ O I § co FE(/@ R// ƒ
/ 0
0
w \
k
)
)
. a
/
#
I
CD
� \
•
\
9
J
\
. 7
ii
/
'0 se6
/ f
CD
q I
k R "0 11 $ > > w co
1 ] •• ] f z E. J m / 13
@ ° ° y \ § /
2 3 a a
/ 5 . a- w ƒ § > $
¢ J * / \ n -a
2 ] l ] ; 0 -0 $ q §
E ® E r q ; >
0 k 2 § co » 3 /
o o J * @ [' c
$ = 5 0 0
m 2 m \ \ ` Ed
Cl) co / CD _£ 7
2 t n- \
H ;
£ U
O ® c
/ \ §
/ 3 CD
%
co -0
G \ %
---.1 - $
Cr) )
al ®
k. \
7
/ / 2 / £
/ J ¥R
/ /
3 2 » t ,
/ f co i
co § e /
/ o \
-. c - /
-0 j 2 \
m 2 \
& 2 7.; 6
CD o 1 3
¥. E
G a ƒ z
B -' /
3 $Cr CD
/ \
F
\
=
\
\
CD
x
\
\
%
@
C
\
/
� 7
/
E va
ri
N e p ± 2 m & 3 § /
% / e J 2 = 0 2 E ( ¥ E e
m R .--,- § 7 • z z g \
% ° f m f
a \ 7 co ° i E
/ qs
° § / ƒ
/ E
W = / E
E / -05 al
* $ / $ %
q § J CD
E CD
0 a) cn 1 ]
H = al 9 @
E n &
/ / § 9
n 5 ] ]
/ ] -, % E
3 _ /-
q co
® --= ƒ
e _ / En
/ � 0
� $ 2 =
/ ƒ / E
= E o En
_ _
CD / //
A ' cn --
§ 7 ƒ
\ / \
pa
5. »
32m —
= 9
0 03 \
a ¥ , /
\ Cl) o q
50J
k Z 7
CD \
f CI
ID x
0 C -
] \ z
/ / /
. \
/
\
/
/
b
. J
E
(
±
-t
(
/
n
k \4
. . . . . . ... . . . ]
ƒ
7
¢ C
0
« O
2 G
$ $ \
o R %
m
7 0 /
Cr a m -r
c S' / »
C t_ & S. f
7
% «
Q 7 G 7 o 0
/ � 2 ® C-7) 2
co \ m
— 9 % § 7
oo / \ 7 ƒ c
27
o 0
2 & / \ / I
§ O & \ % 71 i
\ / / \ K 2
, / / St 17
% � \ o . 2
Q \ 7 / 0 «
c / ƒ § / z f
a Q
� i \ 0 / /
o : % 0 C /
• 2 e' a
¢ 7 o Co % \
a G 9 f 2 DI
o ® 0 ■ 5
ca. -\co 0
cn
% o 0
± - /
i \
\ co , 6
G @ E
i'i'
0 ƒ
0 . . . .. « §
S. 73
\
\
/
\
e
&
4
/
7
\