Jefferson County - East-West Gateway Coordinating Council

REGIONAL ALL-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
UPDATE
JEFFERSON COUNTY
And
PARTICIPATING COMMUNITIES AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS*
Prepared by the East-West Gateway Council of Governments
October 2009
*See Updated Community Participation List for 2010 for most recent
information on communities and school districts which have adopted
Resolution of Support and Participation.

All Hazard Mitigation Plan
Community Participant Update
July 2010
Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan
Jefferson County Communities
Jurisdiction Continuing Pending New
Arnold X
Byrnes Mill X
Cedar Hill Lakes X
Crystal City X
De Soto X
Festus X
Herculaneum X
Hillsboro X
Kimmswick X
Olympian Village X
Parkdale X
Pevely X
Scotsdale X
No Longer
Participating

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan i
Participating Participating Communities Communities All All-Hazard All Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan
Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Continuing Continuing Pending Pending New
New
Arnold X
Byrnes Mill X
Cedar Hill Lakes X
Crystal City X
De Soto X
Festus X
Herculaneum X
Hillsboro X
Kimmswick X
Olympian Village X
Parkdale X
Pevely X
Scotsdale X
No No Longer
Longer
Participating
Participating

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan ii
PARTICIPATING PARTICIPATING SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICTS ALL ALL-HAZARD ALL HAZARD HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
District District Continuing Continuing Pending Pending
New
New
Affton 101 District X
Bayless District X
Brentwood District X
Clayton District X
Crystal City 47 District X
DeSoto 73 District X
Dunklin R-V District X
Ferguson-Florissant R-II X
Festus R-VI District X
Fort Zumwalt R-II District X
Fox C-6 District X
Francis Howell R-III X
Franklin County R-II
District
Grandview R-II District X
Hancock Place District X
Hazelwood District X
Hillsboro R-3 District X
Jefferson County R-VII
District
Jennings District X
Kirkwood R-VII District X
Ladue District X
Lindbergh R-VIII District X
Lonedell R-XIV District X
Mehlville R-IX District
Meramec Valley R-III
X
District
MRH District(Maplewood
Richmond Heights)
New Haven District X
Normandy District X
Northwest R-I District X
Orchard Farm R-5
District
Parkway District X
Pattonville R-III District X
Ritenour District X
Riverview Gardens
District
X
Rockwood R-VI District X
X
X
x
X
X
No No Longer
Longer
Participating
Participating

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan iii
District District Continuing Continuing Pending Pending
New
New
Special School District of
St. Louis County
X
Reorganized R-XV
District (Spring Bluff)
X
St. Charles R-VI District X
St. Clair R-XIII District X
St. Louis Board of
Education
X
Strain-Japan R-16
District
X
Sullivan District X
Sunrise R-IX District X
Union R-XI District X
University City District X
Valley Park District X
Washington District X
Webster Groves District X
Wellston District X
Wentzville R-IV District X
Windsor C-1District X
No No No Longer Longer
Longer
Participating
Participating

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan iv
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
Table Table of of Contents
Contents
Section Section 1 1 County/Community County/Community County/Community Profiles Profiles ................................
................................................................
................................ ................................
........................................
................................ ........ ........1 ........
Community Profiles......................................................................................................1
Jefferson County Profile ...............................................................................................1
Development/History……………… ..............................................................................1
Geography, Geology and Climate.................................................................................2
Form of Government…................................................................................................8
Community Partnerships ..............................................................................................8
Public Awareness.........................................................................................................8
Media Relations...........................................................................................................9
Demographic Information..........................................................................................10
Age ...........................................................................................................................10
Per Capita Income and Persons Below the Federal Poverty Level..................................10
Education Levels ........................................................................................................10
Diversity.....................................................................................................................11
Economy, Employment and Industry ..........................................................................12
Labor Force ...............................................................................................................12
Average Wage Rate ...................................................................................................13
Primary Employers and Industries...............................................................................13
Access to Employment; Incommuting and Outcommuting .........................................14
Codes/Regulations for Building, Stormwater, Zoning, Fire...........................................15
Existing Community Plans ..........................................................................................15
Land Use Information.. ..............................................................................................16
Development Trends and Annexation.........................................................................17
Floodplain Management............................................................................................18
Wetlands Issues .........................................................................................................20
NFIP Participation ......................................................................................................21
Environmental Concerns ............................................................................................21
Endangered Species, Historic Properties/Districts, Archaeological Sites ........................22
Identified Assets ........................................................................................................23
Inventory of Critical/Key/Essential Facilities..................................................................23
Medical Facilities........................................................................................................23
Long Term Care Facilities............................................................................................24
Day Care Centers .......................................................................................................25
Schools......................................................................................................................27
Government Facilities.................................................................................................29
Recreation Facilities....................................................................................................32
Inventory of Infrastructure .........................................................................................35
Roadways/Transportation...........................................................................................37
Motor Freight Transportation.....................................................................................38
Railroads ...................................................................................................................38
Airports .....................................................................................................................39
Public Transportation.................................................................................................40

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan v
Communications .......................................................................................................40
Water and Sewer Facilities .........................................................................................42
Electricity and Natural Gas .........................................................................................48
Solid Waste Disposal..................................................................................................51
Law Enforcement.......................................................................................................52
Emergency Services (911)...........................................................................................52
Emergency Medical Services.......................................................................................53
Fire Protection ...........................................................................................................53
Underground Infrastructure .......................................................................................54
Inventory of Housing Structures .................................................................................55
Number of Dwelling Units..........................................................................................55
Average Unit Cost......................................................................................................56
Total Inventory of Structures ......................................................................................56
Cities and Villages Profiles……………………………………………………….…………56
Section Section 2 2 2 – Risk Risk Assessment Assessment ................................
................................................................
................................
................................
......................................................
................................ ......................
......................1
......................
Natural Hazard Identification and Elimination Process ..................................................1
Community Wide Hazard Profile and List of Hazards Identified .....................................1
Flood...........................................................................................................................2
Levees ................................................................................................................36
Earthquake................................................................................................................54
Tornado/Severe Thunderstorm ...................................................................................76
Severe Winter Weather ..............................................................................................94
Drought ..................................................................................................................102
Heat Wave...............................................................................................................114
Dam Failure .............................................................................................................128
Wildfire ...................................................................................................................141
Multi-Jurisdictional Risk Assessment .........................................................................146
Worksheets ..………………………………………………………………………………149
Section Section 3 3 – Jefferson Jefferson County County Capability Capability Assessment Assessment................................
Assessment Assessment................................
....................................................
................................ ....................
....................1
....................
Mitigation Management Policies ..................................................................................1
Existing Plans...............................................................................................................1
Mitigation Programs ....................................................................................................1
Jefferson County Capabilities (Organization, Staffing, Training) ....................................3
Responsibilities and Authorities....................................................................................3
Intergovernmental and Interagency Coordination.........................................................4
Vulnerability Assessment of County Policies and Development Trends…. ......................4
Commitments to a Comprehensive Mitigation Program................................................4
Laws, Regulations, and Policies Related to Development in Hazard-Prone Areas ............4
County Laws, Regulations and Policies Related to Hazard Mitigation in General ............4
How Local Risk Assessments are Incorporated and Prioritized into Local Planning .........5
Current Criteria Used to Prioritize Mitigation Funding...................................................5
Integration of Hazard Mitigation with the County Department’s Plans……………….…5
How the County Determines Cost-Effectiveness of Mitigation Programs………………...6

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan vi
Mitigation Funding Options, Including Current and Potential Sources of Federal, State,
Local and Private Funds................................................................................................6
How Governments Meet Requirements for Hazard Mitigation Funding Programs..........6
Recommendations for Improvement ............................................................................6
County and Municipal Policies and Development Trends...............................................7
Funding Sources ..........................................................................................................8
Worksheets………………………………………………………………………………….15
Section Section 4 4 - Mitigation Mitigation................................
Mitigation
................................
................................................................
................................ ................................
...............................................................
................................ ...............................
...............................1
...............................
Introduction to Mitigation ...........................................................................................1
Definition of Mitigation ...............................................................................................1
Categories of Mitigation ..............................................................................................1
Mitigation Versus Preparedness....................................................................................2
Mitigation Versus Response and Recovery ....................................................................3
Mitigation Plan Benefits ...............................................................................................3
Hazard Mitigation Goals, Objectives, Strategy and Coordination...................................3
Surveys........................................................................................................................5
Evaluation .................................................................................................................11
Strategic Implementation...........................................................................................16
Cities with Higher Exposure to County Hazards……………………………………….….17
Analysis and Prioritization of Mitigation Actions.........................................................17
Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan...........................................................18
Worksheets. ........………………………………………………………………………..... 20

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan vii
LIST LIST OF OF TABLES
TABLES
Section Section Section 1 1 – County/Community County/Community Profiles Profiles................................
Profiles Profiles................................
................................................................
................................ ................................
......................................
................................ ...... ......1 ......
TABLE J1 JEFFERSON COUNTY INCOME AND POVERTY LEVEL...........................................................10
TABLE J2 JEFFERSON COUNTY EDUCATION ......................................................................................11
TABLE J3 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEMOGRAPHICS ...............................................................................11
TABLE J4 JEFFERSON COUNTY EMPLOYMENT STATUS ......................................................................13
TABLE J5 JEFFERSON COUNTY TOP EMPLOYERS 2007 ......................................................................13
TABLE J6 JEFFERSON COUNTY EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY .............................................................14
TABLE J7 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMUTING TO WORK....................................................................14
TABLE J8 JEFFERSON COUNTY NFIP INSURANCE PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITIES.............................21
TABLE J9A JEFFERSON COUNTY MEDICAL FACILITIES..........................................................................23
TABLE J9B JEFFERSON COUNTY LONG TERM HEALTHCARE FACILITIES ................................................24
TABLE J10 JEFFERSON COUNTY CHILDCARE CENTERS.........................................................................25
TABLE J11A JEFFERSON COUNTY PRIVATE SCHOOLS ............................................................................28
TABLE J11B JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ................................................................28
TABLE J12 JEFFERSON COUNTY GOVERNMENT FACILITIES..................................................................29
TABLE J13 RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY ............................................................33
TABLE J14 JEFFERSON COUNTY FREIGHT CARRERS .............................................................................38
TABLE J15 AIRPORT OPERATIONS: ST. LOUIS REGION .........................................................................39
TABLE J16 PRIMARY LOCAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS.......................................................40
TABLE J17 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IN ST. LOUIS COUNTY............................................42
TABLE J18 ST. LOUIS REGIONAL AREA SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ........................................................51
TABLE J19 ST. LOUIS REGIONAL AREA LANDFILLS ..............................................................................52
TABLE J20 JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS AND RESOURCES ..................................53
TABLE J21 UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................54
TABLE J22 JEFFERSON COUNTY INVENTORY OF HOUSEING UNITS .....................................................55
TABLE J23 JEFFERSON COUNTY HOUSING UNITS BREAKDOWN..........................................................55
TABLE J24 JEFFERSON COUNTY MEDIAN VALUE OF HOMES...............................................................56
TABLE J25 INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES .............................................................................................56
TABLE J26 INDIVIDUAL PROFILE: MUNICIPALITIES LOCATED IN JEFFERSON .........................................57
Section 2 2 – Risk Risk Assessment Assessment ................................
................................................................
................................
................................
.....................................................
................................ .....................
.....................1
.....................
TABLE J27A PROBABILITY OF HAZARDS FROM NATUREAL DISASTERS.....................................................2
TABLE J27B MISSISSIPPI AND MERAMEC RIVER STAGES: JEFFERSON COUNTY ......................................22
TABLE J27C JEFFERSON COUNTY NFIP INSURANCE PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITIES.............................25
TABLE J27D JEFFERSON COUNTY UNMITIGATED PROPERTIES – REPETITIVE LOSSES ..............................26
TABLE J28 SEASONAL PATTERN FOR RAIN EVENTS FOR ST. LOUIS REGION.........................................36
TABLE J29A LIST OF LEVEES .................................................................................................................41
TABLE J29B DAMAGE ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL LEVEE FAILURE ............................................................46
TABLE J30A LARGEST EARTHQUAKES IN CONTIGUOUS UNITED STATES ...............................................60
TABLE J30B RECENT EARTHQUAKE EVENTS 1.0 OR GREATER ...............................................................60
TABLE J30C HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE EVENTS....................................................................................62
TABLE J30D LANDSLIDE, SINKHOLE ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION ...............................................63
TABLE J31 JEFFERSON COUNTY BRIDGES ............................................................................................66
TABLE J32 FREQUENCY OF EARTHQUAKES .........................................................................................70
TABLE J33 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT SCALE..........................................................................81
TABLE J34 TORNADO EVENTS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY........................................................................83
TABLE J35 SEVERE THUNDERSTORM EVENTS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY.................................................84
TABLE J36 TORNADOES: JEFFERSON COUNTY 1950-1998 ..................................................................90
TABLE J37 STORM INTENSITIES: JEFFERSON COUNTY REGION (FUJITA SCALE) ....................................90
TABLE J38 JEFFERSON COUNTY TORNADO PROBABILITY .....................................................................93

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan viii
TABLE J39 JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS 1994-2003 ............................................................96
TABLE J40 JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS 1994 TO 2007 .......................................................97
TABLE J41 PALMER CLASSIFICATIONS...............................................................................................105
TABLE J42 RIVER LEVEL STAGES IN DROUGHT CONDITIONS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY ........................108
TABLE J43
PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX MONTHLY ...................................................108
TABLE J44 TOP FIFTEEN CONSECUTIVE DAYS 90 DEGREES OR HIGHER .............................................120
TABLE J45 HEAT MORBIDITY BY LOCATION 1989 TO 2002...............................................................121
TABLE J46 ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION HEAT WAVE DAMAGES ............................................122
TABLE J47 SUMMARY OF MISSOURI DAMS BY HAZARD CLASSIFICATION................................. 133
TABLE J48 JEFFERSON COUNTY HIGH HAZARD DAMS ......................................................... 133
TABLE J49 RECENT DAM FAILURES IN MISSOURI................................................................ 137
TABLE J50 REASONS FOR FIRES IN MISSOURI .................................................................... 141
Section Section Section 4 4 4 – Mitigation Mitigation ................................
................................................................
................................ ................................
..............................................................
................................ ..............................
..............................1
..............................
TABLE J51A LIST OF EMD AUTHORITIES .............................................................................. 4
TABLE J51B LOCAL JURISDICTIONS .................................................................................... 5
TABLE J51C SCHOOL DISTRICTS......................................................................................... 6
TABLE J51D SURVEY RESULTS ........................................................................................... 8
TABLE J51E 2009 ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SURVEY 1 ........... 9
TABLE J51F 2009 ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SURVEY 2 ..........10
TABLE J52 JEFFERSON COUNTY PROPOSED MITIGATION ACTION EVALUATION ................................11

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan ix
LIST LIST OF OF FIGURES
FIGURES
Section Section Section 1 1 – County/Community County/Community Profiles Profiles................................
Profiles Profiles................................
................................................................
................................ ................................
......................................
................................ ...... ......1 ......
FIGURE J2 TOPOGRAPHIC RELIEF MAP OF MISSOURI ............................................................................3
FIGURE J3 GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC MAP OF MISSOURI.......................................................................4
FIGURE J4 SURFICIAL MATERIALS IN MISSOURI ....................................................................................6
FIGURE J6 JEFFERSON COUNTY LAND USE..........................................................................................16
FIGURE J9 JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS ............................................................................28
FIGURE J10 TRANSPORTATION MAP JEFFERSON COUNTY.....................................................................36
FIGURE J11 ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS .................................................................................39
FIGURE J12 AMEREN UE ELECTRIC COVERAGE .....................................................................................49
FIGURE J13 NATURAL GAS COVERAGE .................................................................................................50
Section Section 2 2 – Risk Risk Assessment Assessment ................................
................................................................
................................
................................
.....................................................
................................ .....................
.....................1
.....................
FIGURE J14 SATELLITE IMAGE ST LOUIS AREA FLOODING 1993 ...........................................................3
FIGURE J15 AERIAL IMAGE ST LOUIS AREA FLOODING 1993 .................................................................3
FIGURE J16 1993 MIDWEST FLOOD........................................................................................................7
FIGURE J17 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ........................................................................................10
FIGURE J18 PUBLIC FACILITIES ..............................................................................................................12
FIGURE J19 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES...................................................................................................14
FIGURE J20 TRANSPORTATION .............................................................................................................16
FIGURE J21A UTILITIES DAMAGES ..........................................................................................................18
FIGURE J21B EMERGENCY EXPENSES.....................................................................................................20
FIGURE J22A LEVEE DESIGN ...................................................................................................................37
FIGURE J22B UNDERSEEPAGE.................................................................................................................38
FIGURE J22C LEVEE DSITRICT CONCERN EXAMPLE..................................................................................39
FIGURE J22D ST. ALBANS AND AUGUSTA BOTTOMS LEVEE SYSTEM ......................................................42
FIGURE J22E ST. PETERS AND CHESTERFIELD VALLEY LEVEE SYSTEM ......................................................43
FIGURE J22F CONFLUENCE LEVEE SYSTEM .............................................................................................44
FIGURE J22G ST. LOUIS REGIONAL MAP OF LEVEES................................................................................45
FIGURE J22H ST. LOUIS AND ST. CHARLES COUNTY LEVEE MAP.............................................................46
FIGURE J25 LANDSLIDE POTENTIAL.......................................................................................................56
FIGURE J27 EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE INTERIOR BUILDING .....................................................................59
FIGURE J28 EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE EXTERIOR BUILDING ....................................................................59
FIGURE J29 PEAK ACCELERATION .........................................................................................................68
FIGURE J30 MODIFIED MERCALLI SCALE...............................................................................................69
FIGURE J31
EARTHQUAKES IN MISSOURI .............................................................................................71
FIGURE J32 VIEW OF TORNADIC THUNDERSTORM ...............................................................................77
FIGURE J33 HAIL PICTURE.....................................................................................................................79
FIGURE J34 FLOODING PICTURE ...........................................................................................................79
FIGURE J35 LIGHTNING PICTURE...........................................................................................................79
FIGURE J36 WIND ZONES ....................................................................................................................80
FIGURE J37 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT DAMAGE F1.................................................................82
FIGURE J38 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT DAMAGE F2.................................................................82
FIGURE J39 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT DAMAGE F3.................................................................82
FIGURE J40 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT DAMAGE F4.................................................................82
FIGURE J41 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT DAMAGE F5.................................................................82
FIGURE J42 TORNADO SEASONAL PATTERN .........................................................................................89
FIGURE J43 PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN OF TORNADOES BY CATEGORY ..............................................91
FIGURE J44 REGIONAL TORNADO STORM TRACKS ...............................................................................91
FIGURE J46 MISSOURI DROUGHT REGIONS ........................................................................................106
FIGURE J47 DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX BY YEAR................................................................................110

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan x
FIGURE J48 PALMER DROUGHT INDEX ...............................................................................................113
FIGURE J49 HEAT INDEX CHART .........................................................................................................117
FIGURE J50 1980 MIDWEST HEAT WAVE ...........................................................................................126
FIGURE J52 WILDFIRE PICTURE ...........................................................................................................141
Volume 2 contains Figures J1, J5, J7, J8, J10, J23, J24, J26, J45, J51 and J54

Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan xi

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION SECTION 1
1
Community Community Profiles
Profiles
Natural hazards impact not only the citizens of the East-West Gateway Council of
Governments (EWG) planning region, but also their property, the environment and the
economy. Natural hazards, defined here as flooding, windstorms, severe winter storms,
earthquakes, heat waves, drought, dam failure and wildfires, have exposed the region’s
residents and businesses to the financial and emotional costs of recovering after disasters.
The risk associated with hazards increases as more people move to areas affect by hazards.
The inevitability of hazards and growing population and activity within the planning region
create an urgent need to develop strategies, coordinate resources and increase public
awareness to reduce risk and prevent loss from future hazard events. Identifying risks
posed by hazards, as well as developing strategies to reduce the impact of a hazard event
can assist in protecting life and property of citizens and communities. Local residents and
businesses are encouraged to work together to implement a Hazard Mitigation Plan that
addresses the potential impact of hazard events.
Below is a description and profile of Jefferson County within the EWG planning region.
County County Profile: Profile: Jefferson Jefferson County County
County
Development/Hist
Development/History
Development/Hist ory
Jefferson County is located in eastern Missouri, just west of the Mississippi River. It is
bordered on the north by St. Louis County and the Meramec River, on the south by Ste.
Genevieve and St. Francois Counties, and on the west by Washington and Franklin
Counties. The county is part of the St. Louis Metropolitan Statistical Area as defined by the
United States Census Bureau. The county has an area of about 425,280 acres that includes
about 2,176 acres of water in the Meramec, Mississippi and Big Rivers and other large
impoundments. Interstate I-55 runs north and south through the county. Jefferson
County was separated from St. Louis and St. Genevieve Counties and established in 1818
(effective January 1, 1819). Prior to settlement by Europeans, Native Americans including
the Delaware, Missouri, Osage and Shawnee tribes inhabited the region. Charles III, the
King of Spain, encouraged settlements by offering land grants. John Hildebrand,
recognized as the first settler, settled on Saline Creek in 1774, later known as the Meramec
Settlement. Lead, silica, zinc, barite, limestone and other mineral deposits lured settlers to
the area. The first lead shot tower west of Pennsylvania was erected in 1809 in the
southern part of Herculaneum. Sandstone mined from the St. Peter Sandstone Formation
was used to manufacture glass. See Figure J1 in the back of the Technical Appendix.
The county had a population of 213,600 as of the 2007 Census. There are 78,867
households in the county with an average size of 2.87 persons and the median age of
1

2
Jefferson County – Section 1
residents is 30.7 years. Median household income is $32,281 annually. Six percent of
county families and 7.4 percent of the total population have incomes below the poverty
level. There are 1,290 miles of roadways in Jefferson County with 75 percent maintained
by municipal and county governments, and 25 percent maintained by the state of Missouri.
Approximately 80 percent of workers drive to work alone and 0.3 percent take public
transportation to work.
While urbanization in the northern part of Jefferson County has been increasing, much of
the remainder of the county retains its rural, small town character. Once predominantly
rural, Jefferson County has experienced more than 50 years of growth pressure from the St.
Louis area. This growth has influenced the county, putting pressure on existing land uses,
natural resources and infrastructure. In 1997, the increase in sales tax revenues was only
3.27 percent, while for the last three years the increase has averaged over 7 percent per
year. This growth in sales tax increases not only impacts the general revenue monies, but
also has a tremendous effect on the budgets for the Sheriff’s department and the highway
department.
Geography, Geography, Geology Geology and and Climate
Climate
Jefferson County is divided into seven distinct physiographic regions. From the northeast
to the south these regions include: a small area of Dissected Till Plains, the River Hills, the
Zell Platform, the Burlington Escarpment, the Crystal Escarpment, the Salem Plateau and
the Avon Escarpment. These regions have landscape shapes controlled by separate
geologic units with variable bedding, thickness, weatherability and time of deposition. The
Dissected Till Plains consist of rolling and partially dissected basin with low hills and broad
ridges adjacent to the lower Meramec and Mississippi Rivers. Thick layers of alluvium and
loess have covered glacial till and outwash materials. The River Hills consist of a narrow
band of uplands bounded on the east by the Mississippi River and on the west by the
Burlington Escarpment. The Glaize, Joachim, Plattin, Pomme and Rock Creeks dissect this
area. Ridges and north and east slopes are covered with loess. West and south slopes
consist of upper cherty red clays and limestone outcrops on the lower slopes. The Zell
Platform is a small valley with rolling topography east of Selma south to Ste. Genevieve
County.
The River Hills are on the east and the Crystal Escarpment is on the west. The Burlington
Escarpment is a band that borders the River Hills and the Crystal Escarpment. The Salem
Plateau is the largest area in the county and borders the Crystal Escarpment to the north
and east and the Avon Escarpment to the south. The Avon Escarpment is the highest area
in the county located in the southwest corner. The Salem Plateau is on the north. Major
soils in this area are Goss and Wrengart. The highest point in the county is Vinegar Hill
about 1,060 feet above sea level. The lowest point is about 385 feet above sea level in the
Mississippi River bottoms. Floodplains of the Big, Meramec and Mississippi Rivers and their
tributaries are the most fertile of the county. Topography varies considerably throughout
Jefferson County. Much of the county can be classified as rugged. Large areas, with
greater than 20 percent slopes are common throughout northern and southern portions of

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
the county. The central one-third of the county consists of wider and flatter crests and
shallower valleys. The three largest rivers in Jefferson County are the Mississippi River,
Meramec River and Big River. These waterways offer commercial and recreational
opportunities, but a significant portion of the county is subject to flooding.
Due to the amount of waterways, as well as fluctuations in water levels the Big River drains
about 37 percent of the county; the Meramec River drains approximately 15 percent of the
county. Smaller streams draining directly into the Mississippi River make up about 48
percent of the county. Big River flows into Meramec River, which then flows into
Mississippi River. Both Joachim and Plattin Creeks flow into the Mississippi River. Refer to
Figure J2 below.
FIGURE FIGURE J2 J2 MISSOURI MISSOURI TOPOGRAPHY
TOPOGRAPHY
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
3

4
FIGURE FIGURE J3 J3 GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC MAP MAP OF OF MIS MISSOURI MIS MISSOURI
SOURI
Jefferson County – Section 1
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
There are 22 geologic formations exposed in Jefferson County, which range from Cambrian
to Pennsylvanian systems in age (Missouri Geological Survey, 1961). The Cambrian system
has the oldest rocks that crop out, and are composed of massive dolostone. Lead and zinc
ores and barite have been mined from Cambrian formations that occur in areas bordering
Big River and larger creeks in the southern part of the county. The Ordovician system is
exposed in almost three fourths of the county and has had a significant role in the
economic growth and development of the area. Limestone and dolostone quarries have
furnished building stones, aggregate and cement for highways, bridges, and buildings.
Sand mined in the St. Peter Sandston is used by the glass industry.
The Devonian system is represented by a narrow band of sandstone, shale and limestone
that crosses the northeastern part of the county. The Mississippian system is

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
predominantly limestone and cherty limestone. The limestone weathers easily and
produces deep cherty soils (in the northeastern part of the county). The Pennsylvanian
system consists of reddish-brown sandstone and bluish-gray to purple shale found in
sinkholes and vertical bedrock joints. Geologic units consist of flat to gently dipping
bedrock dominated by dolostone, sandstone and limestone formations. Several zones of
high angle faults that are downthrown are considered to be extensions of the Ste.
Genevieve Fault System. They are the Crystal City anticline, the Plattin Creek anticline, the
Roselle lineament, the Rugley School fault block, the Summit Park structure and the Valles
Mines-Vineland fault zone. A structure known as the Eureka-House Springs anticline has
been traced from the Mississippi River to near Wright City (McCracken, 1971). The
potential for landslide or slump occurs in areas of the Maquoketa and Warsaw shales.
Sinkholes are numerous in the Kimmswick limestone. Refer to Figure J3 above.
5

6
FIGURE FIGURE J4 J4 SURFICIAL SURFICIAL SURFICIAL MA MATERIALS MA TERIALS MAP MAP
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Jefferson County – Section 1
Soils Soils Soils - There are a total of six soil associations in Jefferson County including the Haynie-
Tice-Waldron Association, the Sonsac-Useful Association, the Wrengart-Goss Association,
the Menfro-Gasconade Association, the Minnith-Pevely Association, and the Haymond-
Freeburg-Horsecreek-Bloomdale Association.
The Haynie-Tice Waldron Association includes zero to two percent slopes, formed in
Mississippian River alluvium. It covers one percent of the county and is present mainly on
natural levees, bottomlands and old meanders. It consists of 48 percent well drained
Haynie soils (silty loam), 29 percent somewhat poorly drained Tice soils (silty loam), 20
percent somewhat poorly drained Waldron soils (silty loam) and three percent minor soils.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Sonsac-Useful-Moko Association ranges from three to 55 percent slope. It covers
approximately 58 percent of the county. These soils are most commonly found on narrow
ridgetops, backslopes and summits. The parent materials are loess and residuum. Welldrained
Sonsac soils (gravelly silt loam-well drained) make up 44 percent of the association.
Useful soils (silty loam-moderately well drained) make up 30 percent of the association.
Well-drained Moko soils (stony soils) make up 15 percent of the association and the
remaining 11 percent are minor soils.
The Wrengart-Goss Association ranges from three to 55 percent slope. It covers about 13
percent of the county and consists of soils located on summits, ridgetops, and backslopes.
The parent materials are loess and residuum. The moderately well drained Wrengart soils
(silty loam) make up 47 percent of the association, well-drained Goss soils (cobbly silty
loam) make up 45 percent of the association and eight percent of minor soils make up the
balance.
The Menfro-Gasconade Association ranges from three to 50 percent slope. It covers about
five percent of the county and is located mainly in the summit and backslope areas. Parent
materials consist of loess and residuum. The well-drained Menfro soils (silty loam) make up
69 percent of the association. Excessively well-drained Gasconade soils (rubbly soils) make
up 17 percent and the remaining 14 percent are minor soils.
The Minnith-Pevely Association ranges from three to 50 percent slope. It covers about
eight percent of the county. These soils are commonly found on ridgetops and backslopes.
The parent materials consist of loess and residuum. The moderately well drained Minnith
soils (silty loam) consist of 51 percent of the association. The moderately well drained
Pevely soils (silty loam) make up 32 percent of the association and minor soils make up the
remaining 17 percent.
The Haymond-Freeburg-Horsecreek-Bloomsdale Association ranges from zero to five
percent slope. It covers about 15 percent of the county. It is commonly found in the
floodplains and terraces. The parent material is alluvium. The well-drained Haymond soils
(silty loam) make up 26 percent of the association. The somewhat poorly drained Freeburg
soils (silty loam) make up 25 percent of the association. The well-drained Horsecreek soils
(silty loam) make up 25 percent of the association and the well-drained Bloomsdale soils
(silty loam) makes up about 24 percent of the association. Refer to Figure J4 above.
Climate Climate - Surficial materials in Jefferson County consist of residuum from cherty limestone
(clay and gravel) up to 50 feet in thickness. These materials are located in the northern half
of the county. Surficial materials in the southern half of the county consist of residuum
from cherty dolomite (clay, silt and gravel). The materials are normally less than ten feet
thick, but can exceed 50 feet in thickness. Surficial materials in the southwest corner of the
county consist of residuum from sandstone and cherty dolomite (clay, silt, sand, gravel and
boulders) and can be up to 200 feet thick.
7

8
Form Form of of Government
Government
Jefferson County – Section 1
Jefferson County is classified as a first class county and has its county seat in Hillsboro.
November 2008 citizens of Jefferson County approved a Home Rule Charter. A sevenmember
County Council governs the county and 13 municipalities. The county
government is divided into the following departments and divisions: Assessors office,
Auditor’s office, Circuit Court Clerk, Collector of Revenue, County Clerk, County
Commission, Data Processing, Department of Administration, Economic Development,
Jefferson County Health Center, Juvenile Office, Land Use Development and Code
Enforcement, Parks and Recreation, Public Administrator’s Office, Public Works, Recorder of
Deeds, and the Sheriff’s Department.
Community Community Partnerships
Partnerships
As part of the EWG region, Jefferson County collaborates on numerous issues including
infrastructure, law enforcement and emergency services. MoDOT, Franklin, St. Francois,
Washington, Ste. Genevieve and St. Louis Counties collaborate on county lines, as well as
transportation issues where it applies to infrastructure systems across the Meramec Rivers.
Other community partnerships include the Rock Creek Watershed Management Plan group
and the St. Louis-Jefferson County Solid Waste Management District. Jefferson County
Planning Division, along with the Missouri Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS),
and the Great Rivers Alliance of Natural-Resource Districts (GRAND) are working together
to address watershed plans for Jefferson County. Organizations that closely participate
with various hazard mitigation activities include Jefferson College, Jefferson County Soil
and Water District, Jefferson Online Information Network, and the University of Missouri
Outreach and Extension Office.
Public Public Awareness
Awareness
Most of the communities contacted in Jefferson County have been very responsive to the
Hazard Mitigation Plan initiative. The initial meeting was held on March 31, 2009.
Approximately 8 representatives from the county and communities were invited to learn
about the advantages of developing hazard mitigation plans.
Jefferson County:
8 Partakers Represented:
Lindbergh School District, Affton School District, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Agency, Olympian Village, SEMA, University City School District, and the City of Shrewsbury.
School Concerns:
• Funding for public education
• Safe rooms from tornados being multi-purpose
• Unified Communication System for schools to work on separate network in case of an
emergency

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
• Panorama views of inner school facilities given to emergency crews to help mitigate loss
of life in the case of a disaster
Community Concerns:
• Pre Debris-Removal to mitigate hazards in the future
• Debris removal measure in purchasing ex: chainsaws
• Strapping down moveable objects to better secure vital resources (water heater) in the
case of a natural disaster (earthquake).
• 75% government funding 25% local funding may be too much in today’s economic
stagnation to use mitigation dollars
• Contamination from methamphetamines and other illicit drugs
• Environmental impacts on the mitigation of asbestos both before and after disasters
• Build green before and after natural disasters. Ex: Rain Gardens to prevent flooding
• Reverse 911 calling dollars
• Restrict development trends: Ex: Northwest District High School flooded 3 times in past
12 months after subdivision built up stream from location
Dams:
Jefferson County has the greatest number of unregulated Dams in the State of Missouri.
• Look into mitigation measures in securing dams in high hazard areas
• Funding for public awareness in the dangers of unregulated dams
Media Media Relations
Relations
Newspapers published for Jefferson County are listed below:
St. Louis Post Dispatch/Jefferson County Suburban Journals
Festus - Jefferson County Leader
Hillsboro - Jefferson County Watchman
Arnold - Imperial Rock, Jefferson County Journal- Leader Publications
Meramec Journal
News Democrat Journal
A variety of radio and television stations are available which include:
Radio Television
KDJR 100.1 FM KETC-PBS
KGNA 89.9 FM KMOV-CBS
KTBJ 89.3 FM KPLR-Independent/WB
KDHX 88.1 FM Cable Channel 3
KEZK 102.5 FM KTVI-Fox
KFUO 99 FM KDNL- 30
9

10
KHITs 96 FM KNLC-24
KLOU 103.3 FM KSDK-NBC
KMOX 1120 AM Jefferson College JC-TV
KNSX 93.3 FM
KPNT 105.7 FM
KSHE 95 FM
KSLQ 104.5 FM
KTRS 550
KWMU 90.7 FM
Demographic Demographic Information
Information
Age
Age
Jefferson County – Section 1
According to the 2007 American Fact Finder, Jefferson County has a total of 59,867
persons under the age of 19; 132,256 persons between the age of 20 to 64 and 21,477
persons 65 years of age and older. Jefferson County has a younger population and has
fewer residents over the age of 64 years when compared to Missouri statewide population.
The median age of 36 in Jefferson County is the same as the 36.0 median age for Missouri.
Per Per Capita Capita Income Income and and Persons Persons Below Below the the Federal Federal Poverty Poverty Level
Level
Compared to statewide statistics, most data categories show that Jefferson County had
higher levels of income and lower levels of poverty. The 2000 Census noted that the per
capita income for Jefferson County was $19,435, and 13,253 persons were living below
the federal poverty level. Refer to Table J1 below.
TABLE TABLE J1 J1 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY INCOME INCOME AND AND POVERTY POVERTY LEVEL
LEVEL LEVEL
CATEGORIES CATEGORIES
VALUE
VALUE
Median money income, 1999 $55,295
Persons below poverty level, percent, 1999 7.4
Education Education Education Levels
Levels
The 2007 American Fact Finder noted that 25,996 individuals had not completed high
school, 45,773 persons had completed high school, and 10,650 persons had graduated
from college with a Bachelor’s degree. Refer to Table J2 below.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Diversity
Diversity
TABLE TABLE J2 J2 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO EDUCATION
EDUCATION
ATTAINMENT
ATTAINMENT
Group Group 2000 2000 2000 2007 2007 2007 Percent
Percent Perc Percent Perc ent
Change
Change Total
Total
Less Less than than 9 9
th grade grade
8,247 6,754 -22.1 6.55
9 th th-12 12 th
12
th ; ; No No diploma diploma
diploma
17,749 17,157 -3.5 14.09
Highschool Highschool Graduate Graduate
45,773 49,331 7.2 36.34
Some Some College College
College
30,175 32,336 6.7 23.96
Associates Associates 8,722 13,002 32.9 6.92
Bachelor Bachelor degree
degree
10,650 14,985 28.9 8.46
Graduate/professional
Graduate/professional Graduate/professional
4,640 6,747 31.2 3.68
According to the 2007 American Fact Finder, 98.7 percent of Jefferson County can be
classified as Caucasian. The largest minority, African-American accounts for 2,413 people.
The largest ethnic population of the total population was Hispanic at 1.3 percent.
According to the 2007 Census, 1,890 individuals have a Native American background and
1,777 have an Asian background. Refer to Table J3.
TABLE TABLE J3 J3 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY DIVERSITY
DIVERSITY
CATEGORY CATEGORY
NU NUMBER NU
MBER PERCENT
PERCENT
One race 210,789 98.7
White 206,404 96.7
Black or African American 2,413 1.1
American Indian and Alaska Native 401 0.2
Asian 1282 0.6
Asian Indian 203 0.1
Chinese 254 0.1
Filipino 244 0.1
Japanese 39 0.0
Korean 147 0.1
Vietnamese 327 0.2
Other Asian 68 0.0
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific I 0 0.0
11

12
TABLE TABLE J3 J3 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY DIVERSITY
DIVERSITY
CATEGORY CATEGORY
NU NUMBER NU
MBER PERCENT
PERCENT
Native Hawaiian 0 0.0
Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0
Samoan 0 0.0
Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0
Some other race 228 0.1
Two or more races 2,802 1.3
Race Race alone alone or or in in combination combination with with one
one
or or more more other other races
races
0.0
White 209,152 98.0
Black or African American 2,926 1.4
American Indian and Alaska Native 1,890 0.9
Asian 1,777 0.8
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander
348 0.2
Economy, Economy, Employment Employment and and Industry Industry
Industry
Labor Labor Labor Force
Force
Some other race 508 0.2
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 2,797 1.3
Jefferson County – Section 1
In 2007, Jefferson County had a labor force of 149,213 people and an unemployment rate
of 6.0 percent, up substantially from 3.2 percent in 2000. In 1990 the unemployment rate
was 7.7 percent. As of 2000, most employed county residents worked in retail, service,
and government sectors. According to the 2007 Census, 185 persons were in the Armed
Forces, 114,886 individuals were in the civilian labor force, 115,071 individuals were
employed, and 7,028 were unemployed. See Table J4 below. A total of 50,276 individuals
were not included in the labor force.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Average Average Wage Wage Rate
Rate
TABLE TABLE J4 J4 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO CO EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT STATUS
STATUS
Group Group Group 2000 2000 2007 2007 Percent
Percent Percent
Percent
Change
Change Total Total
Total
Population 16 & over 165,347 165,347
100.0
In labor 115,071 69.6
Not in labor 50,276 30.4
Population 16 & over 115,071 115,071
69.6
Civilian 114,886 69.5
Armed Forces 185 0.1
Civilian Labor Force 114,886 69.5
Employed 107,858 65.2
Unemployed 7,028 4.3
The average wage rate at the time of the 2007 American Fact Finder, according to U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis was $23,787 (based on place of
work). The median wage rate, based on 1999 place of residence data from the U.S.
Census, was $25,332.
Primary Primary Employers Employers and and Industries
Industries
The top industries in Jefferson County, based on 2007 data on employers that have 200
employees or greater, is found in Table J5 below.
TABLE TABLE TABLE J5 J5 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO TOP TOP EMPLOYERS EMPLOYERS 2007
2007
Company
Company Employees Employees in
in Business Business Type
Type
Name/Website
Name/Website St. St. Louis
Louis
Jefferson Memorial
Hospital
Northwest R-I
School District
Dobbs Tire and Auto
Centers Inc
Jefferson County
LMC Industries
Hillsboro School
Distirict
1,200 Health Care
873 Education
700 Service
550 Government
400 Manufacturing
390 Education
13

14
TABLE TABLE J5 J5 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO CO TOP TOP EMPLOYERS EMPLOYERS 2007 2007
2007
Company
Company Employees Employees in
in Business Business Type Type
Type
Name/Website
Name/Website St. St. Louis
Louis
Sinclair and Rush,
Arnold Plant
Windsor School
Distict
360 Manufacturing
350 Education
Table J6 Employment by Industry – 2007 Percentage
Agriculture, Mining 0.50
Construction 10.40
Trade, Transp., Utilities 22.70
Manufacturing 16.60
Public Administration 2.80
Financial services 5.10
Information 2.70
Education and Health 16.50
Leisure and Hospitality 7.20
Professional Bus. Services 5.80
Other services 9.60
Acc Access Acc Access
ess to Employment; Incommuting and Outcommuting
Jefferson County – Section 1
Approximately twice as many Jefferson County citizens commuted to work outside their
county of residence, as compared to citizens that worked within the county. According to
the 2007 Census, 73.5% of individuals worked within their county of residence, and 26.5
percent worked outside of their county of residence. See Table J7 below.
TABLE TABLE J7 J7 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO COMMUTING COMMUTING WORK WORK
WORK
Group Group 2000 2000 2007 2007 Change Change Percent
Percent
Total
Total
Workers 16 &
over
Car, truck,
van, alone
98,030 104,574 6.7 100.0
82,666 87,626 6.0 83.8
Carpool/public 11,929 11,889 -0.3 11.4
Walk 205 184 -10.2 0.2
Other 801 1,177 46.9 1.1
Work at home 1,149 2,862 149.1 2.7

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Codes/Regulations Codes/Regulations for for Building, Building, Stormwater, Stormwater, Fire, Fire, Zoning
Zoning
http://www.jeffcomo.org/BuildingCode.aspx?nodeID=BuildingDivision
Following are Codes in effect for Jefferson County, which can be found for free at the
International Code Council’s website:
International Residential Code 2003
International Building Code 2003
International Fire Code 2003
International Mechanical Code 2003
International Energy Code 2003
International Plumbing Code 2003
International Private Sewage System Disposal Code 2003
National Electric Code 2002
Existing Existing Community Community Plans
Plans
The Planning Division within the Department of Land Use, Development and Code
Enforcement conducts the planning efforts for the county government primarily in the area
of land use, but increasingly in the areas of infrastructure and public services. The Division
maintains and implements the County's Zoning Ordinance. This service may include
information on permitted uses for a specific piece of property, building setbacks, current
zoning, and information on processes available to change zoning. This service is generally
paid for by the citizens of Jefferson County as part of the one-half cent sales tax collected
for general government operations. The Division conducts numerous research efforts on
countywide issues as well as on site-specific issues. This research may include
environmental analyses, project feasibility studies, and reviews of project proposals.
The Planning Division is organized into three sections, each of which reports to the
Manager of the Planning Division. The Current Planning Section is responsible for daily
operations including planning and zoning issues and proposed development. The second
section is the Comprehensive Planning Section and is responsible for long-range planning
functions including watershed management plans, the Master Plan and other special area
or functional plans. The third section is the Technical Operations, which is responsible for
technical operations and inspection efforts of the Division. The Planning Division produces
plans and reports, the Comprehensive Master Plan, program guides and demographics,
maps and statistics. Planning documents released to date include Jefferson County’s
Master Plan, Rock Creek Watershed Management Plan, Jefferson County Transportation
Mobility Plan, Jefferson County Transit Needs Study and the Jefferson County Economic
Development Plan.
15

16
Jefferson County – Section 1
Land Land Use Use Information
Information Information (most (most current current information information in in accordance accordance accordance wit with wit with
h EW Gateway) Gateway)
Gateway)
Land use in Jefferson County, per EWG data is divided into the following categories:
residential (35,753 acres) commercial (2,491 acres), industrial (2,379 acres), public (4,137
acres), recreational (2,932 acres), transportation, and undeveloped (farmland with 376,217
acres). Refer to Figure J6 below that depicts the land use for Jefferson County (according
to Jefferson County Planning).
FIGURE FIGURE J6 J6 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY LAND LAND LAND USE USE MAP
MAP
Source: Jefferson County Planning

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Development Development Trends Trends and and and Annexation
The population of Jefferson County tripled from 1950 to 1970, with 16.9 percent of the
residents living in incorporated areas. In 1990, the population had increased to 171,380
with 27 percent of the residents living in incorporated areas. The next 25 years are
projected to see a continuation of the growth trend in Jefferson County. The county will
likely see an increase of population of 11 percent or 22,000 people over the next 10 years
and an increase of almost 28 percent over the next 25 years. Jefferson County will likely
experience less growth than St. Charles County, but more than St. Louis County. With the
steady increase in population, the county is faced with ever-increasing environmental
demands. The Jefferson County Soil, Water Conservation District, Jefferson Co Department
of County Services, and Code Enforcement are assisting with identifying and addressing
problems related to the environment.
The economy in Jefferson County has improved, as indicated by a growing labor force,
increased employment opportunities and lower unemployment rates. Growth in residential
and commercial building permits has also helped the county prosper. While the rest of the
state has been in a recession, Jefferson County has had good residential growth.
Residential building permits for 2001 were up over 15 percent. This growth is expected to
continue. Jefferson County plans to continue responsible growth patterns, while keeping a
unique identity for Jefferson County. In addition, the need for a variety of housing options
and concerns exist about increased amount of mobile homes in the county.
Moreover, growth in commercial building permits has helped to balance the economics of
the county. Since 1998, commercial building permits have continued to rise, increasing
108 percent from 1998 to 2001. In 1998, the construction cost of the commercial permits
was 4.6 million dollars, and a major benefit was the size of those commercial operations.
In 2001 the construction costs were 24.1 million dollars, an increase of almost 425
percent.
The local labor market is helping fuel increases in residential permits, and especially
commercial building permits. Jefferson County will continue to strive to provide more
employment opportunities within the county, for almost 67 percent of the workforce has
jobs outside the County. Polls on economic development indicated that efforts should be
made to attract commercial/retail development and to expand the tax base and promote
economic growth. The poll also indicates that growth needs to be planned and financially
responsible for county and that some residents do not want Tax Increment Financing to
assist developers.
An issue of concern in the county is the lack of communication among different
jurisdictions, infrastructure districts (sewer and water) and community service providers
(police, fire and ambulance), as well as a low level of communication/coordination among
the county and the other entities listed above regarding development of the county.
17

18
Jefferson County – Section 1
The Jefferson County Master Plan has identified the following five goals pertaining to
trends:
1. Promote growth and development that creates a quality environment, preserves
natural resources and provides community amenities. This goal will 1) include plans
for phased growth in an orderly manner, 2) promote more compact settlement
patterns that maintain overall low densities and preserve rural character of the
county, 3) promote application of site designs that are efficient and sensitive to the
environment, 4) support existing neighborhoods and develop new neighborhoods
that provide quality environments, 5) provide convenient locations for goods and
services, 6) provide economic and physical diversity of housing options, and 7)
ensure maintenance of public safety and protection of public and private property.
2. Create a housing plan for economic development to attract quality development
and jobs to the county.
3. Provide infrastructure and transportation that adequately services the community
and new development.
4. Ensure the maintenance of the environment and open space in an environmentally
sensitive development, especially in large-scale development areas.
5. To provide quality public awareness and high levels of education and
communications regarding planning and development issues.
Floodplain Floodplain Floodplain Management
Management
Jefferson County adopted a new ordinance on April 22, 1999, termed “The Jefferson
County, Missouri Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.”
The Legislature of the State of Missouri in Section 49.600 RSMo delegated the
responsibility to local governmental units to adopt floodplain management regulations
designed to protect, health, safety and welfare. Jefferson County adopted the ordinance to
establish and maintain the community’s eligibility for participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program as defined in 44 CFR 59.22(a)(3) and to meet the requirements of 44
CFR 60.3(d). The ordinance applies to lands that are unincorporated and identified as
numbered and unnumbered A zones. Jefferson County requires that no development shall
be permitted in the zones except through the issuance of a floodplain development permit
granted by the County Commission. The Jefferson County Building Official is the
Floodplain Administrator.
The duties of the Floodplain Administrator include: (1) review of applications for floodplain
development permits to assure that federal, state and local governmental agencies have
given prior approval; (2) ensure sites are safe from flooding and the floodplain
development permit requirements of this ordinance have been satisfied; (3) ensure that
manufactured home parks are safe from flooding; (4) issue floodplain development
permits; (5) notification of adjacent communities and ensure SEMA/FEMA have been

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
contacted prior to alteration or relocation of a watercourse; (6) ensure that maintenance is
provided in the altered or relocated portion of the watercourse so that the flood-carrying
capacity is not diminished; (7) verify and maintain records of actual elevations that the new
or substantially improved non-residential structures have been floodproofed; and (8) ensure
that Jefferson County Building Official obtain certification from registered professional
engineer or architect when floodproofing techniques are utilized for non-residential
structures.
Floodplain development requires a permit with specific information including: (1) a legal
description of the land; (2) description of work to be done; (3) type of use or occupancy for
which work is intended; (4) assessed value of structure and fair market value; (5)
identification if development is in flood fringe or floodway; (6) identification of existing
base flood elevation and elevation of proposed development; and (7) include plans and
signature.
Provisions for flood hazard reduction includes five sections: general standards, specific
standards, manufactured homes, floodway and recreational vehicles. General standards
require that: (1) no development will be granted in any numbered or unnumbered A zones
unless all conditions are satisfied; (2) if flood insurance studies are not available, the
community will obtain and utilize flood data; (3) until a floodway is designated, no new
construction will be permitted in any numbered A zone on the FIRM unless it is
demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the development (and all other surrounding
development) will not increase the water elevation of the base flood more than one foot;
(4) all new construction, improvements and other development will require design or
adequate anchorage; materials resistant to flooding; use of methods that minimize flood
damage; all utility/service facilities designed and located to prevent water from
entering/accumulating in the components from flooding; water supply/sanitary sewage
systems designed to minimize/eliminate infiltration of floodwaters and discharges from
systems into floodwaters located to avoid impairment or contamination; (5) storage,
material, and equipment within special flood hazard area is prohibited, and storage of
other material may be allowed if not subject to major damage by floods; (6) agricultural
structures may be constructed at grade and wet-floodproofed, provided there is no human
occupancy, is of single-wall design, no permanent retail, wholesale or manufacturing use
and a variance has been issued; (7) accessory structures such as parking areas, not larger
than 400 square feet, may be constructed at grade and wet-floodproofed, no human
habitation, is of single wall design and a variance has been issued; (8) hazardous material
storage and handling must be out of the special flood hazard area; and (9) a
nonconforming structure may be continued, subject to: if the structure is destroyed
(including through flooding), it can’t be reconstructed if the cost is more than 50 percent
of the pre-damage market value of the structure.
Specific standards of the floodplain ordinance requires the following: (1) new construction
or substantial improvement of residential structures must have the lowest floor, including
the basement, elevated to two feet above the base flood elevation. The building envelope
19

20
Jefferson County – Section 1
must be filled to an elevation one foot above base flood elevation; (2) new construction or
substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or nonresidential structures,
including manufactured homes, must have the lowest floor, including basement elevated
to one foot above the base flood elevation, together with utility and sanitary facilities
floodproofed so that below the base flood elevation, the structure is watertight with walls
impermeable to water with structural components with the capability of resisting
hydrostatics and hydrodynamic loads, an engineer must certify that the structure has met
these standards; and (3) for all new construction and substantial improvements, that all
fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor used only for parking of vehicles, building
access, or storage in an area other than the basement must be designed to equalize
hydrostatic flood forces, and the design must be certified by a registered engineer or
architect.
Manufactured homes to be placed within all unnumbered and numbered A zones on the
community’s FIRM must be installed using methods to minimize flood damage. The
homes must be elevated and anchored to resist movement. These homes must be placed
on elevated permanent foundations so that the lowest floor of the home is elevated two
feet above the base flood elevation and securely attached to prevent movement.
Manufactured homes that are not subject to provisions of Article 4 Section C(2) of the
ordinance must be elevated so that the lowest floor of the home is two feet above the base
flood elevation, or the home chassis is supported by reinforced piers so that there are no
less than 36 inches above the grade and securely attached.
The floodplain ordinance also requires that the community select and adopt a regulatory
floodway, that the community prohibit encroachments (fill, construction) in the floodway,
unless it had demonstrated through standard engineering practices that the encroachment
would not result in flood levels. The community, in unnumbered A zones will obtain and
use base flood elevation data from sources in Article 4, Section A(2).
Recreational vehicles, as stipulated in the floodplain ordinance, can only be placed on sites
within unnumbered and numbered A zones on the community’s FIRM for fewer than 180
consecutive days, and fully licensed for use or meeting the permitting, elevating and
anchoring requirements for manufactured homes.
The floodplain damage prevention ordinance has variance procedures and conditions for
approving floodplain management variances, for agricultural structures, accessory
structures, and penalties for violation of the ordinance.
Jefferson County has regulations to help control stromwater runoff through the County
land Disturbance Ordinance and The Erosion Sediments Control/Design Manual.
Wetlands Wetlands Issues
Issues
The Sierra Club has provided wetlands comments on various projects within Jefferson
County. Included in these comments were concerns about the loss of habitat over 14 miles

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
of new four-lane highway through rural farms, forests and streams associated with the
Highway 21 project in Jefferson County.
The United States Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, issues Nationwide Permits for
wetlands in their jurisdiction within Jefferson County. In accordance with the St. Louis
District, and District-Designated Waters: for any discharge or excavation activity requiring
authorization, proposed under NWPs 39, 41, 42 and 43, in any ephemeral, intermittent,
and perennial streams in the following Missouri watersheds, the permittee must notify the
District Engineer in accordance with the "Notification" general condition 13 (Federal
Register, 67 FR 2090-2092). This pertains to the following watersheds in Jefferson County:
Saline/Sugar/Romaine Creeks, Rock Creek, Dulin/Bourne/Heads/Bear Creeks, La Barque
Creek, Glaize Creek, and Joachim/Sandy Creeks.
National National Flood Flood Insurance Insurance (NFIP) (NFIP) (NFIP) Participation
Participation
The National Flood Insurance Policy member number for Jefferson County is 290808.
Table Table J8 J8 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM PROGRAM- PROGRAM
MUNICI PARTICIPATING
COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME NAME NAME INIT INIT FHBM FHBM INIT INIT FIRM FIRM FIRM CURR CURR EFF EFF EMERG EMERG DAT
DAT
ARNOLD, CITY OF 06/28/74 01/16/80 04/05/06 01/16/80
BYRNES MILL, CITY OF 07/29/80 05/16/83 04/05/06 05/16/83
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF 03/15/74 09/01/77 04/05/06 09/01/77
DE SOTO, CITY OF 05/26/72 04/05/06 05/26/72
FESTUS,CITY OF 10/18/74 02/14/76 04/05/06 02/14/76
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF 05/17/74 05/15/78 04/05/06 05/15/78
HILLSBORO, CITY OF 10/22/76 04/01/84 04/05/06 04/01/04
JEFFERSON COUNTY* 07/29/80 05/16/83 04/05/06 05/16/83
KIMMSWICK, CITY OF 11/01/74 01/06/82 04/05/06 01/06/82
PEVELY, CITY OF 10/29/76 09/18/85 04/05/06 09/18/85
SCOTSDALE, TOWN OF 05/16/83 04/05/06 10/21/02
CEDAR HILL LAKES, VILLAGE OF 04/05/06 04/05/06 04/05/07
MUNIC MUNICIPALITIES MUNIC MUNIC IPALITIES NOT NOT PARTICIPATING
PARTICIPATING
Cedar Hills Lake - sanction date April 5, 2007
Environmental Environmental Concerns
Concerns
The recently completed “Jefferson County Wastewater Management Report” identifies as a
concern septic system failure, including soil types within portions of the county that are not
conducive for on-site wastewater treatment systems and their leach-ate fields. Through
the growth and development of strategies identified in the Master Plan, many of the onsite
wastewater treatment system problems can be remedied by the use of public systems
that are more reliable and longer lasting. Sensitivity has been given to topographic
considerations because they relate to the health of the watersheds and watercourses in the
region.
21

22
Jefferson County – Section 1
Air pollution is a major concern in the St. Louis metropolitan area. Numerous initiatives
continue to improve air quality including: St. Louis Community Air Project, Gateway Clean
Air Program, and the St. Louis Regional Clean Air Partnership. Sixteen air qualitymonitoring
stations exist within the metropolitan area that monitors six air pollutants:
carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, particulates, lead, carbon dioxide and ozone. The Air
Quality Index (AQI) is a standardized method of reporting air pollution values. Over the
past 25 years, the air quality in St. Louis has greatly improved, and, through the
introduction of controls, ozone levels have significantly decreased.
In 2002, the St. Louis Metropolitan area (Missouri-Illinois) reached a significant air quality
milestone. Based on 2000-2002 air quality monitoring data, the area attained the onehour
standard. On May 12, 2003, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) designated the area as in maintenance of the one-hour standard. However, this is
only one step on the road to cleaner air in the St. Louis region. The area must soon meet
the eight-hour ozone standard, as well as the fine particulate standard.
Protection and preservation of natural environment is important. This includes air quality,
water quality, streams and topography. Stormwater runoff and land erosion is a
significant issue in Jefferson County. Jefferson County plans to prepare land development
policies and regulations to address erosion during land development and construction
process.
A number of hazardous waste facilities are located in Jefferson County. These sites include:
• Doe Run Company resource recovery facility, located in Herculaneum
• Dow Company hazardous waste facility, located in Pevely, Missouri
• British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., Westinghouse's parent company, owns a nuclear fuel
plant in Hematite, Missouri; potential for chemical solvents and possible traces of
technetium-99, a radioactive fission product thought to be present.
Endangered Endangered Species, Species, Historic Historic Properties/Districts, Properties/Districts, Arch Archaeological Arch aeological Sites
Sites
The federal and state listing of endangered species in Jefferson County includes the Pink
Mucket, Gray Bat, Indiana Bat, Ozark Big Eared Bat, Flathead Chub, Crystal Darter, Bald
Eagle, Eastern Prairie Fringed Orchid, Peregrine Falcon, Northern Harrier, Lake Sturgeon
and the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker.
In accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Archaeological and
Historic Preservation Act of 1974 and the Antiquities Act of 1906, information regarding
specific locations of archaeological sites cannot be released. The Missouri State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) within the Outreach Office of MDNR is in the process of setting
up a GIS database that will house archaeological sites in Missouri. Individuals in need of
information may contact the SHPO for information on specific sites. Reference for further

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
information can be made to Missouri Department of Natural Resources, 1-800-361-4827
or their website at http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/homepage.htm. The Missouri
Archaeological Society’s website is located at http://coas.missouri.edu/mas/ and provides
reference documents on archaeological sites in Missouri.
There are ten sites listed on the national register of historic properties in Jefferson County.
A list of these are found below and can also be found on the Missouri state website at
http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/Jefferson.htm.
Beaumont-Tyson Quarry District, address restricted (10/10/74) (also in St. Louis County)
Boemler Archaeological District, address restricted (10/01/74)
Boland Archaeological District, address restricted (10/01/74)
Fletcher, Thomas C., House, Elm St. between 1st & 2nd Sts., Hillsboro (11/19/74)
Greystone-Meissner, Gustave, House, NE of Pevely off US 61/67 (12/31/74); additional
information (3/11/85)
Kimmswick Bone Bed, Mastodon State Historic Site, NW of Imperial, Kimmswick vicinity
(11/05/80)
Leight, Valentine, General Store, 4566 Main St., House Springs (8/18/92)
Moder Archaeological District, address restricted (10/16/74)
Sandy Creek Covered Bridge State Historic Site, 5 mi. N of Hillsboro off US 21 (7/08/70)
Windsor Harbor Road Bridge, Windsor Harbor Rd. at Rock Cr., Kimmswick (9/08/83)
Identified Identified Assets
Assets
Inventory Inventory Inventory of of Critical/Key/Essential Critical/Key/Essential Facilities
Facilities
Medical Medical Facilities
Facilities
Relevant facilities include medical facilities, schools, long-term care facilities, day care
centers and government structures. These facilities represent resources for care and shelter
as well as populations requiring a higher level of care and installations critical to
community services.
The hospitals and other facilities that service Jefferson County are included in Table J9A.
Physician’s offices, clinics, and urgent care centers within the city are too numerous to list
here. See Figures J7 and J8 located in the back of the Technical Appendix.
Table Table J9A J9A JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY MEDICAL MEDICAL FACILITIES
FACILITIES
Hospitals Hospitals and and Other Other Facilities Facilities Location Number Number of of Beds
Jefferson Memorial Hospital 1400 US Hwy 61, Festus, MO 225
Unity Health Arnold Care Ctr 3619 Richardson Square N.A.
Community Treatment N.A N.A.
Disability Support Systems N.A N.A.
Jefferson County Support for N.A N.A.
23

24
Table Table J9A J9A JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY MEDICAL MEDICAL MEDICAL FACILITIES
FACILITIES
Jefferson County – Section 1
Hospitals Hospitals and and Other Other Facilities Facilities
the Handicapped
Location Number Number of of Beds
Jefferson County Health Dept N.A N.A.
Long Long Term Term Care Care Facilities
Facilities
Long-term care facilities are more likely to be impacted in a disaster. These facilities fulfill a
range of needs including retirement, assisted living, intermediate and long term continuing
care. Residents may have mobility and/or cognitive issues that present special problems.
Refer to Table J9B below.
TABLE TABLE J9B J9B LONG LONG TERM TERM CARE CARE FACILTIES FACILTIES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
FACILITY FACILITY
ADDRESS ADDRESS
CITY CITY BEDS BEDS # # CAP CAP
CAP
COLONIAL HOUSE OF FESTUS I 500 SUNSHINE DRIVE FESTUS 34 No
BAISCH NURSING CENTER 3260 BAISCH DRIVE DESOTO 18 No
BAISCH NURSING CENTER 3260 BAISCH DRIVE DESOTO 61 No
COLONIAL HOUSE
122 EAST PRATT STREET,
PO BOX 638
DESOTO 27 No
CORI MANOR HEALTHCARE &
REHABILITATION CENTER
560 CORISANDE HILL
ROAD
FENTON 22 No
CORI MANOR HEALTHCARE &
REHABILITATION CENTER
560 CORISANDE HILL
ROAD
FENTON 124 No
FESTUS MANOR
627 WESTWOOD DRIVE
SOUTH
FESTUS 120 No
FESTUS REST HOME
705 MOORE STREET, PO
BOX 51
FESTUS 20 No
SOUTH COUNTY NURSING HOME, INC
1101 WEST OUTER 21
ROAD
ARNOLD 153 No
TWIN CITY RESIDENTIAL CARE
#1 HOLDING LANE, PO
BOX 92
HERCULANEUM 48 No
ARBOR PLACE OF FESTUS, INC 12827 HIGHWAY TT FESTUS 81 Yes
COLONIAL HOUSE OF FESTUS II 129 GRAY STREET FESTUS 25 No
STRILER'S CARE CENTER
134 GRAY STREET, PO
BOX 356
FESTUS 20 No
SCENIC NURSING AND REHABILITATION
CENTER, LLC
1333 SCENIC DRIVE HERCULANEUM 23 No
SCENIC NURSING AND REHABILITATION
CENTER, LLC
1333 SCENIC DRIVE HERCULANEUM 166 Yes
MY PLACE RESIDENTIAL CARE 23 NORTH SIXTH STREET FESTUS 44 No
WOODLAND MANOR NURSING CENTER 100 WOODLAND COURT ARNOLD 178 No
CEDAR RIDGE MANOR 6400 THE CEDARS COURT CEDAR HILL 150 No
VILLAS, THE 1550 VILLAS DRIVE DESOTO 80 No
VILLAS, THE 1550 VILLAS DRIVE DESOTO 51 No
MAGNOLIA HOME, THE 204 GRAND AVENUE FESTUS 12 No
AUTUMN RIDGE
300 AUTUMN RIDGE
DRIVE
HERCULANEUM 69 No
LOVING CARE REST HOME, INC 1107 CLARKE STREET DESOTO 47 No

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE J9B J9B LONG LONG TERM TERM CARE CARE FACILTIES FACILTIES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
FACILITY FACILITY
ADDRESS ADDRESS
CITY CITY BEDS BEDS # # CAP CAP
CAP
FOUNTAINBLEAU NURSING CENTER
1349 HIGHWAY 61, PO
BOX 700
FESTUS 16 No
FOUNTAINBLEAU NURSING CENTER
1349 HIGHWAY 61, PO
BOX 700
FESTUS 97 Yes
HILLCREST CARE CENTER, INC 1108 CLARKE STREET DESOTO 120 No
KEATON CENTER 120 NORTH MILL STREET FESTUS 24 No
COLONIAL HOUSE OF CRYSTAL CITY 26 MISSISSIPPI AVENUE CRYSTAL CITY 52 No
CRYSTAL OAKS
1500 CALVARY CHURCH
ROAD, PO BOX 680
CRYSTAL OAKS 60 Yes
CRYSTAL OAKS
1500 CALVARY CHURCH
ROAD, PO BOX 680
CRYSTAL CITY 99 Yes
Day Day Day Care Care Facilities
Facilities
Day care centers represent yet another population that needs special consideration,
especially during a disaster situation. Most day care centers cater to children ages two to
five, although some day care centers serve older adults. Those facilities represent
specialized mitigation needs. The following tables show a current population in schools,
day care, preschools and residential facilities. This list of schools and other facilities is
deemed “Facilities Requiring Special Consideration” for evacuation purposes in the
Jefferson County Emergency Operations Plans. Refer to Table J10 below.
FACILITY FACILITY NAME NAME
TABLE TABLE J10 J10 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY CHILDCARE CHILDCARE CENTERS
CENTERS
LOCATION LOCATION
CAPACITY
CAPACITY
A CHILD'S PLACE INC. 8325 OLD LEMAY FERRY RD 50
A PLACE LIKE HOME LLC 6008 HIGHWAY B 60
ABC PRESCHOOL OF ARNOLD 2315 LONEDELL RD 49
ADVENTURES IN LEARNING -DESOTO 1107 CLARKE ST 126
ALL ABOARD LEARNING CENTER 544 KAREN DR 41
ALPHA AND OMEGA CHILD CARE II 429 MAPLE LN 97
ANTONIA HEAD START 6283 OLD LEMAY FERRY RD 27
BRIGHT BEGINNING LEARNING CENTER 1549 W MAIN ST 124
CHILDREN'S HOUSE OF HILLSBORO 603 MAPLE ST 50
CHILDRENS LEARNING CENTER 2713 CAPETOWN VILLAGE RD 86
CHILDTIME LEARNING CENTER 2130 MICHIGAN AVE 143
CHILDTIME LEARNING CENTER 17 MUNICIPAL DR 144
CREATIVE EXPRESSIONS LEARNING CENTER 2862 SECKMAN RD 100
DESOTO HEAD START 1812 ROCK ROAD 20
FENTON HEAD START 1201 SALINE RD 20
FENTON PLAY AND LEARN 1051 OLD GRAVOIS RD 191
FIRST STEP CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 4215 OLD STATE ROUTE 21 102
25

26
Jefferson County – Section 1
FACILITY FACILITY NAME NAME
TABLE TABLE J10 J10 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY CHILDCARE CHILDCARE CENTERS
CENTERS
LOCATION LOCATION
CAPACITY
CAPACITY
FOR KIDS ONLY CHILD CARE 5432 B HIGHWAY 61 67 99
HEMATITE HEAD START 3680 HILLSBORO HEMATITE RD 60
HIGH RIDGE LEARNING CENTER 3028 HIGH RIDGE BLVD 32
HOUSE SPRINGS HEAD START 4869 SCOTTSDALE 30
ITS FUN 2 LEARN 3225 BAISCH DR 60
JEFFERSON COLLEGE CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER 1000 VIKING DR 100
JEFFERSON COUNTY TELEGRAPH KIDS KORNER 1265 DOOLING HOLLOW RD 50
JEFFERSON R SEVEN PRESCHOOL 2400 R-7 SCHOOL RD 20
JEFFERSON R7 KIDS KORNER 2400 HWY 61 40
KID'S COUNTRY 1645 MARRIOTT 60
KIDS KLUBHOUSE AND ACTIVITY CENTER LLC 38 FOX VALLEY CENTER 51
LA PETITE ACADEMY 3607 RICHARDSON SQ 126
LIL THINKERS\BIG THINKERS, INC 102 FOURTH STREET 113
MAPLE MEADOWS LEARNING CENTER 510 MAPLE MEADOWS 30
MINI SCHOOL OF JEFFERSON COUNTY INC 6434 UPPER BYRNES MILL RD 128
MISS CINDY'S LEARNING CENTER 1757 BIG BILL RD 58
MOMMA BEAR'S CHILD CARE 8085 HIGHWAY 30 45
NORTHWEST PRESCHOOL PROGRAM 6992 RIVERMONT TRL 20
PRIME TIME CHILD CARE ACADEMY 5181 WARREN RD 98
THE GINGERBREAD HOUSE DAYCARE 2000 EL LAGO AVE STE 7 97
THE GODDARD SCHOOL 3228 MILLER RD 145
THE PLAYGROUND CHILD CARE CENTER LLC 1302 KENNER ST 56
WARM HEARTS CHILD CARE CENTER LLC 4235 GRAVOIS RD 60
WEE CARE LEARNING CENTER 821 AMERICAN LEGION DR 252
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY ATHENA ELEMENTARY 3775 ATHENA SCHOOL RD 20
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY BRANCH FESTUS 1515 MID MEADOW LN 60
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY BRANCH OUR LADYS 1550 ST MARY'S LN 50
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY CRYSTAL CITY ELEMENTARY 600 MISSISSIPPI 20
YMCA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY DUNKLIN R-V 300 COUNTY RD 50
YMCA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY HILLSBORO 101 LEON HALL PKY 50
YOUNG HEARTS LEARNING CENTER LLC 1420 GRAVOIS RD 77
BEST FRIENDS LEARNING CENTER LLC 3653 GAIL DR 10
BRADLEY, PATRICIA 2528 MEDFORD LN 10
BURKARD, CAROL 929 NATCHEZ TRCE 10
DITTER, MARY F 2205 PARKWOOD CT 10
EMERSON, CATHERINE 132 SOUTHMOORE 10
ENNIS, GLENDA 5888 TERRACE 10
FORD, DEBORAH 2129 SUNSWEPT LN 10
GANNON, PAULA 714 EMIL DR 10
HASKINS, SUSAN JEANNE 105 LAVERNEL LN 10
HODA'S MONTESSORI LLC 8 ENCHANTED FOREST DR 10
MALIN, DEBORAH 1855 BUENA VISTA DR 10
NUGENT, TINA 1109 ETHEL CT 10
SCHMITT, CONNIE SUE 815 VINE 10

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
FACILITY FACILITY NAME NAME NAME
TABLE TABLE J10 J10 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY CHILDCARE CHILDCARE CENTERS
CENTERS
LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION
CAPACITY
CAPACITY
SCHUBERT, CONSTANCE 1018 CRABAPPLE DR 10
SHELBY, HOLLY A 1520 PREHISTORIC HILL DR 10
SHOWERS, KATHRYN 2774 PINEBROOK DR 10
TEDDY BEAR DAY CARE 106 DELLA DR 10
THE LEARN & PLAY CHILDCARE CENTER 2278 CASTLEGATE DR 10
TIGHE, MARGOT M 4933 FERRIS CT 10
VANCE, JANE ELLEN 3163 OLD HWY A 10
WATSON, JENNIFER 4081 STONEY CRK 10
COUNTRY KIDS LLC 3318 HWY 61 20
DESOTO DAYCARE INC 1733 KOCH LN 20
TINY TOWN CHILD CARE 13197 TIMBERWOOD LN 20
ANGELS IN JOYLAND 450 BAILEY RD
APPLE TREE LEARNING CENTER 365 SALINE RD 0
CHILDREN OF DESTINY CHILD CARE 15533 GAMEL CEMETERY RD
CHRIST THE VINE LUTHERAN SCHOOL 1615 VINE SCHOOL RD
FELLOWSHIP BAPTIST PRESCHOOL 2735 HIGH RIDGE BLVD 0
GOOD SHEPHERD LUTHERAN PRESCHOOL 2211 TENBROOK RD 0
HOPE LUTHERAN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER 2308 GRAVOIS RD
IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHRISTIAN CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL 19 N 3RD ST 0
LITTLE SCHOLARS PRESCHOOL 409 DEER CROSSING DR
MUSTARD SEED PRESCHOOL 6439 HIGHWAY 61-67 0
NEW HOPE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 3921 JEFFCO BLVD
OLYMPIAD GYMNASTICS 215 N MILL ST
PEACE TABERNACLE DAYCARE 11096 HIGHWAY 21 0
REDEEMER PRESCHOOL 1620 NEW BOYD ST
ST MARTINS LEARNING CENTER 7890 DITTMER RIDGE RD 0
URSULINE DAY CARE CENTER 201 BRIERTON LN 0
VALLEY VIEW DAY CARE 2010 SECKMAN RD
VICTORY CHILDRENS CENTER 1 VICTORY DR 0
YMCA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY LIL RASCALS PRESCHOOL 1303 YMCA DR
Schools
Schools
More than 43,211 students attend various preschool, public and parochial elementary,
middle, and high schools and one community college in Jefferson County. There are 11
public school districts in Jefferson County. Schools represent yet another population that
needs special consideration, especially in a disaster situation. Most schools have students
that range from five through the age of 25. The following Figure J9 and Tables J11A and
J11B show a current population in schools and location of the districts. Some of the
districts overlap into neighboring counties. This list of schools and other facilities is
deemed “Facilities Requiring Special Consideration” for evacuation purposes in the
Jefferson County Emergency Operations Plans.
27

28
Jefferson County – Section 1
FIGURE FIGURE J9 J9 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY PUBLIC PUBLIC SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICTS
DISTRICTS
TABLE TABLE J11A J11A J11A JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO. CO. PRIVATE PRIVATE PRIVATE SCHOOLS SCHOOLS ADDRESS ADDRESS
ENROLLMENT
ENROLLMENT
CENTRAL BAPTIST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY 1812 E MCCARTY STREET 36
HELIAS HIGH SCHOOL 1305 SWIFTS HIGHWAY 895
IMMACULATE CONCEPTION SCHOOL 1208 E MCCARTY STREET 501
IMMANUEL LUTHERAN SCHOOL 8231 TANNER BRIDGE ROAD 97
KIM SCHOOL MONTESSORI 1022 TARA ROAD 31
KINDERGARTEN CONNECTION 623 OHIO STREET 41
MOREAU MONTESSORI SCHOOL 900 MOREAU DRIVE 43
ST FRANCIS XAVIER SCHOOL 7307 ROUTE M 195
ST JOSEPH CATHEDRAL SCHOOL 2303 WEST MAIN STREET 464
ST MARTIN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 7206 SAINT MARTINS BOULEVARD 226
ST PETER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 314 W HIGH STREET 516
ST STANISLAUS SCHOOL 6410 ROUTE W 310
TRINITY LUTHERAN EARLY CHILDHOOD 809 SWIFTS HIGHWAY 46
TRINITY LUTHERAN SCHOOL 812 STADIUM BOULEVARD 327

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Government Government Facilities
Facilities
TABLE TABLE J11B J11B JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO CO PUBLIC PUBLIC SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTR DISTRICTS DISTR ICTS
PUBLIC PUBLIC SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICTS LOCATION LOCATION STUDENTS
STUDENTS
Northwest R-I 2843 Community Ln 7066
Grandview R-II 11470 Hwy C 829
Hillsboro R-III 20 Hawk Dr 3691
Dunklin R-V 497 Joachim 1342
Festus R-VI 1515 Mid-Meadow Ln 3103
Jefferson Co. R-VII 1250 Dooling Hollow Rd 751
Sunrise R-IX 4485 Sunrise School Rd 326
Windsor C-1 6208 Hwy 61-67 3017
Fox C-6 745 Jeffco Blvd 11833
Crystal City 47 1100 Mississippi Ave 718
DeSoto 73 610 Vineland School Rd 2950
Table J12 below details city, county, state and federal government centers, police stations,
fire stations, ambulance bases and the 911 Emergency Operations Center.
Table Table J12 J12 GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT FACILITIES FACILITIES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY
COUNTY
GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT CENTERS CENTERS-CITY CENTERS CITY AND
FEDERAL
FEDERAL
LOCATION
LOCATION
Office of Job Training 2 Merchants Drive
Department of Agriculture 10820 Hwy 21
Office of Russ Carnahan 517 Bailey Rd
Recruiting Office 109 Walnut
Barnhart Post Office 1835 Marriot St
Herculaneum Post Office 1234 Commercial Blvd
Cedar Hill Post Office 7050 State Rd BB
Crystal City Post Office 324 Bailey
DeSoto Post Office 950 Boyd
Dittmer Post Office 7768 Gravois Rd
Festus Post Office 109 Walnut
Fletcher Post Office 7682 Old State Rd H
Grubville Post Office Highway Y
Hematite Post Office 3677 State Rd P
Hillsboro Post Office 4620 Yeager Rd
Imperial Post Office 6035 S. Outer Rd
Kimmswick Post Office Front and Market
Liguori Post Office 1 Liguori Rd
Mapaville Post Office 4049 Highway Z
Peveley Post Office N.A.
Richwoods Post Office Highway A
Valle Mines Post Office 3225 State Rd V
29

30
Jefferson County – Section 1
Table Table J12 J12 GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT FACILITIES FACILITIES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT CENTERS CENTERS-CITY CENTERS CITY AND
FEDERAL
FEDERAL
LOCATION
LOCATION
Arnold Post Office 1314 Jeffco Blvd
Fenton Post Office 10 Fenton Plaza
High Ridge Post Office 2829 High Ridge Blvd
House Springs Post Office Highway 30
Arnold Recruiting Center
County County Government Government Cen Centers Cen Centers
ters
471 Jeffco Blvd
Jefferson County Court House 300 2nd Street, Hillsboro
Jefferson County Economic Development
Bldg
725 Maple
Jefferson County Health Department-
Arnold
Jefferson County Health Department-
Hillsboro
3838 Jeffco Blvd.
405 2 nd Street
Jefferson County Parks and Recreation 2800 Community Drive
Jefferson County Library 3033 High Ridge Blvd
Jefferson County Library 2101 Jeffco Blvd
Jefferson County Library 3021 High Ridge
Jefferson County Library 7479 Metropolitan Blvd
Jefferson County Juvenile Office 2101 Jeffco Blvd
Jefferson County Juvenile Office
Police Police
Police
3857 Gravois Rd
Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department-
North
34 Dillion Plaza
Jefferson County Sheriff 300 2 nd St, Hillsboro
Jefferson County Sheriff-South Hwy 21 & Viking Dr. Hillsboro
Jefferson County East Hwy 61-67 & Windsor Harbor Rd
Arnold 2101 Jeffco Blvd
Byrnes Mill Osage Executive Dr
Cedar Hill 7322 Springdale
Crystal City 130 Mississippi Ave
DeSoto 17 Boyd
Festus 100 Park
Herculaneum 1 Parkwood Ct
Hillsboro 101 Second St
Kimmswick 3 rd and Vine
Olympian Village 205 Kronos Dr
Peveley P.O. Box 304

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Table Table J12 J12 GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT FACILITIES FACILITIES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT CENTERS CENTERS-CITY CENTERS CITY AND
LOCATION
LOCATION
FEDERAL
FEDERAL
Ambulance Ambulance Districts
Districts
Big River P.O. Box 348, Cedar Hill
Joachim-Plattin Township 619 Collins Dr, Fstus
North Jefferson County P.O. Box 233, High Ridge
Rock Township P.O. Box 629, Arnold
Valle 12363 Highway 21, Desoto
429 East Osage, Pacific
3279 Highway 100, Villa Ridge
Meramec
31768 Highway O, Robertsville
1060 Hwy W
Eureka Fire Protection and Ambulance 1815 W 5
District
th St
3571 Wright Oak School Rd
Fire Fire Fire Departments/Distric
Departments/Districts
Departments/Distric ts
Antonia 3538 Highway M, Imperial
6766 Cedar Hill Rd
8800 Highway 30, Dittmer
Cedar Hill
8790 Byrnes Rd
Crystal City 130 Mississippi Avenue
17 Boyd Street
201 East Miller
3610 Highway V
DeSoto
12545 Ware
Dunklin 1987 Highway Z
Eureka 1060 Highway W, Eureka
Goldman 9001 Old Lemay Ferry Rd, Hillsboro
304 Rice Street
Hematite
3067 Meyer Rd
Herculaneum 848 Broad
2839 High Ridge Blvd
1434 Gravois
High Ridge
6969 Wild, House Springs
120 5
Hillsboro
th Street
480 Second St
Jefferson County Fire Protection District 13000 Highway T, Festus
Mapaville 3701 Mapaville Fire Dept Rd
Pacific 910 West Osage, Pacific
1533 Jeffco Blvd, Arnold
1020 Main, Imperial
3540 Londell Rd, Arnold
Rock Community FPD
3889 Miller
Shady Valley FPD 4535 Old Hwy 21, Imperial
1691 S Hwy 141, Fenton
Springdale FPD
2198 Saline Rd, Fenton
Festus 212 N Mill St, 213 N Mill St,
Ridge Street
31

32
Recreation Recreation Facilities
Facilities
Jefferson County – Section 1
Table Table J12 J12 GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT FACILITIES FACILITIES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT CENTERS CENTERS-CITY CENTERS CITY AND
FEDERAL
FEDERAL
State State Properties
Properties
LOCATION
LOCATION
Mapaville State School
Highway A
Region Office 2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
Service Bldg 2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
Residence 2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
Warehouse 2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
Service Bldg/Office 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Pit Latrine 5 Mi N Hillsboro-Hwy 21
Tidwell House 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Pit Latrine 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Pit Latrine 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Supt Residence (New) 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Storage Barn 2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
Pole Storage 2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
Interpretive Museum 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Storage Building 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Open Shelter 20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
Desoto Armory State Hwy E 63020
Festus Armory Junction Hwy A&P
Unheat. Stor Bldg Desoto State Hwy E 63020
Festus OMS Junction Hwy A&P
Festus Unheat Stor Bldg Junction Hwy A&P
Core Building 10434 State Rd BB
Housing Unit A 10434 State Rd BB
Housing Unit B/C 10434 State Rd BB
Maintenance Building 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Student Center Building 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Arts & Science Building 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Library Learning Center 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Vocational Technical Building 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Vo-Prep Building 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Field House 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Fine Arts Center 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Arts And Science 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Technology Center 2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Jefferson College- Arnold 4500 Jeffco Blvd
Child Care Center 2mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Veterinary Technology Facility 2mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Jefferson County has approximately 145 acres of parks and recreation space for public use.
This is represented in 11 county parks that include hiking trails, passive recreation space,
and fishing and boating opportunities. The Jefferson County Master Plan noted that,

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
based on Missouri Statewide Outdoor Recreation Plan, the supply of parks and recreation
space is significantly low to serve the population of the county and that future
development opportunities should include measures to remedy this situation. Refer to
Table J13 below.
TABLE ABLE J13 JEFFERSON COUNTY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Big River Saddle Club 10 * * * * * * *
Brown's Ford 2 * * * * *
Cedar Hill 7 * * * * * *
Fletcher House .6 * * * *
High Ridge Civic Center 2 * * * * * * * *
Rockford Beach 8.2 * * * * * * * * *
Jefferson Winter Park 40 * * * * * * * *
Morse Mill 10 * * * * * * * *
Pleasant Valley 40 * * * * * * *
Sunridge 6 * * * * * * * *
NW Jefferson County
Sports Complex
20 * * * * *
Morse Mill Park- The Big River is located at Morse Mill Park. This location can be
used to launch canoes or inner tubes for a 10.9-mile float to Cedar.
Brown’s Ford Park- This facility is located on the Big River. A canoe or inner tube
can be launched at the boat ramp and take 18.3-mile trip down to Morse Mill
Park.
Cedar Hill Park- This facility provides picnicking, fishing and swimming
opportunities on the Big River. The old mill and dam are overlooking the fast
flowing water dropping over rocks. This is a good location to launch a canoe or
inner tubes for a 9.8-mile float to Rockford Beach.
Fletcher House- Built in 1851 by Thomas E. Fletcher (Missouri's first native-born
Governor, and Friend of the Sixteenth President, Abraham Lincoln). The Fletcher
House is operated as a "House Museum" through the cooperative efforts of the
Jefferson County Parks and Recreation Department and the Fletcher House
Foundation.
33

34
Jefferson County – Section 1
High Ridge Civic Center- A wide variety of services provided at the Civic Center.
Rockford Beach- Located on the Big River. A dam creates a cascading waterfall.
The river is commonly used for fishing, swimming and boating. Picnic facilities
provide tables, grills and volleyball court.
Jefferson County Winter Park- Facilities include volleyball courts and picnic tables
over looking the Meramec River. Swimming, personal watercrafts, powerboats
and fishing can be done.
Pleasant Valley Park Preserve – This park offers 40 acres of secluded areas, wild
flowers, wildlife and walking trails. This facility has picnic facilities, playground,
or trails.
Sunridge Park- This facility has the only tower open to the public. Shelter
houses, picnic facilities and playground are also available.
Northwest Jefferson County Sports Complex- The Jefferson County Parks and
Recreation Department acquired the Northwest Jefferson County Sports
Complex, formerly the Cedar Hill Ballfields. This 20-acre complex, which currently
provides four baseball fields with backstops, as well as a designated soccer area,
currently is the home of Youth Instructional Soccer Program and Summer Soccer
Camps.
The cities of Arnold, Pevely, Herculaneum, Crystal City, Festus, Hillsboro, and
Byrnes Mill all have city parks. In addition, there is Mastodon State Historic Site
in Imperial and several State Department of Conservation areas.
Sandy Creek Covered Bridge boasts the picture-perfect appearance of an old red
barn. It was one of six bridges built in 1872 to allow passage from the Jefferson
County seat of Hillsboro to St. Louis.
Mastodon State Historic Site contains an important archaeological and
paleontological site - the Kimmswick Bone Bed. Bones of mastodons and other
now-extinct animals were first found here in the early 1800s. The area was
identified as one of the most extensive Pleistocene ice age deposits in the
country. Archaeological history was made at the site in 1979 when scientists
excavated a stone spear point made by hunters of the Clovis culture (14,000 -
10,000 years ago) in direct association with mastodon bones. This was the first
solid evidence of the coexistence of people and these giant prehistoric beasts.
Today, the 425-acre property preserves this National Register of Historic Places
site and provides recreational opportunities. A museum tells the natural and
cultural story of the oldest American Indian site one can visit in the state's park
system. A full-size replica of a mastodon skeleton highlights the exhibits.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Gov. Daniel Dunklin's Grave State Historic Site, Herculaneum, houses the grave of
Missouri's fifth governor (1832-1836). The site interprets Dunklin's role as the
Father of Public Schools, and provides a scenic overlook of the Mississippi River.
Inventory Inventory of of Infrastructures
Infrastructures
County infrastructures include transportation, communications, water/sewer,
electricity and natural gas, solid waste disposal, law enforcement, fire protection,
emergency medical services and emergency management.
35

36
Transportation
Transportation- Transportation FIGURE J10
Jefferson County – Section 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Roadways
Roadways
The road network has a great impact on Jefferson County. On the eastern side of the
county lies the primary north/south transportation route, Interstate I-55. I-55 connects the
St. Louis region to points north and south. Internally, a web of state and county roads
connects Jefferson County. State Highway 61/67 and 21 are the primary north/south
connectors. Highway 30 runs northeast/southwest through the northwest quadrant of the
county. Highways M and MM provide a major east/west connection from I-55 and
highway 30, in the northern part of the county. The county lacks major east/west
connections south of the M-MM corridor. Narrow county roads provide indirect access in
much of the southern portion of the county. Local roads that serve subdivisions and
neighborhoods are classified as privately owned and dedicated to public use. Thus, for
these subdivisions, the homeowner’s association is responsible for maintenance. See
Figure J10 located in the back of the Technical Appendix.
The County Commission convened the Transportation Advisory Committee on September
16, 1999. The overall purpose of the TAC is to serve as the source of long-range planning
and strategies and shared local transportation policy making for Jefferson County. They will
advise the County Commission on funding, administration, and operation of publicly
supported agencies involved in the delivery of services for all modes of transportation, and
they will act as a focal point for cooperation and coordination between all stakeholders in
the delivery of transportation services.
One of the immediate tasks of the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) was to
investigate the transportation needs of the elderly, handicapped, Welfare-to-work
population and others with special medical and job service needs. The TAC found that the
transportation needs of these segments of the Jefferson County population are not being
sufficiently met. The key issues surrounding this finding are: 1) insufficient funding for
current providers; 2) communication between service providers is limited; 3) there is no
mass transit available in the County; 4) data on needed services is not available; 5) there is
no standard on data collection; and 6) the County is not accessing all the money available
to resource transportation services. All of these issues impact the physically disabled, the
elderly, and others with medical and job service needs.
The TAC has the following short term recommendations to address these issues: 1)
contract a public transit needs study; 2) create a centralized automated information center;
3) expand dialog with mass transit providers; 4) research the availability for potential
funding sources; and 5) implement strategies based on the findings of the transit needs
study.
37

38
Motor Motor Freight Freight Transportation
Transportation
Jefferson County – Section 1
Approximately 550 motor freight carriers and 148 freight shipping establishments serve
Greater St. Louis. Truck terminals are located throughout Greater St. Louis and are
strategically located near rail, port and pipeline facilities. See Table J14 below.
TABLE TABLE J14 J14 TRANS TRANSPORTATION TRANS PORTATION CARRIERS
Sample Sample of of Motor Motor Freight Freight Freight Carriers Carriers
Carriers
ABF Freight Systems Inc. Mabro Corporation
American Freightways Inc. Overnite Transportation Company
Beelman Truck Company Roadway Express Inc.
Cassens Corp. Truck Transport Inc.
CF Motor Freight USF Holland Motor Express
Creech Bros. Truck Lines Inc. Witte Brothers Exchange Inc.
Henry Transportation Inc. Yellow Freight Systems Inc.
Railroads: Railroads: Class Class Class I I
Railroads: Railroads: Regional
Regional
Amtrak (Passenger) Kansas City Southern
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Canadian National Railway
CSX Transportation
Norfolk Southern
Union Pacific
Railroads: Railroads: Switching Switching and and Terminal
Terminal
Alton and Southern Railway
Manufacturers Railway Company
Terminal Railroad
Amtrak passenger service is available in the City of St. Louis
Central Midland Railway
Illinois Western Railway

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Airports Airports Most Most Up Up to to date date data data for for smaller smaller aircraft aircraft facilities
facilities
TABLE TABLE J15 J15 Year 2000 Fourth Quarter St. Louis Metropolitan Region Region Aircraft
Aircraft
Operations Operations Summary Summary at at Public Public-Use Public Use Airports
St. Louis County, Missouri
Spirit of St. Louis 47,447
Creve Coeur 9,555
St. Charles County, Missouri St. Charles County, Smartt 12,045
St. Charles Municipal 9,490
Franklin County, Missouri
Sullivan Regional 5,824
Washington Memorial 8,918
St. Clair Regional 3,185
Jefferson County, Missouri Festus Memorial 3,731
St. Clair County, Illinois St. Louis Downtown-Parks* 40,195
Madison County, Illinois
St. Louis Regional* 19,435
Shafer Metro-East 3,913
Total 163,738
*Aircraft operation estimates reflect activity measured after normal ATC operating hours. This activity, when
combined with ATC traffic counts results in a slightly higher total aircraft operation count for that airport, when
compared to ATC reports.
In addition to the above figures and Table J17, Lambert-St. Louis International
Airport had 4,837general aviation aircraft operations and Mid America Airport in
Illinois had 785 general aviation aircraft operations for a total of 169,360
operations. Figure J11 depicts the regional metropolitan airports.
FIGURE FIGURE J11 J11 ST. ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS METROPOLITAN METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS AIRPORTS
AIRPORTS
39

40
1 = Creve Coeur 8 = St. Charles Municipal
2 = Festus Memorial 9 = St. Clair Regional
3 = Jefferson County (proposed) 10 = St. Louis Downtown - Parks
4 = Lambert-St. Louis Intl Airport 11 = St. Louis Regional
5 = MidAmerica 12 = Spirit of St. Louis
6 = Shafer Metro-East 13 = Sullivan Regional
7 = St. Charles County Smartt 14 = Washington Memorial
Public Public Trans Transportation
Trans portation
Jefferson County – Section 1
Public Transportation for Jefferson County consists of J.C. Transit (JCT) and OATS. (800)
201-6287. Attempts in the past have been made to support public transportation from the
urban St. Louis area to Jefferson County.
Communications
Communications
New infrastructures and services are enhancing county residents’ quality of lives. The
following list of communication facilities is not all-inclusive, but represents the major
providers of the county’s communication infrastructure. See Table J16 below.
TABL TABLE TABL TABL E J16 J16 TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS
Access U.S. Advanced Satellite Systems Inc.
Advantage CTI Communications Inc. Advertisenet
AirTouch Paging Alpha Telecommunications LLC
American Paging Inc. American Technology Corporation
AmericaNetworks Angel Technologies Corp.
AnsaRing Corporation Apple A Day Inc. (An)
Arch Communications Inc. Ascom Nexion
Associated Engineered Systems Inc. Astralink Technology Inc.
AT&T (Jefferson City Office) AT&T (St. Louis Operations)
AT&T Wireless Services Auto Cellular Inc.
Avtex Corp. Axon Telecom LLC
Barron Communications Inc. BigWideSky
Birch Telecom Black Box Inc.
Brick Network BusComm Inc.
Cable & Wireless Inc. Capital Cellular Inc.
Centergistic Solutions Central Business Communications Inc.
Central District Alarm Inc. Centras Networks Inc.
Charter Pipeline Cingular Wireless Corporation
ClearPages.com CMS Communications Inc.
Com Trol Company Com-Sal Inc.
Communications Technologies Inc. Communitronics Corporation
ComTrol Company Concentric Network- St. Louis
Connell Communications Inc. Continental Cement Company LLC
Convergent Communications of St. Louis CoreExpress LLC
CTitek Inc. Custom Cellular Inc.
Cybercon Inc. Cyberedge Technologies
Cybermill Communications Data Wiring & Systems Inc.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABL TABLE TABL E J16 TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS
Datacomm Research Company Dial-A-Page
Dictaphone Corporation Dielmann & Associates
Dietrich Lockard Group Digitized Communications Systems
Double Eagle LLC Ellington Telephone Co. Inc.
Empire Paging & Cellular Inc. EPC Inc.
ESCO Technologies Inc. Everest Connections Corp.
Everest Global Tech Group LLC Evoke Communications Inc.
Executive Systems Inc. Expressive Tek
Falcon Technologies Inc. Fidelity Communications Company
First Internet Alliance G&D Communications Inc.
Gateway City Connections Gateway Communications Group
Global Crossing Graybar Electric Company Inc.
GSI Inc. Honeywell Inc.
ICNS Inc. Inlink Corp.
Integrated Design Engineering Inc. Inter-Tel Technology Inc.
Interchange Technologies Inc. Intermedia Communications Inc.
Internet Gateway Inc. Intira Corporation
Ionex Telecommunications Inc. Jato Communications Inc.
JBM Electronics Inc. JWC Jurisprudence Wireless Communications
Kataman Communications Kaufman Broadcast Services
Kincaid Studios Kingdom Telephone Company
L&R Paging & Cellular Inc. LaBarge Inc.
Lanier Worldwide Inc. LDD Inc.
New Equipment Inc. Lowry Computer Products
Lucent Technologies Inc. Main Net (The)
Marconi Global Service Marz Inc.
Mastor Telecom Equipment Inc. Maximum Communications
MCI Worldcom McLeod USA Information Technology Systems
Med-Products Healthcare Inc. Metro One Telecommunications Inc.
Metro Tele-Communications Inc. Metropark Communications
Mid-America Telephone Systems Midwest Telecom Resellers Inc.
Mobile Select Systems Inc. Mobilecom
MobileComm Moore Design Group
Mpower Communications MVP Cellular
National Pager Services Inc. Net Impact (The)
Next Wave Communications Corp. Nextel Communications Inc.
Northern Telecom Inc. NorthPoint Communications
Nothing But Net Inc. NuVox Communications Inc.
Omnifax Division of Danka On Hold Studios Plus
ONE Inc. Optitek Inc.
Page Girls Inc. PageNet
Paging Network of St. Louis Partner Communications & Services Inc.
Phoenix Networks Inc. Phone Craft Inc.
Phonetell Technologies Inc. PrivSystems Inc
PSI Net Pulitzer Technologies Inc.
Roberts Wireless Communications LLC Rome Net Solutions
SAVVIS Communications Corp. Diamond NET ISP Inc.
SBC Advanced Solutions Inc. SecurityLink
Shared Technologies Slingshott Communications
Software Application Professionals Inc. SONACOM IT Partners
41

42
TABL TABLE TABL E J16 TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company Spectrum Resources Inc.
Sprint Corporation Sprint PCS
Water/Sewer
Water/Sewer
Jefferson County – Section 1
Jefferson County consists of eight public water districts, ten public and six municipal water
districts. Table J17 below represents the wastewater treatment plants and water supply
facilities in Jefferson County.
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
PACE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TRIB GLAIZE CR ANTONIA
SIMPSON CONST MAT-JEFFERS MERAMEC ARNOLD
ARNOLD SMALL MS4 TRIB MERAMEC RIVER ARNOLD
METAL CONTAINER CORP TRIB LITTLE MUDDY CR ARNOLD
SINCLAIR & RUSH INC MERAMEC RIVER ARNOLD
JERRY'S SUNOCO TENBROOK CR ARNOLD
WMM MERAMEC MERAMEC R ARNOLD
WOODGLEN APARTMENTS TRIB ROMAINE CR ARNOLD
BROOKSHIRE COURT APTS TRIB MERAMEC R ARNOLD
NPSD RANDOLPH HILLS DUTCH BOTTOM RD BR ARNOLD
ARNOLD CHURCH OF NAZARENE BR POMME CR ARNOLD
MERAMEC HTS SHOPNG CENTER TRIB MERAMEC R ARNOLD
TESSON HILLS APARTMENTS TRIB ROMAINE CREEK ARNOLD
GLAIZE CREEK SEWER DISTRI GLAIZE CR BARNHART
KOA,SELSOR DEVELOPMNT GRP TRIB MISSISSIPPI R. BARNHART
COUNTRY TRAIL ESTATES MHP TRIB OF HEADS CREEK BARNHART
WILLOW BEND MHP TRIB GLAIZE CR BARNHART
WALLACH SEPTIC SERV, INC TRIB BIG RV CEDAR HILL
MO AMERICAN, CEDAR HILL L UN TR BIG R CEDAR HILL
COUNTRY AIRE MANOR MHP BR ISUM CR CEDAR HILL
LAKES OF DEERWOOD SUBD TRIB ISUM CR. CEDAR HILL
LAKE ADELLE SEWER DIST TRIB SKULLBONE CR CEDAR HILL
BEL AIR ESTATES MHP SUBD TRIB ISUM CR CEDAR HILL
LAKE TAMARAC SUBD TRIB SAND CR. CEDAR HILL
PARADISE ESTATES MHP WWTF TRIB SKULL BONES CR CEDAR HILL
EL CHAPARREL EST SUBD ASO TRIB SAND CREEK CEDAR HILL
COUNTRY LIFE ACRES SUBD TRIB BELEW CR CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL FIRE PRO DIST TRIB BIG R CEDAR HILL
AUSTIN TRAILS WWTF TRIB SAND CR CEDAR HILL
MO AMERICAN, SAND CREEK F SAND CR CEDAR HILL
SECLUDED FOREST SUBD ISUM CR. CEDAR HILL
WEDGEWOOD VILLAGE PLAT 2 TRIB ISUM CR CEDAR HILL
SENNAWOOD VILLAGE SUBD ISUM CR. CEDAR HILL
SUNRISE ACRES SUBDIVISION TRIB BIG RIVER CEDAR HILL

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
PHILLIPS PROPERTY WWTF TRIB SAND CR CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL U-GAS TRIB BIG RIVER CEDAR HILL
CRYSTAL CITY SAND MISSISSIPPI R CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY WTP MISSISSIPPI RIVER CRYSTAL CITY
FRED WEBER INC/ASPHALT PL UNNAMED TRIB CRYSTAL CITY
TWIN CITY AUTO SALVAGE DITCH PLATTIN CK CRYSTAL CITY
UPS, CRYSTAL CITY TRIB PLATTIN CREEK CRYSTAL CITY
FESTUS-CRYSTAL CITY STP PLATTIN CREEK CRYSTAL CITY
FESTUS AIRPORT LAGOON TRIB PLATTIN CR CRYSTAL CITY
ARNOLD READY MIX CORP - D TRIB JOACHIM CREEK DE SOTO
ARCH JOHNSTON COMPANY INC FRITZ CR DE SOTO
COUNTRY CORNER TRIB FLUCOM CR DE SOTO
TIMBER CREEK RESORT TRIB MCMULLEN BR DE SOTO
JONES PLUMBING SERVICES TRIB JOACHIM CK DE SOTO
JEFFCO FEED & FERTILIZER FRITZ CR DE SOTO
DE SOTO WWTP JOACHIM CR DE SOTO
SOUTH JEFFERSON COUNTY UT FALLING ROCK BRANCH DE SOTO
WALKER HILL MHC TRIB JOACHIM CR DE SOTO
ATHENA ELEMENTARY TRIB HAVERSTICK CR DE SOTO
AUTUMN'S HAVEN BRANCH HAVERSTICK CR DE SOTO
BAISCH NURSING CENTER MCMULLEN BR DE SOTO
LAKE KINIPPI SUBDIVISION UNNAMED BR DRY CREEK DE SOTO
SUNRISE R-9 ELEM SCHOOL TRIB JOACHIM CR DE SOTO
VALLE LAKE SEWER DISTRICT TRIB JOACHIM CR DE SOTO
OLYMPIAN VILLAGE WWTP UN TR PLATTIN CR DE SOTO
CAESARS MOBILE HOME PARK MCMULLEN/JOACHIM CR DE SOTO
TIMBER CREEK RESORT MCMULLEN BR DE SOTO
POWER MODEL SUPPLY CO. TRIB FLUCOM CR DE SOTO
PINE FORD VILLAGE MHP TRIB BIG R. DE SOTO
ATHENA CENTER TRIB HAVERSTICK CR DE SOTO
UNION PAC RR DESOTO CAR S TRIB JOACHIM CR DE SOTO
WALKER CAR WASH TRIB TANYARD BR DE SOTO
BRIARWOOD ESTATES TRIB JOACHIM CREEK DE SOTO
WILDWOOD LAKE TRIB PLATTIN CR DE SOTO
AA QUICK SEWER TRIB BIG R DITTMER
ABR SEPTIC SERVICE INC TRIB BIG RIVER DITTMER
DITTMER MEAT PACKING COMP TRIB BIG RIVER DITTMER
SUNSET FIREWORKS LDT/GLOB W FORK TO JONES CR DITTMER
SYCAMORE GREEN ACRES MHP TRIB SKULLBONES CR. DITTMER
FOREST HILL MANOR MHP TRIB CALVEY CR. DITTMER
MAPLE GROVE ELEM SCHOOL TRIB BIG RIVER DITTMER
CAMP SUNNYHILL ADVENTURE TRIB DUTCH CR DITTMER
CEDAR GROVE MHP TRIB CALVEY CR DITTMER
ST MARTIN'S UNITED CHURCH TRIB SKULLBONES CR DITTMER
43

44
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
Jefferson County – Section 1
EUREKA MATERIALS COMPANY MERAMEC RIVER EUREKA
GRAPHIC FINISHERS OF AMER TRIB MERAMEC RV FENTON
IMPERIAL ORNAMENTAL METAL TRIB FENTON CR FENTON
AERO METAL FINISHING INC TRIB SALINE CR FENTON
PRODUCTION CASTINGS, INC TRIB SALINE CREEK FENTON
SIR THOMAS MANOR APTS TRIB SUGAR CR FENTON
BIG VALLEY MHC ROMAINE CREEK FENTON
MERAMEC SEWER COMPANY TRIB MERAMEC R FENTON
NEPSD - TERRY JEAN ACRES SUGAR CR. FENTON
YOUNG SUBDIVISION TRIB FENTON CR FENTON
MCARTHY HOMESITES #2 BR ROMAINE CR FENTON
KOLLER CRAFT PLASTIC PROD TRIB SALINE CR FENTON
NPSD, INTERIM SALINE CR MERAMEC R FENTON
MDNR, ST.FRANCOIS MOUNTAI TRIB MISSISSIPPI RIV FESTUS
ARCH JOHNSTON COMPANY INC TRIB TO MUDDY CREEK FESTUS
H SAND & GRAVEL PLATTIN CR FESTUS
PLATTIN VALLEY STABLES TRIB PLATTIN CREEK FESTUS
PLATTIN VALLEY SAND-GRAV. TRIB PLATTIN CREEK FESTUS
CATHY JOKERST WATER TREAT TRIB JOACHIM CR FESTUS
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MISSIS TR PLATTIN CR FESTUS
MURPHY USA STORE #5775 TRIB PLATTIN CK FESTUS
DPC ENTERPRISES TRIB PLATTIN CR FESTUS
SHAPIRO BROTHERS INC TRIB PLATTIN CR FESTUS
RED-E MIX TRANSPORTATION TRIB MISSISSIPPI RV FESTUS
RIVER CEMENT CO/SELMA CLIFFDALE HOLLOW FESTUS
AMERENUE, RUSH ISLAND PP MISSISSIPPI RIVER FESTUS
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COM TRIB JOACHIM CR FESTUS
RIVER CEMENT COMPANY MISSISSIPPI RIVER FESTUS
LIFESTYLE MHP TRIB TO BUCK CR FESTUS
M.C.L. MHP TRIB MUDDY CR. FESTUS
EDGEWOOD HEIGHTS SUBD TRIB TO SANDY CR. FESTUS
RCSD-GODFREY GARDENS TRIB JOACHIM CR FESTUS
MAPAVILLE MEADOWS SUBDIVI TRIB SANDY CR. FESTUS
LAKESIDE MANOR PLATTIN CR FESTUS
SUNSET POINTE MHP TRIB JOACHIM CR FESTUS
SELMA VILLAGE SEWER DISTR TRIB MUDDY CR FESTUS
TOULON HEIGHTS SUBD TRIB LITTLE CR FESTUS
FESTUS,LAMBERT HILLS SUBD TRIB TO JOACHIM CR. FESTUS
PLATTIN PRIMARY SCHOOL TRIB SELMA HOLLOW FESTUS
OSCARS FAMILY RESTAURANT BR SELMA HOLLOW CR FESTUS
ARBOR PLACE OF FESTUS TRIB HOCUM HOLLOW FESTUS
TWIN GABLES MHP SELMA HOLLOW/MISS R. FESTUS
MANDERLEY COURT MOBILE HO UN TRIB PLATTEN CR FESTUS
MAPAVILLE MEADOWS SUBDIVI SANDY CR. FESTUS

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
OAKLAND MANOR MHP TRIB PLATTIN CR FESTUS
HAPPY HOLLOW MOBILE HOME TRIB BUCK CR FESTUS
BERWIN BUSINESS CENTER BUCK CR FESTUS
FESTUS, GREEN BRIER EST. TRIB BUCK CR FESTUS
FESTUS, INTERIM WEST TP JOACHIM CR FESTUS
LAKE VIRGINIA SUBD E LAG TRIB JOACHIM CR HEMATITE
DOE RUN, HERCULANEUM SMLT MISSISSIPPI R HERCULANEUM
HERCULANEUM WASTEWATER TR JOACHIM CREEK HERCULANEUM
SIEVEKING INC TRIB SALINE CREEK HIGH RIDGE
COUNTRY CLUB OF SUGAR CR TRIB SALINE CR HIGH RIDGE
BEAUMONT SCOUT SWIMMING TRIB LITTLE ANTIRE C HIGH RIDGE
H-J ENTERPRISES INC TRIB SALINE CR HIGH RIDGE
SIMMLER INC TRIB SALINE CREEK HIGH RIDGE
TIRE SHREDDERS UNLIMITED TRIB SALINE R HIGH RIDGE
WOODRIDGE APARTMENTS TRIB TO WILLIAMS CR HIGH RIDGE
SUNNY ACRES II LLC LITTLE ANTIRE CR HIGH RIDGE
STARLIGHT APTS. TRIB OF BEAR CR HIGH RIDGE
VILLAS OF WILLIAMS CREEK TRIB L ANTIRE CR HIGH RIDGE
LAUREL ACRES MHP ANTIRE CR. HIGH RIDGE
NPSD-PERE CLIFF TRIB L ANTIRE CREEK HIGH RIDGE
MURPHY ANN APARTMENTS TRIB TO SALINE CR. HIGH RIDGE
PEMBROKE PARK APARTMENTS ANTIRE CR HIGH RIDGE
NPSD, CRYSTAL HILLS TRIB SALINE CR HIGH RIDGE
H R ELECTRONICS ANTIRE CR HIGH RIDGE
NPSD WALNUT RIDGE WWTF ANTIRE CR HIGH RIDGE
ENGINEERED COIL COMPANY ANTIRE CR HIGH RIDGE
NPSD, ANTIRE SPRINGS PLNT TRIB ANTIRE CREEK HIGH RIDGE
JEFFERSON CO PWSD #2 TRIB BIG RIVER HIGH RIDGE
JEFFERSON COUNTY LIBRARY TRIB BEAR CR HIGH RIDGE
NPSD, HUNNING HILLS STP TRIB SALINE CR HIGH RIDGE
NATCHEZ ESTATES APARTMENT TRIB SALINE CREEK HIGH RIDGE
NPSD, COUNTRY CLUB OF SUG TRIB SALINE CR HIGH RIDGE
FEED MY PEOPLE BR BEAR CR HIGH RIDGE
NPSD - PARADISE VALLEY WILLIAMS CR HIGH RIDGE
SEVEN SPRINGS/TWIN LAKES TRIB BIG RIVER HIGH RIDGE
TEEN CHALLENGE OF ST LOUI TRIB SALINE CR HIGH RIDGE
CONCRETE RESOURCES INC - TRIB SANDY CR HILLSBORO
DRY CREEK MATERIALS INC DRY CREEK HILLSBORO
DRY CREEK MATERIALS, INC. DRY CR HILLSBORO
ALL WEATHER SEW SERV INC TRIB COTTER CR HILLSBORO
JEFFERSON CNTY SMALL MS4 MERAMEC RIVER HILLSBORO
L W SEWER CORP TRIB DRY CR HILLSBORO
GRANDVIEW R-II SCHOOL DIS TRIB DRY CR HILLSBORO
FAWN MEADOWS SUBD WWTF TRIB OF SANDY CREEK HILLSBORO
45

46
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
Jefferson County – Section 1
OAK RIDGE TRAILER COURT TRIB SANDY CR HILLSBORO
MAPA ACRES M H P TRIB SANDY CR HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO WW RECLAMATION BELEW CR HILLSBORO
CHAPEL HILL MHC TRIB SANDY CR HILLSBORO
FISHER COMMERCIAL AREA TRIB BELEW CR HILLSBORO
PARC GREENWOOD MHP TRIB TO SANDY CR. HILLSBORO
SANDIA HEIGHTS MHP SUBD SANDY CR/JOACHIM CR HILLSBORO
MOCKINGBIRD SUBD WWTF TRIB BIG CREEK HILLSBORO
LEONARD MOBILE HOME PARK TRIB SANDY CR HILLSBORO
HILLTOP MOBILE HOME ESTAT MURRIL BR HILLSBORO
RAINTREE PLANTATION GALLIGHER CR. HILLSBORO
SWISS LODGE APARTMENTS TRIB SANDY CR HILLSBORO
JEFFERSON WOODS SUBD TRIB BIG CR/SANDY CR HILLSBORO
PIONEER TRAIL SUBD TRIB TO SANDY CR. HILLSBORO
LAKEWOOD TRAILS WWTF TRIB JOACHIM CREEK HILLSBORO
GRANADA MEADOWS WWTP TRIB SANDY CREEK HILLSBORO
PERSIMMON POINT DRWBRDG E TRIB SANDY CREEK HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO, JAMESTOWN MOBI TRIB MURREL BR HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO NORTH WWTF SANDY CR HILLSBORO
LOCKEPORT LANDING WWTF TRIB BIG CREEK HILLSBORO
SANDY BRANCH SUBD WWTF HILLSBORO
KING SEPTIC SERVICE TRIB BIG RIVER HOUSE SPRINGS
IMPERIAL PUMPING TRIB GLAIZE CK HOUSE SPRINGS
O'BRIEN EXCAVATING TRIB HEADS CR HOUSE SPRINGS
RITE NOW SEPTIC CLEANING TRIB BIG RIVER HOUSE SPRINGS
BONACKER FARMS INC TRIB BIG RIVER HOUSE SPRINGS
BIG 3 AUTO PARTS & SALVAG HEADS CR HOUSE SPRINGS
NORTHWEST R-1 SCHOOL DIST TRIB BEAR CREEK HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, NORTHWEST HIGH SCH BEAR CR HOUSE SPRINGS
OUR LADY QUEEN OF PEACE TRIB DULIN CR HOUSE SPRINGS
CREST MANOR MHP TRIB TO BEAR CR. HOUSE SPRINGS
GREEN ACRES MHP BEAR CR HOUSE SPRINGS
GOLDEN ACRES MHP TRIB HEADS CREEK HOUSE SPRINGS
ELDERLY HOUSING PARTNERSH DULIN CREEK HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, HOUSE SPGS MID SCH HEAD'S CR. HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, ECHO VALLEY EST HEAD'S CR. HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, BEAR CREEK ESTATES TRIB BEAR CREEK HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, WOODRIDGE ESTATES TRIB HEADS CR. HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, PINE GROVE MANOR TRIB BEAR CR HOUSE SPRINGS
BYRNES MILL MOBILE HOME P TRIB BIG RIVER HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, MEADOW BROOK ESTATE TRIB HEADS CR HOUSE SPRINGS
SYCAMORE SPRINGS MHP HEADS CREEK HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, CEDAR SPGS ELEM SCH DULIN CREEK HOUSE SPRINGS
BYRNES MILL SOUTH WWTP BIG RIVER HOUSE SPRINGS

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
MEADOWBROOK VALLEY ESTATE TRIB BIG R HOUSE SPRINGS
WINTERWOOD SUBDIVISION TRIB LA BARQUE CR HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, MILLER CROSSING WTF TRIB HEADS CR HOUSE SPRINGS
HSSC, FISHER RD TRIB BEAR CR HOUSE SPRINGS
BLUFFS WWTF BIG RIVER HOUSE SPRINGS
AAA ZOELLNER MATERIALS IN TRIB HEADS CR IMPERIAL
ARNOLD READY MIX CORP - I TRIB ROCK CR IMPERIAL
MASTERCHEM INDUSTRIES INC GLAIZE CR IMPERIAL
NPSD ARCHVIEW SUBDIVISION TRIB ROMAINE CR IMPERIAL
EV'S PLAZA SHOPPING CENTE TRIB GLAIZE CR IMPERIAL
VERDA VISTA APARTMENTS GLAIZE CR. IMPERIAL
JOHN'S AUTO BODY TRIB TO ROCK CR. IMPERIAL
CEDAR GROVE MHP CHESLEY ISLND SLOUGH IMPERIAL
RCSD, SECKMAN SCHOOL ROCK CREEK IMPERIAL
SUBURBAN AUTO AUCTIO TRIB TO ROCK CR IMPERIAL
LION'S DEN OUTDOOR LRNG ROCK CR IMPERIAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF MO - ROCK CREEK KIMMSWICK
RCSD, KIMMSWICK WWTP MISSISSIPPI RIVER KIMMSWICK
BROOKSTONE ESTATES SUBD TRIB SANDY CR MAPAVILLE
DISABILITY SUPPORT SYSTEM TRIB SANDY CR MAPAVILLE
MAPAVILLE STATE SCHOOL FO WET WEATHER BR MAPAVILLE
PONY BIRD INC TRIB SANDY CR MAPAVILLE
BRECKENRIDGE JEFFCO PLANT MERAMEC R MURPHY
LAKE CATTAILS SUBDIVISION TRIB MERAMEC RIVER PACIFIC
LAKEWOOD CARE CENTER TRIB MERAMEC R PACIFIC
PALISADES VILLAGE SUBD MERAMEC R PACIFIC
H. TRAUTMAN QUARRY INC TRIB SANDY CREEK PEVELY
BRECKENRIDGE PEVELY PLANT TRIB SANDY CR PEVELY
TEAMSTERS LOC 688 HEALTH TRIB MISSISSIPPI R PEVELY
SCORE TRIB MISSISSIPPI R PEVELY
CARONDELET CORP TRIB SANDY CREEK PEVELY
HUNT INDUSTRIAL SERVICE C TRIB JOACHIM CREEK PEVELY
DOW CHEMICAL - RIVERSIDE TRIB MISSISSIPPI R PEVELY
E & J AUTO SALVAGE TRIB TO JOACHIM CR PEVELY
CHERRY LANE SUBD TRIB TO SANDY CR. PEVELY
PEVELY WWTP TRIB SANDY CR PEVELY
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 688 HEALT TRIB MISSISSIPPI R PEVELY
GRIFFITH'S FIRST ADDITION TRIB SANDY CR. PEVELY
SAINT-GOBAIN CONTAINERS TRIB SANDY CR PEVELY
HAZELWOOD COURT MHP TRIB TO SANDY CR. PEVELY
VICTORY CHRISTIAN FELLOWS TRIB TO JOACHIM CR PEVELY
SAND CASTLE SUBDIVISION JOACHIM CR PEVELY
PEVELY, HUNTERS GLEN SUBD TRIB MISSISSIPPI R PEVELY
UNIMIN CORPORATION - PEVE UN TR SANDY CR PEVELY
47

48
TABLE TABLE J17 J17 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON CO CO WASTEWATER WASTEWATER TREATMENT TREATMENT FACILTIES FACILTIES
FACILTIES
FACILITY FACILITY
RECEIVING RECEIVING STREAMS STREAMS STREAMS CITY
CITY
Jefferson County – Section 1
O'NEAIL'S SEPTIC SERVICES TRIB PLATTIN CK VALLES MINES
COUNTRY AIR EST/RETIREMEN TRIB FLOCUM CR VALLES MINES
Electricity Electricity and and Natural Natural Natural Gas
Gas
Ameren UE operates 18 power-generating plants, with five located in the region and
Dynegy operates six, with three located in the region. Ameren IP operates the distribution
system in Illinois. The total capability for all power plants is 12,769 megawatts. Refer to
Figures J 12 and J13 below.
Electricity/Gas Electricity/Gas Providers
Providers
Ameren UE
1901 Chouteau Ave.
St. Louis, Missouri 63103
314-621-3222
Serves Missouri portion of region

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
FIGURE FIGURE J12 J12 AMEREN AMEREN UE UE COVERAGE
COVERAGE
Source: Ameren UE
49

50
Laclede Gas Company
720 Olive Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63101
314-342-0500
Serves Missouri portion of region
FIGURE FIGURE J13 J13 LACLEDE LACLEDE GAS GAS COVERAGE
COVERAGE
Source: Laclede Gas
Jefferson County – Section 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Solid Solid Solid Waste Waste Disposal
Disposal
Jefferson County is a part of the St. Louis-Jefferson Solid Waste Management District. The
following list identifies those waste providers for the municipalities identified. See Table
J18 below.
TABLE TABLE J18 J18 SOLID SOLID WASTE WASTE DISPOSAL
DISPOSAL
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
Municipal Municipal
Municipal
Directory Directory Directory Waste Waste Provider Provider Provider Address 12976 St. Charles
Provider Provider City City
Jefferson Arnold Midwest Waste Rock Rd.
Midwest Waste,
Waste Mngt, M 12976 St. Charles
Bridgeton
Jefferson Byrnes Mill & M Hauling Rock Rd Bridgeton
Jefferson Cedar Hill Lakes
City of Crystal
Jefferson Crystal City City
Waste
130 Mississippi Ave Crystal City
Jefferson De Soto Management
Waste
7320 Hall St St. Louis
Jefferson Festus Management 7320 Hall St St. Louis
Jefferson Herculaneum Republic Waste 18716 State Hwy 177 Jackson
Jefferson Hillsboro Republic Waste 18716 State Hwy 177 Jackson
Midwest Waste,
Kraemer
Hauling
12976 St. Charles
Rock Rd Bridgeton
Jefferson Kimmswick
Olympian
Jefferson Village Republic Waste 18716 State Hwy 177 Jackson
Jefferson Parkdale
Waste
Jefferson Pevely Management 7320 Hall St St. Louis
Jefferson Scotsdale
Solid Waste
Franklin St. Clair Solutions P.O. Box 228 St. Clair
Franklin Sullivan CWI of Missouri 18716 State Hwy 177
12976 St. Charles
Jackson
Franklin Union Midwest Waste Rock Rd
City of
Bridgeton
Franklin Washington Washington 405 Jefferson Washington
51

52
Jefferson County – Section 1
In 1989-1990, there were 13 sanitary landfills in the St. Louis metropolitan area (Missouri-
Illinois), which includes the District, with an estimated remaining lifespan of 8.8 years. One
landfill was publicly owned. By 1995-1996, there were seven sanitary landfills in the
region: three in Missouri and four in Illinois. All landfills but one are now privately owned
and operated. Since 1989-1990, six sanitary landfills have closed and one has been
decommissioned. In the last two years a privately owned landfill in St. Clair County, Illinois
has opened. See Table J19 below.
Law Law Enforcement
Enforcement
TABLE TABLE J19 J19 2007 2007 LANDFILLS LANDFILLS IN IN REGION
REGION
Landfill Landfill
County State
Fred Weber St. Louis Missouri
Veloia Oak Ridge St. Louis Missouri
Roxana Madison Illinois
WMI - Milam St. Clair Illinois
WMI – Cotton Woods St. Clair Illinois
Source: St. Louis-Jefferson Solid Waste Management District
The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department includes 196 officers. In addition, Crystal City
has 20 officers, DeSoto has 19 officers, Festus has 29 officers, Hillsboro has 14 officers,
Kimmswick has 6 officers, Pevely has 22 officers, Herculaneum has 17 officers, Byrnes Mill
has 15 officers, Arnold has 46 officers, and Olympian Village has 2 officers. The
departments participate in mutual aid agreements with all incorporated areas within the
county. Jefferson County officers working in the north zone are headquartered out of High
Ridge. Officers working in the south zone are headquartered out of Hillsboro. Officers
working out of the east zone are headquartered out of Imperial.
Emergency Emergency Services Services (911)
(911)
Emergency management for Jefferson County is conducted and coordinated by the
Jefferson County Emergency Management & Public Information Office. They help to
protect, preserve and enhance the quality of life of county residents by working with the
community in managing the mitigation of, preparedness for, response to, and recovery
from natural and technological disasters and intentional destructive acts. Their focus is on
the preservation of: the lives and health of citizens, the environment within which they live,
and their property. They cooperate with participating agencies, municipalities,
organizations, industries and media, then providing the citizens of the county with
information to prepare for and recover from disasters.
The Department of Administration is primarily responsible for staff functions within the
County and consists of two staff offices and three line divisions. The functional areas of the
department are the Office of the Contracts and Grants Administrator, the Office of
Emergency Management and Public Information Administrator, the Division of Human
Resources, the Division of General Services, and the Division of Animal Control. The

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
address for the Emergency Management Office is the Jefferson County Courthouse
Basement, 300 Main Street, Hillsboro, MO 63050.
Emergency Emergency Medical Medical Services
Services
The Joachim-Plattin Ambulance District (JPAD) protects 63000 people living in an area of
180 square miles. The district is a public department whose members are on a paid status
and operates out of two stations. Joachim Plattin Ambulance District (JPAD) provides
emergency and non-emergency medical care and transport to the south-eastern region of
Jefferson County, Missouri (approx 30 miles south of St. Louis). JPAD began providing
service in September 1975. The district includes a wide range of demographics from rural
farming areas, to small cities and areas of heavy industry. JPAD spans across nine separate
fire districts and five different police departments (including Jefferson County Sheriff's
Department).
Jefferson County has seven ambulance districts that include the following:
• Big River Ambulance District: P.O. Box 348, Cedar Hill, MO
• Joachim-Plattin Townships Ambulance District: 619 Collins Drive, Festus, Mo
• North Jefferson county Ambulance District: P.O. Box 233, High Ridge, MO
• Rock Township Ambulance District: P.O. Box 629, Arnold, MO
• Valle Ambulance District: 12363 Highway 21, Desoto, MO
• Meramec –Ambulance District- House 1 (Unit 8517) 429 East Osage, Pacific MO
63069; House 2 (Unit 8527) 3279 Highway 100, Villa Ridge MO.; House, 31768
Highway O, Robertsville, MO. 63072
• Eureka Fire Protection and Ambulance District– House 1, 1060 Hwy W; House 2,
1815 W 5 th ; House 3, 3571 Wright Oak School Rd.
Fire Fire Pr Protection Pr otection
Table 20 lists the 19 fire protection districts providing fire services and their resources in
Jefferson County.
The districts that service the County provide the following resources in Table J20.
TABLE TABLE J20 J20 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY FIRE FIRE PROTECTI PROTECTION PROTECTI ON RESOURCES 2003
2003
Fire Fire Protection Protection Protection District District Stations Stations Vehicles Staff (Professional (Professional & &
Volunteer)
Volunteer)
Antonia 1 4 36
Cedar Hill 3 5 66
Crystal City 1 6 30
DeSoto City 1 2 34
DeSoto Rural 3 12 50
Dunklin 1 6 30
Eureka 1 N.A. 27
53

54
Jefferson County – Section 1
TABLE TABLE J20 J20 J20 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY FIRE FIRE PROTECTI PROTECTION PROTECTI ON RESOURCES 2003 2003
2003
Fire Fire Protection Protection Protection District District Stations Stations Vehicles Staff (Professional (Professional &
Volunteer)
Volunteer)
Goldman 1 7 33
Hematite 2 6 21
Herculaneum 1 8 20
High Ridge 3 5 58
Hillsboro 2 6 38
Jefferson R-7 FPD 1 N.A. 41
Mapaville FPD 1 7 25
Pacific 1 N.A. N.A.
Rock Community FPD 4 9 64
Shady Valley 1 7 29
Springdale 2 6 N.A.
Festus 3 10 42
Underground Underground Underground Infrastructure
Infrastructure
Due to homeland security concerns, underground utilities are not mapped in this plan.
According to the Missouri One Call System, Inc. as of April 4, 2003, the following
companies maintain underground utility lines within Jefferson County. Emergency
information concerning these utility lines in contained in the County’s Emergency
Operations Plan. The Jefferson County Emergency Management director’s telephone
number is 636-797-5381.
The following companies listed in Table J21 have underground lines running through
Jefferson County:
TABLE TABLE TABLE J21 J21 UNDERGROUND UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE
INFRASTRUCTURE
Ameren UE AT & T Corp
Broadwing Communications Cablevision, LLC
Charter Citizens Electric Corp
City of Arnold City of Crystal City
City of DeSoto City of Eureka
City of Festus City of Pevely
Crawford Electric Coop, Inc House Springs Sewer Co.
Jefferson Co. Public Works Jefferson Co. CPWSD-C-1
Jefferson Co. PWSD 1 Jefferson Co. PWSD 10
Jefferson Co. PWSD 2 Jefferson Co. PWSD 3
Jefferson Co. PWSD 5 Jefferson Co. PWSD 6
Jefferson Co. PWSD 7 Jefferson Co. PWSD 8
KMB Utility Corp Laclede Gas Company
Level 3 Communications Lightcore (DTI)
MCI Worldcom Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District
Mississippi River Trans Missouri American Water Co.
Missouri Natural Gas Northeast Public Sewer Dist
Northeast Public Sewer Dist Phillips Pipeline Co.
SBC (Southwestern Bell) Sprint Long Distance
Valle Lake Sewer District

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Missouri One Call utility location telephone number is 1-800-344-7483.
Inventory Inventory of of Housing Housing Structures Structures
Structures
Number Number of of Dwelling Dwelling Units
Units
According to the American Fact Finder 2007 there are 84,919 households in the county
with an average size of 2.69 persons and the median age of residents is 36.2 years.
Median household income is $55,295 annually with 7.4 percent of county families and 9.1
percent of the total population with incomes below the poverty level.
Average Average Unit Unit Cost
Cost
The average dwelling unit cost (including rental properties) for Jefferson County is
$147,300 up from $91,690 in 2000.
TABLE TABLE J22 J22 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY HOUS HOUSING HOUS HOUSING
ING UNITS
Total Total Housing Housing Units Units
84,919 84,919 Percent
Percent
Unweighted Sample HU Count
Total Housing Units (100 percent Count) 84,919
Est Occupied Housing Units (100 percent Count) 78,867
Est Vacant Housing Units (100 percent Count) 6,052
Pct of Occupied HUs in Sample 92.9
Pct of Vacant HUs in Sample 7.1
TOTAL OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS 78,867
Owner occupied units 66,679 84.5
Renter occupied units 12,188 15.5
Vacant Housing Units 6,052 7.1
TABLE TABLE TABLE J23 J23 J23 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY HHOUSING
H OUSING
BREAKDOWN
BREAKDOWN
BREAKDOWN
Total Total Units Units Percent
Percent
Single Family Units 65,498 77.7
2 to 4 Units 3,759 4.4
5 to 19 Units 2,576 3.2
In Buildings with 20+ Units 290 0.3
Mobile Homes 12,115 14.4
Boat, RV, Van, etc. 0 0.0
55

56
Average Average Unit Unit Cost
Cost
Total Total Inventory Inventory of of Structures Structures
Structures
TABLE TABLE J24 J24 VALUE VALUE OOF
O F HOMES IN JEFFERSON
COUNTY
COUNTY
Home Home Home Value Value Number Number Percent
Percent
House Value < $50,000 7,682 11.5
Value $50,000 to $99,999 8,570 12.9
Value $100,000 to $149,999 18,620 28
Value $150,000 to $199,999 15,759 24
Value $200,000 to $299,999 11,433 17.2
Value $300,000 to $499,999 4,109 6.2
Value $500,000 to $999,999 713 1.1
Value $1 million or more 117 0.02
Median House Value $147,300
Source: 2007 U.S. Census
Jefferson County – Section 1
The total Jefferson County assessed valuation for the year 2000, including both real estate
and personal property was $1,863,308,707, according to Missouri Department of
Revenue. State assessed utilities accounted for $151,536,040.
TABLE TABLE J25 J25 Inventory Inventory Inventory of of Structures
Structures
Parcel Parcel Classification Classification
Total Assessed # of of Recor Records Recor
ds Average Average Assessed
Assessed
Commercial & Agricultural $1,468,600 32 $45,893.75
Commercial & Agricultural & Residential $4,333,900 30 $144,463.33
Agricultural Vacant $2,598,700 1903 $1,365.58
Agricultural $630,400 255 $2,472.16
Commercial $271,718,000 2089 $130,070.85
Commercial Vacant $15,239,400 350 $43,541.14
Residential $1,006,396,400 61942 $16,247.40
Residential Vacant $44,626,200 16819 $2,653.32
Commercial & Residential $43,678,100 602 $72,554.98
Cities Cities and and Villages Villages (No (No (No Change Change 2000 2000 Census)
Census)
Below is a listing of the municipalities within Jefferson County. This information is based
on the results of the capabilities questionnaires sent out to all of the jurisdictions. Included
in this listing is demographic statistics, municipal information on mitigation policies,
programs and regulations, as well as asset data. Blanks in the database indicate that the
municipality did not respond to the question.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson County County unincorporated
unincorporated
unincorporated
Total population 145,820
Classification 1st Class, Home Rule
Leadership structure County Executive Council
Median household income, 1999 $48,470
Total housing units
Housing unit, median year built
54,506
Median gross rent $504
Median owner-occupied housing value $102,081
Master plan yes-'03
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations BOCA '96
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations yes- 2'
Water service Water Districts; individual
Sewer service Sewer Districts; individual
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service multiple
Ambulance service multiple
Arnold
Arnold
Total population 19744
Classification City-3rd class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $47,188
Total housing units 7913
Housing unit, median year built 1972
Median gross rent $575
Median owner-occupied housing value $97,500
Master plan yes
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations IBC 2000; #7.30
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations Zoning sec 6;art 5.76-5.97;ord 7.5, sec5-13
Water service PWSD #1
Sewer service PWSD #10
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service Midwest MO Gas
Fire service RockCom FPD
Ambulance service RockTNAD
57

58
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Byrnes Byrnes Byrnes Mill
Mill
Total population 1172
Classification City-4th class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $51,211
Total housing units 935
Housing unit, median year built 1985
Median gross rent $484
Median owner-occupied housing value $121,600
Master plan yes-'91
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations IBC 2000
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations yes
Water service PWSD #1; PWSD #10
Sewer service Byrnes Mill
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service Laclede
Fire service High Ridge FPD
Ambulance Big River AD
Cedar Cedar Hill Hill Lakes
Lakes
Total population 229
Classification Village
Leadership structure Bd of trustees
Median household income, 1999 $54,375
Total housing units 95
Housing unit, median year built 1962
Median gross rent $483
Median owner-occupied housing value
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
$67,500
Water service community well; indiviual wells
Sewer service individual
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service none
Fire service Cedar Hill FPD
Ambulance service Big River AD
Jefferson County – Section 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Crystal Crystal City
City
Total population 4247
Classification City-3rd class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $36,117
Total housing units 1,769
Housing unit, median year built 1955
Median gross rent $452
Median owner-occupied housing value $85,400
Master plan yes
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations IBC 2000; #1374
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations #1096
Water service Crystal City
Sewer service Crystal City
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Crystal City FD
Ambulance service JPT AD
Desoto
Desoto
Total population 6375
Classification City-3rd class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $30,725
Total housing units 2741
Housing unit, median year built 1954
Median gross rent $406
Median owner-occupied housing value $67,200
Master plan yes-'60
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations BOCA 2000
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations yes
Water service Desoto
Sewer service Desoto
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Desoto F&R
Ambulance service Valle AD
59

60
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Festus
Festus
Total population 9660
Classification City-3rd class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $36,687
Total housing units 4,040
Housing unit, median year built 1966
Median gross rent $474
Median owner-occupied housing value $87,300
Master plan Yes- -'03
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations IBC 2000; #716
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations Chap 11
Water service Festus
Sewer service Festus
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Festus FD
Ambulance service JPT AD
Herculaneum
Herculaneum
Total population 2805
Classification City-4th class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $40,365
Total housing units 1078
Housing unit, median year built 1964
Median gross rent $582
Median owner-occupied housing value
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
$87,400
Water service Herculaneum
Sewer service Herculaneum
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Herculaneum FD
Jefferson County – Section 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Ambulance service JPT AD
Hillsboro
Hillsboro
Total population 1675
Classification City-4th class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $36,850
Total housing units 620
Housing unit, median year built 1971
Median gross rent $501
Median owner-occupied housing value $93,800
Master plan yes
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations yes
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations yes
Water service Hillsboro
Sewer service Hillsboro
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Hillsboro FPD
Ambulance service Valle AD
Kimmswick
Kimmswick
Total population 94
Classification City-4th class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $54,688
Total housing units 36
Housing unit, median year built pre1940
Median gross rent $650
Median owner-occupied housing value $121,400
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
Water service PWSD #10
Sewer service
Electric service AmerenUE
61

62
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Natural gas service none
Fire service RockCom FPD
Ambulance service RockTNAD
Olympian Olympian Village
Village
Total population 669
Classification City-4th class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $41,447
Total housing units 232
Housing unit, median year built 1974
Median gross rent $467
Median owner-occupied housing value
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
$72,800
Water service PWSD #5
Sewer service Olympian Village
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Jefferson R-7 FPD
Ambulance service Valle AD
Parkdale
Parkdale
Total population 205
Classification Village
Leadership structure Bd of Trustees
Median household income, 1999 $52,000
Total housing units 71
Housing unit, median year built 1958
Median gross rent $0
Median owner-occupied housing value $63,900
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
Water service
Jefferson County – Section 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service High Ridge FPD
Ambulance service NJC AD
Pevely
Pevely
Total population 3768
Classification City-4th class
Leadership structure Mayor/Council
Median household income, 1999 $34,916
Total housing units 1482
Housing unit, median year built 1980
Median gross rent $379
Median owner-occupied housing value $80,200
Master plan yes-'96
Emergency Operations Plan yes
Zoning regulations yes
Building regulations IBC 2000; #958
Subdivision regulations yes
Stormwater regulations yes
Floodplain regulations FEMA model #956
Water service Pevely
Sewer service Pevely
Electric service AmerenUE
Natural gas service MO NG
Fire service Dunklin FPD
Ambulance service JPT AD
Scotsdale Scotsdale
Scotsdale
Total population 211
Classification Town
Leadership structure Bd of Trustees
Median household income, 1999 $53,750
Total housing units 68
Housing unit, median year built 1978
Median gross rent $563
Median owner-occupied housing value $95,800
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
63

64
TABLE TABLE TABLE J26 J26 Cities Cities and and Villages Villages
2000
2000
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service Cedar Hill FPD
Ambulance service Big River AD
Jefferson County – Section 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 1
SECTION SECTION 2
2
Risk Risk Assessment
Assessment
Hazard Hazard Identification Identification and and Elimination Elimination Elimination Process
Process
During the course of this study, many sources were researched for data relating to hazards.
Primary sources included FEMA, SEMA, National Climate Data Center (NCDC) and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) and Center for Earthquake Research and Information (CERI), Central U.S.
Earthquake Consortium (CUSEC) were major sources for earthquake information. MDNR’s
Dam and Reservoir Safety Program provided major information concerning dams.
Additional research was based on data from USACE, National Park Service, National Forest
Service, other departments within Missouri Department of Natural Resources, St. Louis
University, State of Missouri Climatologist, Missouri Department of Conservation, and
University of Missouri, Columbia. Additional sources included county officials; existing
county, regional and state plans, reports on the floods of 1993 and 1995; position papers
on transportation issues and information from local officials and residents. Past State and
federal disaster designations, current Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) and available local
mitigation plans were also utilized.
In order to identify the hazards relevant to Jefferson County, the above information sources
were searched for incidents of all possible hazards occurring within the county. Some
hazards are regional in scope and included in the hazard profiles. Location-specific hazards
not found through the information search were further investigated to determine whether
there would be a future possibility of occurrence. Hazard event histories, repetitive loss
information and conversations with local residents were used to identify relevant hazards.
Communi Community Communi Community
ty-Wide ty Wide Hazard Profile and List of Hazards Identified
The largest disaster to impact Jefferson County in the recent past was the Great Flood of
1993. The loss of homes, businesses and infrastructures, as well as the temporary closing
of some local businesses, contributed to economic losses throughout the County and
beyond. Several hazards can affect Jefferson County. History indicates that Jefferson
County could be at risk of tornadoes and severe thunderstorms, riverine flooding (including
flash flooding), severe winter weather (snow, ice, extreme cold), drought, heat wave,
earthquakes, wildfires and dam failures. Worksheet #1, Jefferson County Hazard
Identification and Analysis, is included at the end of the Technical Appendix and shows
earthquakes as the hazard with the greatest possible impact. Jefferson County has
experienced a number of slight tremors from the New Madrid Fault Zone. Disasters ranked
in descending order after earthquakes include flood, dam, severe windstorms, winter
weather, drought, wildfires, and heat wave.

2
Jefferson County – Section 2
These disasters can precipitate cascading hazards or those hazards caused as a result of
disasters. Cascading hazards could include interruption of power supply, water supply,
business and transportation. Disasters also can cause civil unrest, computer failure and
environmental health hazards. Any of these, alone or in combination, could possibly
impact emergency response activities. Table J27A shows the relationships found between
Jefferson County’s disasters and categories of possible cascading disasters. Examples of
specific disasters include nuclear power plant damage, hazardous materials release, mass
transportation accidents and disease outbreak due to unsanitary conditions.
Hazards Hazards Not Not Included Included and and Reasons Reasons For For Elimi Elimination Elimi nation
Based on the lack of documented historical occurrence and research, it was determined
that the following hazards would not be evaluated for the purposes of this Hazard
Mitigation Plan: coastal storms, hurricanes, tsunamis, avalanche and volcanic activity.
These hazards do not exist within Jefferson County due to its geographic location and
geologic conditions.
TABLE J27A CASCADING HAZARDS HAZARDS RESULTING RESULTING FROM FROM DISASTERS DISASTERS
DISASTERS
Disaster
Disaster
Power Power &
&
Communications
Communications
Interruption
Interruption
Water Water Supply
Supply
Interruption
Interruption
Business Business
Interruption
Interruption
Civil Civil Unrest
Unrest
Computer Computer Failure
Failure
& & Loss Loss of of Records Records
Transportation
Transportation
Interruption
Interruption
Health Health &
&
Environmental
Environmental
Hazard
Hazard
Tornado/
Tornado/
Windstorm
Windstorm
X X X X X X X
Flood Flood X X X X X X
Winter Winter X X X X X X
Drought Drought
X X
Heat Heat
X X X
Earthquake/
Earthquake/
Landsl Landslide Landsl ide
X X X X X X X
Dams Dams X X X X X X
Fires Fires Fires
X X X
X = More than 50% chance of a side effect in the case of a disaster
Flood Flood Hazard Hazard Profile
Profile
The Mississippi River is the eastern boundary of the County. Jefferson County is just
downstream from the Missouri River. Jefferson County is highly susceptible to annual
flooding events in the spring. Flooding poses a threat to lives and safety and can cause
severe damage to public and private property. With the exception of fire, floods are the
most common and widespread of all disasters. Most communities in the United States
have experienced some kind of flooding, after spring rains, heavy thunderstorms or winter
snow thaws. Refer to Figures J14 and J15 below.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 3
FIGURE FIGURE J14 J14
FIGURE FIGURE J15
J15
Satellite image of flooding at Aerial photo along the Mississippi River 1993
Missouri/Mississippi River confluence.
Background
Background
Background
The first step to floodplain management as a nonstructural alternative to flood control was
incorporated into the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. This was 40 years after the
Flood Control Act of 1928 that authorized the United States Corps of Engineers (USACE) to
control the Mississippi River with dams, levees and diversion channels. This Act authorized
the USACE to undertake a structural approach to reducing flood damages (thus keeping
water from people). After numerous floods, and having spent billions of dollars on floods
and disasters, Congress looked at another approach to reduce flood losses, adding a nonstructural
approach in the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The National Flood
Insurance program (NFIP) required local governments to adopt regulations governing new
development activities in identified flood plains in order to be eligible for the sale of flood
insurance within their jurisdictions.
Description Description of of Hazard
Hazard
Flooding is a natural event and has been characteristic of rivers throughout history. It
becomes a disaster when it is of such magnitude that both man-made and natural
landforms and human lives are destroyed or seriously damaged (Gaffney). Through
analysis of existing federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) and Flood Insurance Studies,
the Hazard Mitigation Plan Unit of EWG has determined that the counties included in the
EWG planning region including St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Franklin County,
Jefferson County and the City of St. Louis have 100-year floodplains (in addition to 500year
floodplains) and may be affected by flooding hazards. A variety of factors affect the
type and severity of flooding throughout the planning region, including urban
development and infrastructure and topography.

4
Jefferson County – Section 2
A flood is defined as an overflow or inundation that comes from a river or other body of
water (Barrows, 1948) and causes or threatens damage or any relatively high streamflow
overtopping the natural or artificial banks in any reach of a stream (Leopold and Maddock,
1954). A flood is defined by the National Flood Insurance Program as: “A general and
temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of two or more acres of normally
dry land area or of two or more properties from:
• Overflow of inland or tidal waters,
• Unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source, or
• A mudflow.
Characteristics
Characteristics
Riverine flooding includes headwater, backwater, and interior drainage. Floods can be
slow or fast rising, depending on the intensity of the rainstorms in the watershed over a
certain length of time, or from rapid snowmelt or icemelt. Floods generally develop over a
period of days. During heavy rains from storm systems (including severe thunderstorms),
water flows down the watershed, collecting in, and then overtopping, valley streams and
rivers.
Flash flooding is characterized by rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any
source. This type of flooding can occur within six hours of a rain event, after a dam or
levee failure, or the sudden release of water held by an ice or debris dam. Because flash
flood can develop in just a matter of hours, flash floods can catch people unprepared and
most flood-related deaths result from this type of flooding. Most flash flooding is caused
by slow-moving thunderstorms or heavy rains.
Several factors contribute to both riverine and flash flooding. Two key elements are rainfall
intensity (the rate of rainfall) and duration (length of time that the rainfall lasts). Type of
ground cover, soil type and topography all play important roles in flooding.
Flooding potential is further exacerbated in urban areas (disturbed lands) by the increased
runoff up from two to six times over what would occur on undisturbed terrain. Soils lose
their ability to absorb rain as land is converted from fields or woodlands to buildings and
pavement. During periods of urban flooding, streets become rivers, and basements and
viaducts become death traps as they fill with water.
Floodplains are located in relatively flat lowland areas and adjoin rivers and streams. These
lowland areas adjacent to rivers and stream banks serve to carry excess floodwater during
rapid runoff. Floodplains are a vital part of a larger entity called a watershed basin. A
watershed basin is defined as all the land drained by a river and its branches. In some
cases, flooding may not be attributed to a river, stream or lake. It may be the combination
of excessive rainfall, snowmelt, saturated ground and inadequate drainage.The term “base
flood” or 100-year flood is the area in the floodplain that is subject to a one percent or
greater chance of flooding in any given year, based on historical records. A 500-year flood

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 5
is defined as the area in the floodplain that has a .2% probability of occurring in any given
year. While unlikely, it is possible to have two 100 or even 500 year floods within years or
months of each other. The primary use for these terms is for the determination of flood
insurance rates in flood hazard areas. Using historic weather and hydrograph data the
estimated rate of flow or discharge of a river or creek is derived. After extensive study and
coordination with Federal and State agencies, this group recommended that the 1-percentannual-chance
flood (also referred to as the 100-year or “Base Flood”) be used as the
standard for the NFIP.
The 1-percent-annual-chance flood was chosen on the basis that it provides a higher level
of protection while not imposing overly stringent requirements or the burden of excessive
costs on property owners. The 1-percent-annual-chance flood (or 100-year flood)
represents a magnitude and frequency that has a statistical probability of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year, or the 100-year flood has a 26 percent (or 1 in 4) chance of
occurring over the life of a 30-year mortgage.
Likely Likely Locations
Locations
In certain areas of Jefferson County, steep slopes can induce high velocities as the water
flows downhill and downstream, in many cases producing flash flooding conditions.
Because some areas in Jefferson County are located in low areas, and therefore, often in
the floodplain, floodwaters have the potential to affect or even severely harm portions of
the community, especially if the floodwalls or levees fail.
There is a 3.2 mile 500-year federal levee in the Festus-Crystal City area on the Missouri side
of the Mississippi River in Jefferson County; however there are federal levees on the Illinois
side that extend as far south as Ste. Genevieve County, Missouri. During floods, these
levees would force higher floodwaters to inundate the Missouri side of the river. The
failure of the federal levees would lower the floodwaters and reduce the flooding impact
on the Missouri side. These conditions that exist in areas where flash floods are a problem
make response operations and evacuation very difficult, adversely affecting the safety of
the residents.
Type Type of of of Damage
Damage
Damage incurred as a result of flooding includes the inundation of residences,
outbuildings, businesses, churches stormwater, mud, rock, trees, debris, trash, and
chemical pollutants. Depending upon the severity of the flood and the volume and rate of
flow of the water, floodwaters may be capable of carrying vehicles, whole or parts of
buildings, etc.
During spring and summer 1993, record flooding inundated much of the upper Mississippi
River Basin. The magnitude of the damages -- in terms of property, disrupted business, and
personal trauma -- was unmatched by any other flood disaster in United States history .
Property damage alone was over $20 billion. Damaged highways and submerged roads

6
Jefferson County – Section 2
disrupted overland transportation throughout the flooded region. The Mississippi and the
Missouri Rivers were closed to navigation before, during, and after the flooding. Millions of
acres of productive farmland remained under water for weeks during the growing season.
and severe erosion occurred. The banks and channels of many rivers were severely eroded,
and sediment was deposited over large areas of the basin's flood plain. Record flows
submerged many areas that had not been affected by previous floods. Industrial and
agricultural areas were inundated, which caused concern about the transport and fate of
industrial chemicals and sewage effluent in the floodwaters . The extent and duration of
the flooding caused numerous levees to fail.
Hazard Hazard Event Event History
History
The largest disaster to impact Jefferson County in recent years was the flood of 1993. Its
size and impact was unprecedented and has been considered the most costly and
devastating flood to ravage the U.S. in modern history. The number of record river levels,
its aerial extent, the number of persons displaced, amount of property damage and the
flood’s duration surpassed all earlier U.S. floods in modern times.
The following gives an account of locations and areas that were affected by the inundation
of water during the 1993 flood. Based on a workshop meeting held on October 17, 2003
with Jefferson County officials and other community emergency management agencies, the
following locations were specifically identified as locations that become flooded during
various rainfall events in 1993. In DeSoto, Joachim Creek and North Main along Cedar
Street became inundated from floodwaters and flash flooding occurred near the high
school. In Festus, the community flooded in 1993 and has experienced problems with
storm drainage and creeks. Also in 1993, Rock Creek in Kimmswick flooded Highway K
and Highway K Bridge. Other areas of Jefferson County experienced significant flooding at
the confluence of the Big River and Meramec River, including Highway BB, West Old
Highway 21, Highway 61/67 and Highway 55. Several areas in community of Arnold
experienced significant flooding impacts, including Twin River Road, Big Bend Road,
Meadow Drive, Riffle Island, State Road BB, and River Bend Acres. West of Pevely on
Highway Z between Sandy Creek and Cherry Lane, 1993 floodwaters inundated the bridge;
mitigation for this stretch entailed the raising of the road and replacement of the bridge.
Refer to Figure J16 below.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 7
FIGURE IGURE J16 1993 MIDWEST FLOOD
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

8
Jefferson County – Section 2
Areas hardest hit by the 1993 flooding were along the Mississippi and Meramec Rivers in
the eastern and northern portions of Jefferson County. The existing levee system (federal
levees along the Illinois side of the Mississippi River) intended to aid in protecting the
Illinois side from the potential of flooding endured extreme pressures from extended
duration of the high river levels. The presence of the Illinois federal levees resulted in the
inundation of floodwaters on the Missouri side of the Mississippi River. Illinois levee
failures resulted in the relief from floodwaters on the Missouri side of the Mississippi River.
During the 1993 flood, commuting was interrupted when various bridges north of the
Jefferson County area over the Mississippi River were closed due to flooding. Commuting
was also heavily interrupted when Highway 40-64 was closed due to the overtopping of
the Monarch Levee in Chesterfield, Missouri. Prolonged flooding on the Highway 40-61
created economic loss and hardship impacts on the St. Louis metropolitan region. They
provided critical access to employment, healthcare, emergency services, education, retail
and commerce activities and transportation of goods and services. They provide critical
access to employment, healthcare, emergency services, education, retail and commerce
activities and transportation of goods and services.
Approximately 138 homes were bought out as a result of flooding in Jefferson County.
FEMA estimated the total dollar loss for housing units alone was $3,483,868 for Jefferson
County as of January 9, 2001. While some households carried adequate flood insurance
on their dwellings, about 82 percent of the dwellings in the affected areas were either
underinsured or not insured for flood. Unfortunately this left a portion of the county’s
labor force homeless for a period of time, adding to the economic loss. From the Disaster
Declaration of 1993 (DR-0995), Jefferson County received $1,527,199 in public assistance.
From the 1995 disaster (DR-1054), Jefferson County received $89,928 in public assistance.
From the 2000 disaster (DR-1328), Jefferson County received $483,511.22 in individual
assistance, $473,000 in SBA assistance and $574,002.26 in public assistance. From the
2002 disaster (R-1412), Jefferson County received $31,192.35 in individual assistance and
$20,000 in SBA assistance. In the 2003 disaster (DR-1463), Jefferson County received
$2,082,045.99 in individual assistance, $3,411,600 in SBA assistance and $353,632.20 in
public.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) produced a set of maps showing damage
estimates for the 1993 flood. According to the maps, Jefferson County damages included:
Greater than $10 million in commercial properties damages
Between $1 and $5 million in public facilities damages
Between $1 and $5 million in residential damages
Greater than $10 million in transportation system damage
Between $500,000 and $10 million in utilities damages
Greater than $1 million is emergency expenses
Statewide data was collected by USACE for seven specific areas of damages and costs and
for one general area. Information was collected for residential, commercial/industrial,

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 9
public facilities, transportation, utilities, agriculture and emergency services. The general
area was an attempt to cover what might be thought of as secondary costs of the
flooding. These were the costs of buyout, mitigation, mission, unemployment assistance
and crisis counseling.
Buyout and relocation costs were typically received from local officials. These costs are
typically included in the mitigation costs rather than presented separately. USACE derived
mitigation costs from the FEMA DSRs, from SBA reports and from Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) officials. In most cases, the mitigation costs were well reported and
include monies that went for buyouts. Unemployment costs, including both
unemployment and food aid assistance costs, were derived from FEMA and USDA reports.
The commercial variable included all commercial and industrial damages for the Missouri
area. The figures for all parts of the commercial/industrial damages were derived from
FEMA, SBA, and state and local sources. Refer to Figure J17 below. The equipment
damages for both commercial and industrial are found in the commercial equipment
damages variable. These estimates come from FEMA, SBA and local sources. Commercial
and industrial revenues lost under the commercial variable. These estimates come from SBA
and local sources.

10
FIGURE FIGURE J17 J17 COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL AND AND INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL (1993)
(1993)
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 11
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
FEMA Damage Survey Reports (DSRs) and local sources were used for the various
categories of damage to public facilities. The variables included under this category were
number of and damages to public structures, public equipment damage, costs of public
restoration and debris clearance, damages to parks and recreation facilities, and damages
to water control facilities. The latter variable was drawn from U.S. Department of
Agriculture and USACE sources as well as those sources used for the other public variables.
Refer to Figure J18 below.

12
FIGURE FIGURE J18 J18 PUBLIC PUBLIC FACILITIES FACILITIES FACILITIES (1993)
(1993)
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 13
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USACE gathered residential data on the numbers of residences damaged, structure
damage and content damage. This category included residential damage figures for both
structure and content unseparated in Missouri. Refer to Figure J19 below.

14
FIGURE FIGURE J19 J19 RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES PROPERTIES (1993)
(1993)
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 15
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Variables for railroad damages were miles of lines flooded, amount of damages, and
revenues lost. These were determined by contacting the private railroad companies, local
officials, and the Federal Railroad Administration. Refer to Figure J20 below. Variables for
trucking damages were the number of trucking companies experiencing damage, the
amount of damages, and revenues lost. Only in Kansas City and St. Louis USACE Districts
were damages in this category reported. Damages to airports included numbers of airports
damaged, amounts of that damage, and revenues lost by airports. Transportation damages
were also acquired on miles of roads flooded; traffic rerouting costs, and damages to roads
and bridges.

16
FIGURE FIGURE J20 J20 TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION (1993)
(1993)
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 17
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
The utilities damages covered water, sewer, electric and general utilities in Missouri. Data
regarding utilities damage was sought from state departments of natural resources or
environmental protection, the FEMA DSRs and local officials. Names of some water
facilities, evidently those that suffered some damage, are included in the records. Numbers
of water customers affected and dollar amounts of water facilities damage were more
frequently reported. Very few areas reported lost water revenues. Refer to Figure J21
below. More information is available on sewerage systems as both the numbers damaged
and the dollar amounts of that damage are available.
Flood damages to the electrical power distribution system were collected through
discussions with local, regional and state officials, the FEMA DSRs and officials of the
involved electric companies. Variables are presented for number of companies affected,
number of customers affected, dollar damages to the companies and revenues lost. The
final utilities variable, utility systems - general, was specifically used in the USACE St. Louis
District counties to report gas utility company damages. That information was obtained
from gas company officials. Otherwise, the FEMA DSRs were the primary sources for utility
damages not specifically assignable.

18
FIGURE FIGURE J21A J21A UTILITIES UTILITIES DAMAGES DAMAGES (1993)
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 19
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
The two emergency cost variables are the emergency preparedness and response costs and
the evacuation costs. The former was primarily derived from the FEMA DSRs, with
supplemental data coming from some local and regional officials. The latter variable came
from these same sources, as well as the Red Cross and FEMA Disaster Field Offices. The
final variable, crisis counseling, was derived from FEMA reports and state sources. Refer to
Figure J22 below.
According to the Department of Economic Development and Department of Labor and
Industrial Relations, employment impact and the occurrence of the 1993 floods did not
show a direct correlation in the Jefferson County area. July, August, September, October
and November’s unemployment rate are as follows: 6.6, 6.4, 5.4, 5.2, and 5.1,
respectively. The region was just recovering from a recession and the rates reflect a higher
than normal unemployment rate due to the recession. The decrease in the unemployment
rate from August to September was the result of the student population going back to
school. In addition, manufacturing industries were closed for up to two weeks and
incurred damages.
Infrastructure problems included contaminated wells, collapsed wells, destroyed pumping
equipment, failed sewage treatment facilities or private septic systems, contaminated
ground and drinking water, sewage backups and treatment facilities seriously purged by
the floodwaters.

20
FIGURE FIGURE J21B J21B EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EXPENSES EXPENSES (1993)
(1993)
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 21
Frequency Frequency of of of Occurrence Occurrence
Occurrence
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments planning region has many river and small
tributaries in both the unincorporated and incorporated areas that are susceptible to
flooding. Major floods have affected the citizens of the planning region as early as 1785.
Table J28 below illustrates major flood events on the Mississippi and Meramec Rivers. In
1993, 1994 and 2001, major flood events occurred in the planning region and
surrounding areas. There have been 14 major flood events since 1785. The history of river
crest levels along the Mississippi River north of Jefferson County at St. Louis helps to
illustrate the risk, severity and repetitiveness and along the Meramec River.
TABLE TABLE TABLE J27B J27B J27B MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI AND AND AND MERAMEC MERAMEC MERAMEC RIVER RIVER RIVER FLOOD FLOOD FLOOD STAGES STAGES STAGES NEAR NEAR NEAR JEFFERSON JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON
COUNTY
COUNTY
Station Station
Stage (Flood Stage 30 ft) Date
Mississippi River at St. Louis 42.0 4/1/1785
Mississippi River at St. Louis 40.3 7/2/1947
Mississippi River at St. Louis 40.2 7/22/1951
Mississippi River at St. Louis 43.23 4/28/1973
Mississippi River at St. Louis 39.27 12/7/1982
Mississippi River at St. Louis 39.0 5/4/1983
Mississippi River at St. Louis 33.8 4/24/1984
Mississippi River at St. Louis 33.5 4/8/1985
Mississippi River at St. Louis 39.13 10/9/1986
Mississippi River at St. Louis 49.58 8/1/1993
Mississippi River at St. Louis 36.6 4/15/1994
Mississippi River at St. Louis 41.89 5/221995
Mississippi River at St. Louis 35.35 6/2/1996
Mississippi River at St. Louis 34.79 6/10/2001
Station Station
Stage (Flood Stage 18 ft) Date Date
Meramec River at Eureka 33.4 4/14/1979
Meramec River at Eureka 42.9 12/6/1982
Meramec River at Eureka 36.6 5/3/1983
Meramec River at Eureka 31.3 2/26/1985
Meramec River at Eureka 26.8 4/2/1985
Meramec River at Eureka 29.2 6/21/1985
Meramec River at Eureka 34.6 11/22/1985
Meramec River at Eureka 25.1 12/29/1987
Meramec River at Eureka 25.2 5/28/1990
Meramec River at Eureka 35.9 9/26/1993
Meramec River at Eureka 35.6 11/17/1993
Meramec River at Eureka 30.4 5/20/1995
Meramec River at Eureka 29.9 4/30/1996
Meramec River at Eureka 26.33 5/11/2002
Station Station
Stage (Flood (Flood Stage 16 16 ft) ft) Date
Meramec River at Valley Park 34.4 2/1/1916
Meramec River at Valley Park 39.73 12/6/1982

22
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE TABLE TABLE J27B J27B MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI AND AND MERAMEC MERAMEC RIVER RIVER FLOOD FLOOD FLOOD STAGES STAGES NEAR NEAR JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON
COUNTY
COUNTY
Meramec River at Valley Park 33 5/3/1983
Meramec River at Valley Park 28.5 2/26/1985
Meramec River at Valley Park 24.3 4/1/1985
Meramec River at Valley Park 26 6/21/1985
Meramec River at Valley Park 31.7 11/22/1985
Meramec River at Valley Park 22.2 10/5/1986
Meramec River at Valley Park 22.8 12/29/1987
Meramec River at Valley Park 22.5 5/29/1990
Meramec River at Valley Park 32.4 9/26/1993
Meramec River at Valley Park 37.4 4/14/1994
Meramec River at Valley Park 29.3 5/21/1995
Meramec River at Valley Park 24 5/8/2000
Meramec River at Valley Park 24.2 5/11/2002
Station Station
Stage (Flood Stage at 24 ft) Date
Meramec River at Arnold 38.9 4/28/1973
Meramec River at Arnold 38 4/16/1979
Meramec River at Arnold 43.9 12/6/1982
Meramec River at Arnold 39.8 5/4/1983
Meramec River at Arnold 35.7 2/27/1985
Meramec River at Arnold 36.2 11/22/1985
Meramec River at Arnold 36.4 10/9/1986
Meramec River at Arnold 32.9 5/20/1990
Meramec River at Arnold 34.3 4/18/1993
Meramec River at Arnold 45.3 8/1/1993
Meramec River at Arnold 33.9 11/18/1993
Meramec River at Arnold 41.7 4/14/1994
Meramec River at Arnold 41.1 5/21/1994
Meramec River at Arnold 36.7 5/18/2002
Station Station
Stage (Flood Stage 16 ft) Date Date
Big River at Byrnes Mill 30.2 8/21/1915
Big River at Byrnes Mill 24.37 5/27/1990
Big River at Byrnes Mill 29.37 9/25/1993
Big River at Byrnes Mill 27.61 11/16/1993
Big River at Byrnes Mill 21.55 4/30/1994
Big River at Byrnes Mill 20.08 4/24/1996
Big River at Byrnes Mill 15.31 5/15/1996
Big River at Byrnes Mill 17.72 11/27/1996
Big River at Byrnes Mill 16.08 1/29/1997
Big River at Byrnes Mill 19.99 2/28/1997
Big River at Byrnes Mill 20.65 6/23/1997
Big River at Byrnes Mill 22.44 5/7/2000
Big River at Byrnes Mill 17.9 12/19/2001
Big River at Byrnes Mill
Source: NOAA
22.5 5/10/2002
Since 1979 there have been 14 major flood events on the Meramec River at Eureka. Since
1916, there have been 14 major flood events on the Meramec River at Valley Park. Since
1973, there have been 14 major floods on the Meramec River at Arnold and 14 major

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 23
floods on the Meramec at Byrnes Mill. The properties in and near the floodplains of the
planning region Jefferson County are subject to flooding events almost annually. Since
flooding is such a pervasive problem throughout the county, many residents have
purchased flood insurance to help recover form losses incurred from flooding events, have
sold property, or have rebuilt structures to reflect construction standards. Flood insurance
covers only the improved land, or the actual building structures. Although flood insurance
assists in recovery, it can provide an inappropriate sense of protection from flooding.
Many residents and businesses that have flood damage rebuilt in the same vulnerable
areas, only to be flooded again. These properties are termed repetitive loss properties and
continue to expose lives and property to flooding hazards. Local governments, as well as
federal agencies such as FEMA, recognize this problem of floodplain insurance and attempt
to remove the risk from repetitive loss properties though projects such as acquiring land
and relocating homes or by elevating the structures.
Continued repetitive loss claims from flood events lead to an increased amount of damage
caused by floods, higher insurance rates, and contribute to the rising cost of taxpayerfunded
disaster relief for flood victims.
Intensity Intensity or or Strength
Strength
The largest disaster to impact Jefferson County in recent years was the flood in 1993. Its
size and impact was unprecedented and has been considered the most costly and
devastating flood to ravage the U.S. in modern history, as evidenced by Table J28 above.
The number of record river levels, its aerial extent, the number of persons displaced,
amount of property damage and its duration surpassed all earlier U.S. floods in modern
times. In the 2001 flood, a total of $1.9 billion dollars in damage and costs and at least
three deaths over a 14-state area including Missouri occurred. In the 1993 flood
approximately $21 billion dollars in damage and costs and 50 deaths resulted (NOAA). In
the 1997 flooding, 9 states including Missouri were impacted and an estimated $1 billion
dollars in damage and costs and 11 deaths resulted. The report also stated that floods at
the second most likely type of weather event to occur (based on 46 weather events from
1980 to 1999).
Lives Lives Lives Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Property Damage, Damage, Economic Losses/Other Losses Losses
Losses
Due to flooding of many of the major roadways and interstates in 1993, 'commuting'
distances grew from several miles to over 200 miles in some instances. From July 16-20,
there were no bridge crossings over a 212-mile span between Burlington, Iowa and St.
Louis, Missouri. Also, there was no Mississippi River traffic over a 585-mile span from
Cairo, Illinois through St. Louis, Missouri to St. Paul, Minnesota from late June through
early August, resulting in over 5,000 loaded barges being halted, and an estimated $3
million per day in lost revenue. Similarly, the Missouri River was closed from late June
through early August over a 535-mile span stretching from its confluence with the
Mississippi River to near Sioux City, Iowa. Eleven commercial airports were closed at one

24
Jefferson County – Section 2
time or another due to the flooding. Over 4000 miles of railroad track was either flooded
or idled, and over $200 million in estimated losses.
In 1993 well over 20 million acres were flooded, covering parts of nine states. More than
50,000 homes were damaged or destroyed, and over 85,000 residents had to evacuate
their homes. More than 75 small towns near the rivers were completely flooded and had
to be abandoned or relocated. Some of the flooding occurred as levees collapsed after
being weakened by constant pressure from rising water levels. However, some levees, such
as the 52-foot floodwall protecting St. Louis, held back the rising waters. It is interesting
to note that the St. Louis levee was built to a level 9 feet higher than the previous record
crest for the Mississippi River, but less than 3 feet higher than the 49.6-foot crest recorded
on August 1. Over 6,500 National Guard members were called in to assist in levee work.
A recent report on the various levees on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers indicates the
following: In 1993 over 16,000 square miles of farmland were flooded, and crop losses
exceeded $5 billion. Many farm animals perished in the rising waters. Total crop losses due
to flooding or saturated fields exceeded 35 million acres. The national soybean yield was
forecast to be 13 percent below 1992’s level, while the national corn yield was down by 22
percent. Soybean prices moved to 4- year highs on July 10, 1993 due to the damage
assessments.
Overall damage estimates exceeded $12 billion. Local power plants were damaged in
many cities, with electrical service lost as a result. Business districts were flooded in
Davenport, Dubuque, Burlington, and many other smaller towns.
The Missouri River, normally no more than a half-mile wide, expanded to 5-6 miles wide
north of St. Joseph, Missouri, and 8-10 miles wide east of Kansas City. Just north of St.
Louis, it reached 20 miles wide near its confluence with the Mississippi, as the merging of
the 2 rivers occurred 20 miles north of their normal point of confluence. As a result,
almost half of the 620 square miles of St. Charles County, Missouri were underwater.
Four hundred and four counties in the Midwest were declared federal disaster areas
including 62 percent of Missouri counties. The waters in some areas remained above flood
stage for many weeks, and receded rather slowly. Many locations experienced not one,
but two record crests during the flooding. Mississippi River watershed 1993 precipitation
was the greatest since 1895 for the following periods: July, June-July, May-July, and April-
July.
Over 1,000 flood warnings and statements, five times the normal, were issued to notify the
public and need-to-know officials about river levels. In St. Louis, river levels were nearly 20
feet above flood stage, the highest in the city’s 150-year history. The 52-foot St. Louis
Flood wall, built to handle the volume of the 1844 flood, was able to keep the 1993 flood
out with just over two feet to spare. On the Missouri River it was estimated that nearly all
of the 700 privately built agricultural levees were overtopped or destroyed.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 25
The Mississippi River at St. Louis crested at 49.6 feet on August 1, nearly 20 feet above
flood stage and had a peak flow rate of 1.08 million cubic feet per second. The old record
was 43.2 feet in 1973. Some locations on the Mississippi River were in flood for almost
200 days while locations on the Missouri neared 100 days of flooding. On October 7, 103
days after it began, the Mississippi River at St. Louis finally dropped below flood stage.
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (as noted in the NOAA National Weather
Service disaster survey report) 40 of 229 federal levees and 1,043 of 1,347 non-federal
levees were over-topped or damaged. Every breeched levee contributed to the amount of
floodwater flowing outside the main drainages. The flood eroded more than 600 billion
tons of topsoil and deposited great amounts of sand and silt on valuable farmland. In large
areas inundated by the flood, the harvest of 1993 was a total loss and some farmers lost
any chance for a 1994 harvest.
National National Flood Flood Insurance Insurance (NFIP) (NFIP) (NFIP) Participation
Participation
The National Flood Insurance Policy member number for Jefferson County is 290808.
TABLE TABLE J27C J27C J27C NATIONAL NATIONAL FLOOD FLOOD INSURANCE INSURANCE INSURANCE PROGRAM PROGRAM- PROGRAM MMUNICI
M
UNICI PARTICIPATING
COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME NAME INIT INIT FHBM FHBM INIT INIT FIRM FIRM FIRM CURR CURR EFF EFF EMERGENCY
EMERGENCY
DATE DATE
DATE
ARNOLD, CITY OF 06/28 01/16 04/05 01/16
BYRNES MILL, CITY OF 07/29 05/16 04/05 05/16
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF 03/15 09/01 04/05 09/01
DE SOTO, CITY OF 05/26 04/05 05/26
FESTUS,CITY OF 10/18 02/14 04/05 02/14
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF 05/17 05/15 04/05 05/15
HILLSBORO, CITY OF 10/22 04/01 04/05 04/01
JEFFERSON COUNTY* 07/29 05/16 04/05 05/16
KIMMSWICK, CITY OF 11/01 01/06 04/05 01/06
PEVELY, CITY OF 10/29 09/18 04/05/06 09/18
SCOTSDALE, TOWN OF 05/16 04/05 10/21
CEDAR HILL LAKES, VILLAGE OF 04/05 04/05 04/05
MUNICIPALITIES MUNICIPALITIES NOT NOT PARTICIPATING
PARTICIPATING
PARTICIPATING
Cedar Hills Lake – sanction date April 5, 2007
* REPRESENTS COUNTY
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
Owners of repetitive loss properties clearly have knowledge that there is a highly likely
chance of being flooded in future rain events. The largest single drain on flood insurance
reserve funds is repetitive claims from repetitive loss properties (Galloway report). Missouri
ranks first among non-coastal states in repetitive losses. Missouri has 3,268 repetitive loss
buildings that have resulted in 10,038 loss claims.

26
Jefferson County – Section 2
During the 1993 flood the following gives an account of Jefferson County areas that were
affected by the inundation. Based on a workshop meeting with Jefferson County and
other community emergency management agencies held on October 17, 2003, the
following locations were specifically identified as locations that become flooded during
various rainfall events. In DeSoto, Joachim Creek and North Main along Cedar Street
became inundated from floodwaters in 1993 and there was flash flooding near the high
school. During the 1993 floods, Festus experienced problems with storm drainage and
creeks. In Kimmswick, Rock Creek flooded Highway K. Other areas of Jefferson County
experienced significant flooding at the confluence of the Big River and Meramec River,
Highway BB, West Old Highway 21, Highway 61/67 and Highway 55. The community of
Arnold experienced significant flooding impacts from the 1993 flood. Areas flooded
included Twin River Road, Big Bend Road, Meadow Drive, Riffle Island, State Road BB, and
River Bend Acres. West of Pevely on Highway Z between Sandy Creek and Cherry Lane
floodwaters inundated the bridge; mitigation for this stretch entailed the raising of the
road, property buyouts and replacement of the bridge.
In Festus, all but one of the north-south roads and most of the major streets in the
community were closed due to the 1993 floodwaters including 61/67 and Highway A. The
community was inundated by floodwaters for approximately 5 months during this major
flood event.
Pevely was impacted only slightly during the 1993 flood. Ancient Oaks subdivision, located
in the southwest portion of the community was affected when floodwaters from nearby
Sandy Creek inundated the sewage treatment system (lagoon) for the subdivision. Further,
in 1993 west of Pevely along Highway Z, Sandy Creek flooded the roadway. The Missouri
Department of Transportation subsequent to the flooding event raised the roadbed and
replaced the bridge above the 100-year event. As a result of the 1993 flood, Pevely placed
one of their lift stations at a higher elevation to prevent impacts from flooding. There were
no buyouts from the 1993 or subsequent flooding events.
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 06/08/2001 M-95
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/13/2002 M-95
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 03/21/2008 M-02 J-93 D-82
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 07/15/1993 D-82
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 06/25/1993 O-86 D-82 A-79
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/19/1995 J-93 M-83 D-82 A-79
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 04/13/1994 J-93 M-83 D-82
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 04/14/1994 J-93 D-82 A-79
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/03/1983 D-82 A-79
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 08/01/1993 A-81
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 06/08/1982 A-81
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 02/25/1985 M-83 D-82

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 27
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 11/19/1985 D-82
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 04/12/1983 D-82
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 07/10/1993 M-83
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 06/17/2008 M-02 J-96 M-95 J-93 A-93 O-86 D-85
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 07/31/1993 J-93
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93 A-93
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 07/31/1993 J-93
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/20/1995 A-94
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/20/1995 A-94
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/19/1995 A-94
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93 J-90
ARNOLD, CITY OF Single-Family 05/16/2002 J-01 M-97 J-96 J-93 M-90
ARNOLD, CITY OF Count 24
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/12/2002 M-95 M-95 A-94 S-93 J-93 O-86 M-83 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 06/10/2003 M-03 A-96
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 10/06/1986 F-85 M-83 A-83 D-82 A-79 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/04/1983 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/04/1983 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 04/11/1984 A-83 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/04/1983 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 05/04/1983 A-83 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 05/01/1983 A-83 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF ASSMD CONDO 10/04/1986 M-83 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 04/30/1983 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 04/09/1983 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/01/1983 A-83 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/19/1995 J-93 O-86 M-83 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/21/1995 J-93 M-83 D-82 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/03/1983 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 05/24/1983 D-82 A-78
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 08/22/1983 M-83 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 04/30/1983 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 10/04/1986 M-83 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 04/30/1983 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 04/09/1983 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 10/04/1986 M-83 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 07/10/1993 O-86 A-79
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 05/17/1995 J-93 O-86
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/18/1995 J-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 06/01/1995 A-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/19/1995 J-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/23/1995 J-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 07/06/1993 A-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/21/2002 M-95 S-93 J-93

28
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Single-Family 05/18/1995 J-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/20/2002 M-95 D-82
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/16/2002 M-95 S-93 J-93
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF 34
FESTUS,CITY OF Single-Family 06/28/1993 O-86
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/06/2003 M-95
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/06/2003 M-95
FESTUS,CITY OF Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
FESTUS,CITY OF ASSMD CONDO 05/06/2003 M-95 A-93 A-93
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/06/2003 M-95 J-93
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/16/1995 A-93
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 06/18/2004 M-03 M-95 A-93
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 06/18/2004 M-03 M-95 A-93
FESTUS,CITY OF Nonresidential 05/06/2003 A-96 J-93 S-86
FESTUS,CITY OF Count 10
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Nonresidential 04/07/1983 D-82 D-82 A-79 A-79
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Single-Family 07/04/1993 A-93 O-86
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Nonresidential 04/06/1983 D-82
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Single-Family 04/06/1983 D-82
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Nonresidential 03/28/1979 M-79
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Nonresidential 05/22/1995 J-93
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Single-Family 05/18/1995 J-93
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF Single-Family 05/19/1995 J-93
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF 8
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/17/1993 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/2000 A-96
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Other Residential 05/07/2000 A-98
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/19/2006 M-00 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/02/2000 A-96
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/01/2000 A-96
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/05/2000 M-98
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 07/05/2000 A-96
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/15/1993 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/22/1993 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-96 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/14/1993 S-93

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 29
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/22/1993 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-94 N-93 S-93 N-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/2000 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-94 N-93 S-93 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/22/2005 J-01 J-97
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/18/2008 M-06 M-02 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 M-02 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/13/2002 J-01
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 M-02 M-00 F-99 D-90 M-90 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 04/28/1996 M-95 A-94 S-93 J-93 J-93 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/21/2005 M-03 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/17/2003 M-02
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/21/2005 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/20/2005 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/21/2005 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/21/2005 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/21/2005 M-00
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 M-06 J-05 M-02 M-00 A-96 A-96 M-95 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/09/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 02/25/1985 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/04/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/05/1983 M-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 M-06 M-02
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 S-93 N-85 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93 M-90 N-85 A-85 F-85 N-84
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/28/1993 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 09/23/1993 J-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 02/23/1985 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 10/07/1986 N-85 M-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 06/24/2003 M-03 J-98 A-93 O-86 M-83 D-82 A-79 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 12/03/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/25/1993 N-85 F-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/23/1993 N-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/03/1982 A-81 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/25/1993 N-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/03/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 D-82

30
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/03/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 N-93 S-93 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/20/1985 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/24/1993 M-90 N-84 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/04/1993 A-93 O-86 N-85 F-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Other Residential 11/20/1985 F-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/23/1985 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 04/15/1978 M-78
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/03/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/04/1983 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/18/1993 S-93 N-85 F-85 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 02/27/1985 M-83 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 12/03/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 F-85 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/03/1983 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/03/1982 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/25/1993 J-90 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 N-93 S-93 N-85 N-84
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 05/27/1990 N-85 F-85 N-84
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 N-93 S-93 M-90 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 05/02/1983 A-83 D-82 M-81 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 S-93 F-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/04/1983 D-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/18/1985 F-85 M-83 D-82 D-82 F-82 A-79
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/23/1993 M-90 N-85 F-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 02/25/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/08/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Other Residential 03/20/2008 A-94 S-93 N-85 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-94 S-93 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 03/22/2008 M-95 M-95 A-94 J-93 N-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 A-94 S-93 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/30/1983 D-82

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 31
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 A-96 M-95 A-94 J-93 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/25/1993 J-90 A-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/08/1993 O-86 F-85 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/08/1993 N-85 F-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/30/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 N-93 S-93 N-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 N-93 S-93 N-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93 N-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/24/1993 M-90 N-85 F-85 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 08/30/1981 J-81 J-80
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 12/03/1982 A-81
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/03/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/19/1985 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/25/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/19/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/28/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/15/1993 S-93 N-85 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 02/26/1985 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/04/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 F-85 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 F-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/15/1990 S-86 J-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/03/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 03/19/2008 A-94 A-94 N-93 N-93 S-93 S-93 N-85 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 06/24/1985 S-81
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/20/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 02/25/1985 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/18/1985 A-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/19/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 09/04/1991 J-89 J-85 S-84
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/27/1983 D-82 F-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 05/01/1983 D-82

32
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/24/1993 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/19/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/19/1985 M-85 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/23/1985 M-85 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/14/1985 M-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/20/1984 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/20/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/01/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1983 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/22/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 03/23/2008 A-94 J-93 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/20/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/23/1985 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-94 S-93 N-85 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/02/1985 A-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93 N-85 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93 N-85 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/24/1993 M-90 N-85 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 04/13/1994 A-93 M-90 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/25/1993 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/08/1993 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/23/1985 F-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/21/1985 F-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/28/1993 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/04/1988 N-85 F-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/10/1993 O-86
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 06/21/1985 J-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 11/21/1985 J-85 A-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 06/06/1997 A-96 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/14/1993 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 S-93 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 03/21/2008 M-02 M-95 A-94 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 03/22/2008 A-94 S-93 J-93 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 05/20/1995 A-94 S-93 A-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 A-96 M-95 A-94 J-93 M-83 D-82

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 33
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/25/1993 M-90 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/19/1995 J-93 J-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 S-93 M-83
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-94 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-96 M-95 A-94 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/22/2008 M-95 A-94 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 A-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/09/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/2008 M-95 A-94 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 03/20/2008 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 04/14/1994 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/18/1995 A-94 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 M-08 M-00 A-94 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 04/18/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/18/1994 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 04/09/1994 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/21/2008 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 04/15/1994 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/09/1994 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/09/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 S-93 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Other Residential 04/11/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/17/2008 A-94 N-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/23/2008 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/29/1996 M-95 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93

34
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/29/1996 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/19/1994 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 A-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 03/22/2008 M-95 A-94 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/13/1994 M-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/14/1994 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 05/17/1995 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/20/1995 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 05/20/1995 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/19/1995 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/2000 F-99 J-97 A-96 M-95 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 03/22/2008 M-95 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/1995 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 04/15/1998 A-96 M-95 S-81
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 04/28/1996 M-95 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/24/1996 M-95 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 07/01/1995 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Other Residential 04/28/1996 J-95 J-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 09/14/2008 A-94 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/02/1996 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/29/1996 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 05/07/2000 A-98 A-96 M-95 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 M-06 M-02 M-00 F-99 M-98 J-97 A-96 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* ASSMD CONDO 04/28/1996 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/28/1996 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/28/1996 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/28/1996 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/25/2008 A-94 A-94 A-94 N-93 S-93 S-93 S-93 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/03/2000 S-93 J-90
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 07/02/2000 A-96 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/30/1996 M-95
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/2008 M-00 S-93 M-90 N-85 A-83 D-82
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 11/15/1993 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 06/22/1997 A-94
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/19/2008 M-00 A-96 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 M-90 N-85
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/11/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 35
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/18/1995 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/18/1995 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/28/1996 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 06/22/1997 F-97 A-96 M-95 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 03/20/1998 J-97 N-93 S-93 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/2000 A-96 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Nonresidential 04/28/1996 J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Two to Four-Family 06/27/1998 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/2000 A-98 A-96
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 05/07/2000 A-98 A-96
JEFFERSON COUNTY* Single-Family 04/12/1994 N-93 S-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY* 302
DE SOTO, CITY OF Single-Family 05/06/2003 M-00
DE SOTO, CITY OF Count 1
Grand Count 379
* REPRESENTS COUNTY
Source: SEMA
Other areas that are in the 100 and 500-year floodplain that are susceptible to flooding
include the following areas within Jefferson County:
DeSoto
Joachim Creek flash flooding along Cedar St. & near high school
Valley St. Culvert flooding
N. Main St. Artery
Festus
Flooding on Highway BB
Flooding on Highway W. Old 21
Flooding on Highway 61/67
Flooding on Highway 55
Kimmswick
Rock Creek floods Hwy K under 33 feet of water.

36
Seasonal Seasonal Pattern
Pattern
Jefferson County – Section 2
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments planning region (namely, Jefferson
County) typically obtains most of its wet weather in the spring months (April, May, June
and July). Seasonal patterns are depicted on the Table J28 below.
TABLE TABLE J28 J28 J28 SEASONAL SEASONAL FLOODING FLOODING PATTERNS PATTERNS IN/NEAR
IN/NEAR
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY ALONG ALONG ALONG MISSISIPPI MISSISIPPI RIVER RIVER
RIVER
Month Month
Number Number of of Events
Events
January 0
February 0
March 0
April 5
May 2
June 2
July 2
August 1
September 0
October 1
November 0
December 1
Therefore, the floodplain areas are highly likely to experience one or more flood events
during the months of April through July.
What What are are Levees?
Levees?
Man-made levee systems usually consist of earthen embankments and wall structures
which are designed and constructed to contain, control, or divert the rising flow of water
so as to protect low lying areas from periodic flooding. For stability, an earthen levee is
constructed in pyramid fashion so that its bottom width is several times its height.
Therefore, constructed levees have a large footprint requiring considerable land area. In
urban areas where land is limited, concrete and masonry floodwalls are often used. A long
levee system, such as those of Southwestern Illinois, may include a combination of earthen
levees and floodwalls. Also, earthen levees are generally constructed with compacted clay
materials and an impervious clay base to prevent water infiltration (see Figure J22A).

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 37
FIGURE FIGURE J22A J22A J22A LEVEE LEVEE DESIGN
DESIGN
Figure Figure 4: 4: Cross Cross-Sectional Cross Sectional View of of an Earthen Levee
Generally, levees are specifically designed and constructed to withstand a certain flood
frequency. A ten to a fifty-year levee is usually considered to be an agricultural levee
designed to protect floodplain in agricultural areas from floods that may occur once every
ten or fifty years. These areas will experience flooding during major flood events (e.g.,
100-year flood events). Urban levees protect floodplains from 100-year floods or higher.
Other levee structures in the system include tie back or lateral levees, which extend from
the main stem levee to bluff lines (high ground) and are part of the line of protection
against backflow during periods of high water (FIGURE J30C). Other key components of a
levee system include pumping stations, gravity drains or outlets, street closure gates and
relief wells. Gravity drains or outlets are openings built through the base of the levees and
are designed to drain and convey floodwaters. These gravity structures permit the
outflow of stormwater that comes off the bluffs to the east when the river stage is low.
Gravity drains are equipped with closure gates to prevent the river flows from entering the
protected area during time of high river stages. Pump stations may be also operated to
drain the protected area from interior flooding (FIGURE J30C).
Figure Figure 5: 5: Schematic Schematic of of of Standard Standard Levee Levee Levee System System Source: FEMA
The four general ways a levee may fail include: overtopping; piping; saturation; and
underseepage (FIGURE J22B). During an extreme flood situation, floodwaters may actually
exceed the designed water level of the levee and overtop it. For example, the Metro East
levees have a design water level of 52.0 feet. In 1993 floodwaters reached a level of 49.6
feet, which approached but did not reach overtop conditions. Piping, or internal levee
erosion, occurs when floodwaters enter the levee through animal burrows and/or plant and
tree root channels. Saturation failure is attributable to a levee that is saturated with
floodwaters for an extended period of time. Floodwater permeates and weakens the core
of the levee, making it unstable. Underseepage refers to floodwater that travels under the

38
Jefferson County – Section 2
base of the levee via an unstable layer of sand and gravel and weakens the base foundation
of the levee from below (FIGURE J22B).
To control for underseepage, relief wells are drilled on the interior side of the levee, and
operated during flood events to depress and eliminate seepage under the levee. Another
method for eliminating or controlling levee seepage is the construction of pressure berms.
These berms are designed as horizontal strips of materials built contiguous to the levee
base on the interior sides of the levee for the purpose of providing protection from seepage
and resulting levee erosion.
FIGURE FIGURE J22B J22B UNDE UNDERSEEPAGE
UNDE UNDE RSEEPAGE
Source: FEMA
The size and height of the St. Louis urban levee system has grown over the years to its
current configuration to protect from the 500-year flood, a flood that has 0.2 percent
chance of occurring in any given year. Major levee improvements were completed with the
passage of the Flood Control Act of 1938. Today’s urban levee system consists of riverside
levees and tie back or wing-levees, canals, conduits, pumping stations, gravity drains and
seepage relief wells. The urban levee system has proven effective in protecting the
American Bottoms from major flooding events, including the flood of record in 1993 (a
300-year flood) and a 200-year flood in 1995.
Below is a brief description of each the levee districts of concern in this report. The maps
show the location of the levees and protected areas.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 39
FIGURE FIGURE J22C J22C LEVEE LEVEE DISTRICT DISTRICT CONCERN CONCERN EXAMPLE
EXAMPLE

40
Public Public Law Law 84 84-99 84 84 99 99
Jefferson County – Section 2
Public Law 84-99 is the authority by which the Army Corps of Engineers responds to
emergencies within the District boundary. Under PL 84-99 authorities are delegated to
the Corps Districts for disaster preparedness, emergency operations, rehabilitations,
emergency water supplies and drought assistance, advance measures and hazard
mitigation. The St. Louis District encompasses approximately 28,000 square miles, almost
equally divided between Illinois and Missouri, and ten riverine watersheds.
Eighty-nine levees in the St. Louis District participate in the PL 84-99 program.
Inclusion in the program requires submittal of as-built drawings and current geotechnical
and survey information, as well as an onsite inspection by Army Corps engineers and
specialists.
Once accepted into the program, levee districts must pass annual operation and
maintenance inspections with an acceptable or minimum acceptable rating. If the levee
district maintains its eligibility, the levee district qualifies for federal funds to repair
damages that occur to the levee during a declared federal emergency.
St. St. Louis
Louis
Flood Flood Risk Risk Manage Management
Manage ment
The 1993 Midwest flood was one of the most damaging natural disasters ever to affect the
United States up to that time. Total impact of damages approximated $15 billion,
thousands of people were evacuated, fifty people died and hundreds of levees failed. The
flood and its path of devastation lasted for several months. The magnitude of this flood
event seemed overwhelming. Just twelve years later Hurricane Katrina and storm surges
that followed caused more than fifty levee breaches, resulting in catastrophic flooding
damage over large portions of southern Mississippi and Louisiana. More than fourteen
hundred people died and over 80% of New Orleans was flooded. The losses devastated an
entire multistate region and, for a time, adversely affected the whole United States
economy.
Katrina has focused great attention on the flood protection systems across the United
States. Under the current circumstances, competition for limited federal funding, limited
financial capacity of local sponsors and delays in appropriations conspire to compromise
public safety and welfare.
The St. Louis District’s flood risk management system is comprised of three major
components: urban levees or floodwalls, agricultural levees and multi-purpose
reservoirs.
Urban levees are built high to protect cities and towns against floods of great magnitude.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 41
Agricultural levees are smaller levees that provide relatively lower levels of protection to
thousands of acres of cropland against more frequent, less severe floods. There are over
700 miles of levee structures within the St. Louis District, protecting approximately 578,365
acres.
Multi-purpose reservoirs are an important part of the flood risk management system. They
provide flood storage capacity and support other Corps’ missions, such as water supply,
hydropower, environmental stewardship and recreation. During the Great Flood of 1993,
the water held back by Army Corps reservoirs decreased the crest in St. Louis by four feet.
When performance of a flood damage reduction system is evaluated, all components
must be considered and evaluated as a whole system and not as separate features. Since
1960 the overall system has prevented more than $11 billion in damages within the St.
Louis District.
Located below is a list of levees based upon ratings by the US Army Corp of Engineers.
There are also figures depicting levee location. Volume 2 contains additional maps of levee
systems in the St. Louis area which were developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
TABLE TABLE J29A J29A LIST LIST LIST OF OF LEV LEVEES LEV EES
Levee Levee
Acceptable:
Acceptable:
Federal/Non
Federal/Non-Fed
Federal/Non Fed St. St. Charles
Charles
Protection Protection Protection Miles Miles Miles Acres Acres Protected Protected
Protected
St. Peters No. 1 Non-Federal Levee 10 Year Protection .5 Miles 300 Acres
Dutzow Bottom Levee Association Non-Federal Levee 25 Year Protection 14.1 Miles 6,700 Acres
Augusta Bottom Levee Association Non-Federal Levee 25 Year Protection 14.1 Miles 6,700 Acres
St. Louis Flood Protection Project
City City of of St. St. Louis
Louis
Federal Levee 500 Year Protection 10.67 Miles 3,160 Acres
Valley Park D&L District
St. St. Louis Louis County
County
Federal Levee 100 Year Protection 3.2 Miles 365 Acres
Riverport Levee District Non-Federal Levee 500 Year Levee 1.1 Miles 440 Acres
Earth City Levee District Non-Federal Levee 500 Year Levee 2.6 Miles 1,900 Acres
Festus/Crystal City
Jefferson Jefferson County
County
Federal Levee 500 Year Protection 3.2 Miles 365 Acres
Minimum Minimum Acceptable:
Acceptable:
Acceptable:
Darst Bottom L.D. (Sec. 2)
St. St. Charles
Charles
Non-Federal Levee 100 Year Protection 8.2 Miles 3,500 Acres
Missouri University Levee Non-Federal Levee 10 Year Protection 2.8 Miles 450 Acres
Greens Bottom L.D. (Sec. 1&2) Non-Federal Levee 5 Year Protection 8.5 Miles 3,100 Acres
Monarch/Chesterfield*
St. St. Louis Louis County
County
Federal Levee 500 Year Protection 11.5 Miles 4,240 Acres

42
TABLE TABLE J29A J29A J29A LIST LIST OF OF LEV LEVEES LEV LEV EES
Jefferson County – Section 2
Levee Levee
Federal/Non
Federal/Non-Fed
Federal/Non Fed Protection Protection Miles Miles Acres Acres Protected
Protected
Missouri Bottoms Levee District Non-Federal Levee 10 Year Protection 7.1 Miles 2,530 Acres
Columbia Bottoms Levee District Non-Federal Levee 5 Year Protection 8 Miles 4,000 Acres
Howard Bend Levee Dist. Non-Federal Levee 500 Year Protection 6.1 Miles 6,000 Acres
Old Town St. Peters Levee
St. St. Charles
Charles
Federal Levee 100 Year Protection .9 Miles 644 Acres
Elm Point Levee Non-Federal Levee 25 Year Protection 2.7 Miles 390 Acres
Consolidated North County L.D. Federal Levee 20 Year Protection 42 Miles 30,000 Acres
Kuhs Levee District Non-Federal Levee 10 Year Protection 7 Miles 1,980 Acres
Cora Island Levee
*Design *Design Deficiency
Deficiency
Non-Federal Levee 25 Year Protection 6.2 Miles 1,000 Acres
FIGURE FIGURE J22D J22D St. St. Albans Albans & & Augusta Augusta Bottoms Bottoms Levee Levee System
System

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 43
FIGURE FIGURE J22E J22E St. St. Peters Peters & & Chesterfield Chesterfield Valley Valley Levee Levee Systems
Systems

44
FIGURE FIGURE J22F J22F Confluence Confluence Levee Levee System
System
Jefferson County – Section 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 45
FIGURE FIGURE J22G J22G St. St. Louis Louis Regiona Regional Regiona l Map of Levees

46
FIGURE FIGURE J22H J22H St. St. Louis Louis and and St. St. Charles Charles County County Levee Levee Map
Map
US Army Corps of Engineers
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE TABLE J29B J29B DAMAGE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT OF OF TOTAL TOTAL LEVEE LEVEE FAILURE FAILURE- FAILURE ST. LOUIS REGION
ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS COUNTY
COUNTY
Land Use Parcel Improve- Tax Value Total Assessment % Improved Assessment Total Value Land
Commercial 240,594,370 293,651,610 32% 753,715,637.31 919,929,300.00 166,213,662.69
Common Ground 2,720 26,140 31% 8,917.52 85,700.00 76,782.48
Duplex/Townhome 110,770 121,780 19% 583,502.67 641,500.00 57,997.33
Industrial/Utility 241,072,170 326,184,830 32% 754,152,200.93 1,020,412,300.00 266,260,099.07
Institution 7,220,560 8,195,570 31% 23,215,018.83 26,349,800.00 3,134,781.17
Multi-Family 19,860 23,430 19% 104,512.93 123,300.00 18,787.07
Park 945,250 3,862,750 25% 3,842,128.33 15,700,800.00 11,858,671.67
Recreation 11,753,470 20,832,080 30% 38,810,957.61 68,789,300.00 29,978,342.39
Single Family 1,950,880 2,201,010 19% 10,544,897.24 11,896,900.00 1,352,002.76
Vacant/Agriculture 1,733,590 17,841,190 30% 5,859,094.79 60,298,700.00 54,439,605.21
Total: Total:
505,403,640 505,403,640 672,940,390 672,940,390 1,590,836,868.16
1,590,836,868.16 1,590,836,868.16 2,124,227,600.00 2,124,227,600.00 533,390,731.84
533,390,731.84

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 47
CITY CITY CITY OF OF ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS
LOUIS
Land Use Parcel Improve- Tax Value Total Assessment % Improved Assessment Total Value Land
Commercial 616 60,499,110 86,503,490 32% 189,059,718.75 270,323,406.25 81,263,687.50
Industrial 660 52,425,020 78,589,100 32% 163,828,187.50 245,590,937.50 81,762,750.00
Institutional 21 1,911,720 6,048,770 32% 5,974,125.00 18,902,406.25 12,928,281.25
Multi-Family 290 1,440,580 1,688,810 19% 7,582,000.00 8,888,473.68 1,306,473.68
R.O.W. 41 42,400 1,471,800 12% 353,333.33 12,265,000.00 11,911,666.67
Recreation 14 28,000 4,112,590 12% 233,333.33 34,271,583.33 34,038,250.00
Single Family 343 1,636,000 2,248,950 19% 8,610,526.32 11,836,578.95 3,226,052.63
Vacant Undeveloped 76 3,601,700 7,271,880 12% 30,014,166.67 60,599,000.00 30,584,833.33
Vacant Residential 321 1,090,920 1,411,490 19% 5,741,684.21 7,428,894.74 1,687,210.53
Total: Total:
2,382 2,382 122,675,450 122,675,450 189,346,880
189,346,880 189,346,880
411,397,075.11
411,397,075.11 411,397,075.11 670,106,280.70 670,106,280.70 258,709,205.59
258,709,205.59
ST. ST. CHARLES CHARLES CO
CO
Land Use Parcel Improve- Tax Value Total Assessment % Improved Assessment Total Value Land
Agriculture 958 10,485,680 15,385,977.20 12% 87,380,667 128,216,477 40,835,810
Commercial 103 8,419,900 11,868,229.60 32% 26,312,188 37,088,218 10,776,030
Government 352 2,619,450 16,629,635.60 32% 8,185,781 51,967,611 43,781,830
Industrial 44 34,027,040 39,292,982.40 32% 106,334,500 122,790,570 16,456,070
Multi-Family 64 2,586,770 2,590,248.90 19% 13,614,579 13,632,889 18,310
Recreational 7 443,780 604,901.60 12% 3,698,167 5,040,847 1,342,680
Single Family 566 9,210,040 13,397,961.10 19% 48,473,895 70,515,585 22,041,690
Utility 7 64,710 69,612.00 12% 539,250 580,100 40,850
Total: Total: Total:
2,101 2,101 67,857,370
67,857,370 67,857,370 99,839,548.40
99,839,548.40 99,839,548.40
294,539,025.77
294,539,025.77 294,539,025.77 429,832,295.77 429,832,295.77 135,293,270.00
135,293,270.00
Flood Flood Fight Fight Teams
Teams
The St. Louis District has seven flood fight teams assigned to watershed sectors within the
District’s area of responsibility. Flood fight teams are activated once river stages reach a
pre-determined level. They provide technical assistance to effected levee districts and act as
a liaison between the District’s emergency operations center and impacted communities.
The District’s Readiness Branch ensures that the teams remain properly staffed and ready
for emergency response.
FEMA FEMA Floodplain Floodplain maps
maps
The Federal Emergency Management Agency is responsible for administering the
National Flood Insurance Program. The NFIP is an agreement between the Federal
government and local communities and has three components: flood risk mapping,
floodplain management and flood insurance availability.
Flood Insurance Risk Maps are used to manage development with the goal of reducing risk.
Many FIRMS across the country were published in the late 1970s and early 1980s. FEMA is
in the midst of a multi-year, $1 billion map modernization effort to update all floodplain

48
maps across the country.
Jefferson County – Section 2
The goal is to provide up-to-date, accurate flood risk info to the public, provide data so
individuals and communities can make informed risk management decisions and promote
and enhance public safety.
B. B. Restoration Restoration Zone Zone (AR (AR Zone) Zone) Zone) Designation
Designation
The National Flood Insurance Program requires FEMA to map areas that are not certified to
protect against a 100-year flood as Special Flood Hazard Areas, but it also allows FEMA to
map areas previously shown as protected by a levee as a “Restoration Zone” (AR Zone).
Because the American Bottoms has historically been protected by levees and work has
begun to continue to provide that protection, FEMA suggests that an AR designation
would provide many short-term benefits. In a letter sent to all affected communities, dated
October 5, 2007, FEMA suggested that the levees might meet requirements for AR Zone
designation (Appendix B). AR Zone indicates that the increased flood hazard is considered
temporary and that restoration of protection is underway. An application to FEMA that is
submitted before January 30, 2008 would allow sufficient time for FEMA to make a
determination and incorporate the designation in FEMA’s preliminary maps.
The application process requires that communities currently designated as protected make
a written request to be considered for AR Zone. According to FEMA, “communities”
means all of the communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. The
communities include cities, villages and counties representing the unincorporated areas. In
an area such as the American Bottoms where there are many communities, FEMA will
accept a joint application as long as it includes a request letter signed by the chief elected
official from each of the cities, villages and counties. 9
The request will need to include
technical information about how the plan to correct design deficiencies will be
implemented over a period not to exceed ten years, if being done in cooperation with a
federal agency (or five years if a non-federal project). Each community will also be
responsible for adopting a resolution passed by the city or county legislative body – saying
they want to apply for the AR Zone designation, that they have not applied before, that
they are not in litigation over levees, and that they have a plan to meet requirements for
federally supported restoration. The communities must also be certified by the Corps that
they are protected against a 33- year flood, a requirement that the Corps has indicated will
likely be met, based on a survey currently underway.
For the purpose of determining future development restrictions, the law makes a
distinction between “developed” and “undeveloped” areas. A community must adopt a
map or legal description designating the developed area, to be submitted with the AR
Zone request. As defined in the rule at 44 CFR 59.1(a)-(c) the developed area encompasses
the larger urbanized area as well as isolated developed subdivisions beyond the urbanized
area. Developed area also recognizes vested land development interests by identifying land
that is planned and permitted and where construction is underway. FEMA indicates that

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 49
while the communities will need to include a map of developed areas in the initial
application, the map may be later amended to include any additional areas that are
developed (or where construction has begun) during the time before the map becomes
official. After FEMA sends the letter of final determination on the AR Zone, the
communities will then have time to legally adopt their official map.
C. C. Benefits Benefits of of AR AR Zone
Zone
The AR Zone designation helps eligible communities establish levee restoration plans that,
when implemented properly, will allow the communities to remove the SFHA designation
from the previously protected areas as soon as the levee system is restored. With this AR
Zone designation indicating that a restoration plan is in place, developers will be more
confident in the long-term success of their investments.
There are other significant benefits. The flood insurance premium rates are lower in
SFHAs designated AR Zone than the rates in SFHAs with other flood insurance risk zone
designations. Rates in the AR Zone are similar to the rates available to people who have
purchased insurance while the area is recognized as protected and grandfathered into
the required program. The structure elevation requirements in AR Zone areas are more
relaxed than the elevation requirements in other SFHAs 10
. The designation of AR Zone
areas also provides a strong incentive for communities to expeditiously restore base flood
protection in at-risk areas.
In areas designated as AR Zone, the minimum elevation required for all new construction in areas identified
as developed is 3 feet above the highest adjacent grade or the AR Zone Base Flood Elevation, whichever is
lower. For new construction in AR Zone that is outside areas already designated as developed, the
requirement is 3 feet in areas where base flood depth are projected to be less than five feet or the AR Zone
Base Flood Elevation for any areas where the projected flood depths exceed 5 feet.
D. D. Zone Zone A99
A99
As adequate progress is made on any levee reconstruction project, a community may
request FEMA to revise the AR Zone designation to A99. Zone A99 designation indicates
that for insurance rating purposes, the levee is considered complete. However, NFIP
insurance requirements still apply. 11
Adequate progress includes: 100% project funding
authorized; 60% appropriated; 50% project cost expended and all critical features as
determined by FEMA are under construction and at least 50% completed. The Zone A99
designation is based on the protection from base flood (100-year flood). As soon as FEMA
is notified that the project is complete, FEMA can remap the area to delineate a floodprotection
zone.

50
Recent Recent Levee Levee Projects
Projects
Jefferson County – Section 2
St. t. Louis Louis Flood Flood Protection Protection Project
Project
Authorized level of protection: 500 year Length: 10.67 miles Protects: 3,160 acres of
industrial and commercial development, and residential areas Concern: Inadequate
seepage controls and deteriorated metal closure gates Solution:
• Replace swing gates at 20 closure structures and permanently close openings at 13
closure structures
• Install 70 new relief wells, replace 103 existing relief wells
Status: Nearing completion of preconstruction engineering
and design City of St. Louis has its cost share. Require
Construction General funds to begin relief wells and closure
structures construction
Monarch Monarch Chesterfield Chesterfield Levee Levee District
District
Authorized level of protection: 500 year Length: 11.5 miles Protects: 4,240 acres; $660
million in economic value Concern: Ensure levee provides 500 year level of protection
Project:
Levee raise, installation of relief wells and sheet pile cutoff, and construction of berms
Status:
Project Cooperation Agreement being executed between Corps and sponsor.
Army Corps initial construction contract expected to be Baxter Road closure structure.
Sponsor-constructed levee raise completed. Sponsor constructing berm to address
underseepage issue along 7,500 feet of levee.
Flood Flood and and Decertification Decertification of of Levee Risks
When the FEMA maps are finalized (currently predicted to occur in March 2009), property
in flood risk areas will be required to have federal flood insurance to qualify for a mortgage
from a federally regulated institution. Flood insurance purchased now (and over the next
year before the new maps are officially adopted by FEMA) is significantly less expensive
than it will be once the maps are finalized, because the property is still officially behind a
protected levee.
Potential levee decertification will cause massive costs to individuals and businesses and
potentially cripple economic growth and investment in the region. Federally regulated
financial institutions will not be able to issue loans to homeowners or businesses that
do not carry adequate flood insurance, and communities will need to adopt
development ordinances that include strict requirements for building in flood zones.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 51
Many homeowners will not be able to afford flood insurance, even at the current
favorable rate, putting them at future financial risk. A secondary impact to
homeowners and small businesses is a potential decline in property values, since sales
of property that require bank financing will be conditioned on the purchase of costly
flood insurance.
This potential action will directly affect almost a third of the population of the Illinois
portion of the St. Louis area and many critical businesses that are the foundation of the
local economy. Inadequate levees threaten to disrupt all who travel on interstate highways
55, 64 and 70. The consequences will be felt not only by areas that could be in jeopardy
of flooding, but also by all communities that have a stake in the economic vitality of the
region.
Speed Speed Of Of Onset Onset And And /Or /Or Existing Existing Warning Warning Systems
Systems
Depending upon the weather forecasts, the speed of onset of flash floods can be almost
instantaneous. Existing warning systems are issued by the National Weather Service and
the local media (television stations, the Weather Channel and local radio stations); USACE,
USGS river stages warnings are given that enable communities to plan for flood events.
The National Weather Service prepares its forecasts and other services in collaboration with
agencies like the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Natural Resource Conservation Service, National Park Service, ALERT Users
Group, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and many state and local emergency managers across the
country.
Hazard Hazard Map Map for for for Flood Flood Events
Events
Refer to Figures J23 and J24 (located in the Technical Appendix) that depict the areas of
the county susceptible to the 100 and 500-year floods.
Statement Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Future Future Severity
Severity
According to SEMA’s Severity Ratings Table, the 1993 floods would qualify as critical.
During the 1993 floods, some facilities were closed for more than 24 hours. Other flood
events had minimal impact on quality of life, no critical facilities or services were shut down
for more than 24 hours, and property damage for the county was about 11percent.
Therefore, the probable severity of future floods could range from critical in the floodplain
areas to negligible in the areas outside of the floodplains.
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk
Risk
Flooding in Jefferson County is likely to occur in the future. Jefferson County faces two
major factors for flooding. First, the land that forms Jefferson County is included the area

52
Jefferson County – Section 2
that drains to the Mississippi and Meramec River. Secondly, according to the FIRM, 11
percent of the land for the Jefferson County lies within the 100-year floodplain. The
majority of that land lies adjacent to the Mississippi River levees and the Meramec River.
The Mississippi River has experienced 14 major flood events since 1785. The Meramec
River has experienced 15 flood events in the last 22 years.
Statement Statement Statement of of of Next Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Adverse Impact Impact Impact on on the the the Community Community
Community
The next flood to invade Jefferson County would follow the pattern of the 1993 floods.
However, post-1993 mitigation measures already have been tested in the 1995 and 2001
flooding along the Mississippi and Meramec River. Despite high river levels, damages were
relatively minimal due to relocation of many homes and businesses. Adverse impacts of
future Mississippi and Meramec River floods are discussed below.
Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures:
Measures:
Life: Limited
Property: Limited
Emotional: Limited
Financial: Limited
Comments: The above impacts assume conditions at the time of the 1993 floods over
the entire county. Impacts within the floodplain would be catastrophic; impacts outside of
the floodplain would be negligible.
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures: Measures:
Measures:
Life: Negligible
Property: Negligible
Emotional: Negligible
Financial: Negligible
Comments: Mitigation measures have already begun in the wake of the 1990s floods.
Further mitigation measures should be directed at improving land use practices and
redesigning vulnerable highways.
Recommendation
Recommendation
In 1996, MDNR/DGLS, Dick Gaffney prepared a Flood Analysis Report, based on four
documents: The Report and Recommendations of the Governor’s Task Force on Flood Plain
Management on behalf of Governor Carnahan, July, 1994; The Floods of ’93, State of
Missouri -- The Federal Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team, Report For the Three
Presidential Disaster Declarations in Missouri, April, 1994, as set up by FEMA under 1988
Stafford Act; Sharing the Challenge: Floodplain Management into 21 st Century -- The
Report of the Interagency Floodplain Management Review Committee to the
Administration (Whitehouse) Floodplain Management Task Force; A Blueprint for Change,
June, 1994 and National Flood Policy in Review-1994 by Association of State Floodplain
Managers (ASFPM). Recommendations made by these documents are summarized below:

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 53
All four post-flood reports recommend that the state should take an active role in
flood plain management, determine state flood plain management, determine state
flood plain management policy and implement it.
The reports generally agreed that the hydrology of the Missouri and the Mississippi
rivers should be reviewed, with the possible result that base flood elevations should
be recalculated and new flood maps issued.
The encouragement of participation in the National Flood Insurance Program, both
by communities and individual property owners was stressed to the point that
recommendations stated that post-flood disaster assistance to those not insured
should be limited, reduced or withheld. The problems of mortgage lenders and
borrowers were addressed and escrow of premiums for flood insurance was
emphasized.
Maintaining flood insurance purchase requirements behind levee protection works
was recommended. Further, it was recommended that the state develop a
definition of market value to assure compliance with flood insurance regulations,
dealing with substantial damages.
Levees, levee districts, levee protection systems, state levee permits, levee
construction criteria, levee repairs and levee heights were addressed by the four
reports as a result of the levee failures in the 1993 flooding. More state
involvement in this topic was universally recommended, especially with regard to
oversight and permits. These recommendations imply that it is critical with respect
to property owners and their lives that the flood stages remain stable (does not
fluctuate as a result of levees built upstream). The aggregate result will be to
increase the flood danger by increasing the height and velocity of river flow during
floods.
Greater environmental sensitivity and increased state government involvement in
flood plain matters was stressed in the post-flood reports. Public health and safety
during flood events was also stressed, especially in regard to hazardous materials.
Government agencies should inventory their property to determine their
vulnerability to future flooding.
Federal agencies should collaborate on an assessment of effectiveness of stream
gauging network and flood forecasting/models.
Insurance should be purchased behind levees to protect citizens against future flood
losses.
Need of a state definition of market value due to 1) NFIP rules not providing a
definition and 2). FEMA not abiding by its definition of market value.
Remove substantially and repetitively damaged structures from flood plains.
Acquire easements on lands through Emergency Wetlands Reserve program,
Conservation Reserve program, USFW.
Ensure that placement/security of hazardous materials on floodplains is done.

54
Earthquake Earthquake Earthquake Hazard Hazard Profile
Profile
Background
Background
Jefferson County – Section 2
The State of Missouri established the Missouri Seismic Safety Commission (MSSC) through
the authority of the Seismic Safety Commission Act also known as (RSMo) Sections 44.225
through 44.237, the main office being within SEMA. The purpose of MSSC is to review
Missouri’s current preparedness for major earthquakes and to make recommendations to
mitigate their impact. In 1997 MSSC developed a plan A Strategic Plan for Earthquake
Safety that documented successes, opportunities and concerns including
recommendations: 1) that educational efforts continue to be developed and expanded and
that the MSSC take the lead; 2) that continued and increased cooperation of State agencies
with nationally funded programs (National Science Foundation funding the Mid-America
Earthquake Center); 3) that stable State funding be provided for the Missouri earthquake
mitigation and preparedness program; 4) that SEMA review and recommend hiring a
person to train and tract the Community Emergency Response Teams [CERT]; and 5) to
assess the impact of National Hazard Earthquake Reduction Program maps on the state
and that scientific investigations be conducted to evaluate assumptions upon which maps
are based.
The MSSC prepared the A Strategic Plan for Earthquake Safety as the result of a legislative
mandate, Senate Bill No. 142 in 1993. The MSCC notes that preparation following the
Strategic Plan will yield significant reduction in fatalities, casualties, damaged structures,
business failures and state infrastructure losses from earthquakes and will reduce the
impact from other hazards. Key issues identified by MSSC are: 1) Earthquake threat is real
and addressing the problem now will yield significant long-term benefits; 2) Reduction of
earthquake risk required combined efforts of individuals, businesses, industry, professional
and volunteer organizations and all levels of government [promote adoption and
enforcement of appropriate building codes]; 3) Strategies identified in the report for
reducing earthquake risk can be implemented through proactive, voluntary community
participation; others will require legislation or funding, [promote community emergency
response teams-CERTs; 4) MSSC accepts responsibilities to advance earthquake planning
and mitigation in state at outlined in plan. Objectives include: 1) increase earthquake
awareness and education; 2) reduce earthquake hazard through mitigation, 3) create
response efforts that are well-coordinated, fast, efficient to reduce injury, loss of life and
property destruction; 4) improve recovery from seismic event [identify earthquake resistant
shelters]; 5) assess earthquake hazard [develop response team to evaluate post-earthquake
effects].

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 55
Description
Description
Earthquake is a term used to describe both sudden slip on a fault (the resulting ground
shaking and radiated seismic energy caused by the slip). Result of volcanic or magmatic
activity, or other sudden stress changes in the earth. The Earth’s crust is made up of large
plates, also known as tectonic plates. These plates are the large, thin, relatively rigid plates
that move relative to one another on the outer surface of the Earth. The lithosphere is the
outer solid part of the earth, including the crust and uppermost mantle. The lithosphere is
about 100 km thick. The lithosphere below the crust is brittle enough at some locations to
produce earthquakes by faulting, such as within a subducted oceanic plate. Much of
Earth's internal heat is relieved through a movement of plates and many of Earth's large
structural and topographic features are consequently formed. Continental rift valleys (the
nearby New Madrid Fault Zone is considered a buried rift valley) and vast plateaus of basalt
are created at plate break up. Plates collide and are destroyed as they descend at
subduction zones to produce deep ocean trenches, strings of volcanoes, extensive
transform faults, broad linear rises, and folded mountain belts. Earth's lithosphere
presently is divided into eight large plates with about two dozen smaller ones that are
drifting above the mantle at the rate of 5 to 10 centimeters (2 to 4 inches) per year. There
are eight large plates; the New Madrid Fault Zone is located in the North American Plate.
Earthquakes include landslides and dam failure/levee failure. Secondary earthquake
hazards that occur from ground shaking. Damage resulting from landslides is similar to
that from earthquakes. Damage resulting from dam failure/levee failure is similar to that
with flash flooding. Landslides and other types of earth movements, including sinkhole
and mine shaft collapse, have occurred in the St. Louis metropolitan area. Landslides result
from a disturbance in the natural stability of a slope. It is another form of earth
movement. They can be small or large in extent, slow or rapid to occur. Triggering events
can be sinkhole collapses or earthquakes.

56
FIGURE FIGURE J25 J25 LANDSLIDE LANDSLIDE POTENTIAL
POTENTIAL
Source: United States Geological Survey
Jefferson County – Section 2
Landslides constitute a major geologic hazard because they are widespread, occurring in all
50 states, and cause $1-2 billion in damages and more than 25 fatalities on average each
year. Landslides pose serious threats to highways and structures that support fisheries,
tourism, timber harvesting, mining, and energy production as well as general
transportation. Landslides commonly occur with other major disasters such as earthquakes
and floods that exacerbate relief and reconstruction efforts and expanded development
and other land use has increased the incidence of landslide disasters. Refer to Figure J25
above and J26 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix).
Landslides and other types of earth movements including sinkhole and mine shaft collapse
have occurred in the St. Louis metropolitan. The Shaley Warsaw Formation and the
Maquoketa Shale are the two geologic strata present in the region in which landslides

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 57
occur. Unstable shales are subject to lateral movement, especially if the natural slope is
disturbed by construction. A foreseeable consequence of construction in this geologic
setting would be disturbance of natural moisture drainage on the slope that could
lubricate the shales interlayered with limestone. The resultant loss of resistance to lateral
movement in the shale beds would have a tendency to accelerate the downhill creep of
associated limestone beds that could be followed by a landslide. Table J30D below
summarizes landslide, sinkhole and underground mine shaft earth movements in the St.
Louis metropolitan region, including Jefferson County. In its early history, areas in Jefferson
County had been mined for silica and limestone, and has a lead smelter located in
Herculaneum.
The term landslide includes a wide range of ground movement, such as rock falls, deep
failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Although gravity acting on an over steepened
slope is the primary reason for a landslide, there are other contributing factors include:
erosion; soil saturation; earthquakes; volcanic activity; and excessive weights on steep
slopes.
Slope materials that become saturated with water may develop a debris flow or mud flow.
The resulting slurry of rock and mud may pick up trees, houses, and cars, thus blocking
bridges and tributaries causing flooding along its path. Features that might be noticed
prior to major landsliding:
• Springs, seeps, or saturated ground in areas that have not typically been wet before.
• New cracks or unusual bulges in the ground, street pavements or sidewalks.
• Soil moving away from foundations.
• Ancillary structures such as decks and patios tilting and/or moving relative to the
main house.
• Tilting or cracking of concrete floors and foundations.
• Broken water lines and other underground utilities.
• Leaning telephone poles, trees, retaining walls or fences
• Offset fence lines.
• Sunken or down-dropped road beds.
• Rapid increase in creek water levels, possibly accompanied by increased turbidity
(soil content).
• Sudden decrease in creek water levels though rain is still falling or just recently
stopped.
• Sticking doors and windows, and visible open spaces indicating jambs and frames
out of plumb.
Characteristics
Characteristics
The characteristics of earthquakes include the rolling or shaking of the surface of the
ground, landslides, liquefaction and amplification. The severity of these hazards depends
on several factors, including soil and slope conditions, proximity to the fault, earthquake
magnitude and type of earthquake.

58
Likely Likely Locations
Locations
Jefferson County – Section 2
Earthquakes occur all the time all over the world, both along plate edges and along faults.
Most earthquakes occur along the edge of the oceanic and continental plates. Likely
locations of earthquakes that would affect Jefferson County would come from the New
Madrid Fault Zone, the Wabash Valley Fault and the fault zones in the vicinity of
Farmington (including Big River Fault and the St. Genevieve Fault Zone) because of their
close proximity and the geologic setting of Jefferson County.
Type Type of of Damage
Damage
Buildings on poorly consolidated and thick soils will typically have more damage than
buildings located on consolidated soils and bedrock. Soils and soft sedimentary rocks near
the earth’s surface and landfills can modify ground shaking caused by earthquakes. One of
these modifications is amplification. Amplification increases the magnitude of the seismic
waves generated by the earthquake. The amount of amplification is influenced by the
thickness of geologic materials and their physical properties. Buildings and structures built
on soft and unconsolidated soils can face greater risk. Damage on buildings can range
from minor foundation cracks to complete leveling of the structure. Refer to Figures J27
and J28 below. Building contents can be broken from being knocked onto the floor or
being crushed by the ceiling, walls and floor failing. Dams and levees have the potential to
fail, resulting in the flooding of downstream regions including residentially populated
areas.
Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking causes wet granular soils to change from a solid
state to a liquid state. This results in the loss of soil strength and the soil’s ability to
support weight. Buildings and their occupants are at risk when the ground can no longer
support these structures. Damage from liquefaction can destroy the buildings and the
foundations the buildings rest on. Liquefaction has been documented from the New
Madrid Fault Zone earthquake activity.
The St. Louis Metropolitan region is 150 miles or so from the New Madrid Fault Zone. If
there was an earthquake of magnitude 6.6 or so, Jefferson County would feel it; a lot of
the damage would be minor, and not many collapses. If there was an earthquake of
magnitude 8, there would be a good bit of damage, but the region would not be leveled.
Earthquakes and landslides have the potential to destroy roads, bridges, buildings
(especially older buildings constructed of masonry or those buildings that are not designed
to seismic standards), utilities (including those that are not designed to seismic standards)
and other critical facilities (including those that are not designed to seismic standards).
Earthquake induced landslides are secondary earthquake hazards that occur from ground
shaking. Damage resulting from landslides is similar to that from earthquakes.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 59
FIGURE FIGURE J27 J27 INTERIOR INTERIOR DAMAGE DAMAGE FIGURE J28 EXTERIOR EXTERIOR DAMAGE
DAMAGE
Hazard Hazard Event Event History History
History
Source for both photographs: United States Geological Survey website
The central Mississippi Valley has more earthquakes than any other part of the United
States east of the Rocky Mountains. Between 1811 and 1812, four catastrophic
earthquakes, with magnitude estimates greater than 7.0, occurred during a three month
period. Hundreds of aftershocks followed over a period of several years. These magnitude
8 quakes, centered near the town of New Madrid (Missouri), devastated the surrounding
region and rang church bells 1,000 miles away in Boston. The quakes locally changed the
course of the Mississippi River and created Reelfoot Lake. In recent decades, earth
scientists have collected evidence that strong earthquakes in the central Mississippi Valley
have occurred repeatedly in the geologic past. Small earthquakes occur in the region
frequently. Scientists refer to the area in which most of these quakes occur as the New
Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ). It lies within the central Mississippi Valley, extending from
northeast Arkansas, through southeast Missouri, western Tennessee, and western Kentucky
to southern Illinois. Historically, this area has been the site of some of the largest
earthquakes in North America. The largest earthquakes to have occurred since then were
on January 4, 1843 and October 31, 1895 with magnitude estimates of 6.0 and 6.2
respectively. In addition to these events, seven events of magnitude 5.0 and greater have
occurred in the area. In 1974 instruments were installed in and around this area to closely
monitor seismic activity. Since then, more than 4000 earthquakes have been located, most
of which are too small to be felt. On average one earthquake per year will be large enough
to be felt in the area.
The most recent earthquake event affecting the East-West Gateway planning region was
on June 6, 2003. The epicenter of the 4.0 magnitude earthquake was 4 miles southeast of
Blandville, Kentucky and residents in the surrounding area felt the tremor. While impacts
of this quake were inconsequential, Missouri has had three of the largest earthquakes in
the contiguous United States; the three ranking #1, #2 and #4 in magnitude ranging
from 7.9 to 8.1. Projected losses, based on losses from recent earthquake activity in Loma
Prieta, California, losses exceeded $6 billion dollars with over 28,000 homes and businesses
destroyed and 63 lives lost and 3800 injuries in the event of a magnitude 6 earthquake.
Earthquakes pose a serious threat to many Missouri communities. Local governments,

60
Jefferson County – Section 2
planners, and engineers must consider the threat as they seek to balance development and
risk. Identifying locations susceptible to seismic activity generated by nearby faults,
adopting strong policies and implementing measures and using other mitigation
techniques are essential to reducing risk from seismic hazards in the East-West Gateway
planning region. Table J30A below depicts the history of the large earthquakes in the
region.
TABLE TABLE J30A J30A THE THE LARGEST LARGEST EARTHQUAKES EARTHQUAKES IN IN CONTIGUOUS CONTIGUOUS U.S.
U.S.
Location Location
Date Time UTC Magnit Magnitude Magnit
ude ude
1. New Madrid, Missouri 1811 12 16 08:15 UTC 8.1
2. New Madrid, Missouri 1812 02 07 09:45 UTC 8
3. Fort Tejon, California 1857 01 09 16:24 UTC 7.9
4. New Madrid, Missouri 1812 01 23 15:00 UTC 7.8
5. Imperial Valley, California 1892 02 24 07:20 UTC 7.8
6. San Francisco, California 1906 04 18 13:12 UTC 7.8
7. Owens Valley, California 1872 03 26 10:30 UTC 7.6
8. Gorda Plate, California 1980 11 08 10:27 UTC 7.4
9. N Cascades, Washington 1872 12 15 05:40 UTC 7.3
10. California - Oregon Coast 1873 11 23 05:00 UTC 7.3
11. Charleston, South Carolina 1886 09 01 02:51 UTC 7.3
12. West of Eureka, California 1922 01 31 13:17 UTC 7.3
13. Kern County, California 1952 07 21 11:52 UTC 7.3
14. Hebgen Lake, Montana 1959 08 18 06:37 UTC 7.3
Table J30B below illustrates seismic events from various eastern Missouri seismic sampling
facilities that have been documented by St. Louis University and Southeast Missouri State
University, CERI and CUSEC. To better understand the earthquake hazard, the scientific
community has looked at historical records. Historical earthquake records can be divided
into pre-instrumental and the instrumental period. In the absence of instruments, the
detection of earthquakes is based on observations and felt reports, and is dependent upon
population density and distribution. Newspapers and books from various cities around the
nation (list) provide a good source of historical documentation of the 1811-1812
earthquake. The seismic risk is more severe today than in the past because population is
increasing.
TABLE TABLE J30B J30B RECENT RECENT EARTHQUAKE EVENTS 1.0 1.0 OR GREATER
mb mb Date Date time time UTC UTC Lat. Lat. Lon. Lon. Lon. Depth Depth Depth
km/Location
km/Location
1.5 06/28/2008 10:22 36.48 -89.54 8.2 8 km ( 5 mi) ESE of Marston, MO
1.9 06/27/2008 9:27 36.6 -89.56 5.4 3 km ( 2 mi) WNW of New Madrid, MO
1.2 06/26/2008 11:03 35.49 -85.12 17.2 6 km ( 4 mi) NW of Graysville, TN
1.8 06/26/2008 10:02 36.6 -89.56 5.7 3 km ( 2 mi) WNW of New Madrid, MO
1.4 06/26/2008 4:27 36.45 -89.53 6.1 9 km ( 6 mi) NNW of Tiptonville, TN
2.3 06/24/2008 22:40 36.46 -89.76 3.5 6 km ( 4 mi) WNW of Portageville, MO
2.9 06/24/2008 22:20 38.45 -87.86 14.7 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
1.8 06/23/2008 4:53 36.54 -89.62 8.6 3 km ( 2 mi) NNW of Marston, MO
1.5 06/19/2008 6:44 36.6 -89.57 15.1 3 km ( 2 mi) WNW of New Madrid, MO

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 61
TABLE TABLE J30B J30B RECENT RECENT EARTHQUAKE EVENTS 1.0 OR OR GREATER
1.8 06/17/2008 21:45 35.84 -90.16 4.1 5 km ( 3 mi) S of Manila, AR
1.5 06/16/2008 18:57 36.53 -89.59 8.9 2 km ( 1 mi) NE of Marston, MO
1.5 06/15/2008 3:21 36.49 -89.56 8.9 5 km ( 3 mi) SE of Marston, MO
2.1 06/11/2008 20:31 36.33 -89.44 5 6 km ( 4 mi) SSE of Tiptonville, TN
1.3 06/11/2008 20:31 36.33 -89.45 3.1 6 km ( 4 mi) SSE of Tiptonville, TN
3.6 06/05/2008 7:13 38.444 -87.839 5 7 km ( 4 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
1.9 06/05/2008 6:34 36.9 -89.41 3.8 4 km ( 2 mi) ESE of Bertrand, MO
1.5 06/03/2008 1:03 36.51 -89.56 7.6 5 km ( 3 mi) E of Marston, MO
1.3 06/01/2008 22:39 36.5 -89.57 9.2 4 km ( 3 mi) ESE of Marston, MO
1.6 06/01/2008 14:56 38.45 -87.85 14.2 8 km ( 5 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
2 05/29/2008 10:49 38.44 -87.86 14.1 7 km ( 5 mi) NE of Bellmont, IL
1.6 05/12/2008 13:19 36.5 -89.53 6.7 7 km ( 5 mi) ESE of Marston, MO
2.8 05/09/2008 8:40 35.88 -89.99 11.2 5 km ( 3 mi) ENE of Dell, AR
2.7 05/05/2008 11:25 38.486 -90.408 22.9 6 km ( 3 mi) S of Sunset Hills, MO
1.6 05/03/2008 14:54 36.14 -89.41 8.4 11 km ( 7 mi) NNW of Dyersburg, TN
1.6 05/03/2008 4:27 36.54 -89.6 6.5 3 km ( 2 mi) NNE of Marston, MO
1.4 05/03/2008 0:34 38.45 -87.86 16.2 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
3.3 05/01/2008 5:30 38.459 -87.831 5 7 km ( 5 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
2.6 04/30/2008 19:29 38.45 -87.87 15.4 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.3 04/29/2008 22:56 36.09 -89.77 7.4 5 km ( 3 mi) E of Steele, MO
1.7 04/28/2008 21:46 38.45 -87.85 14.2 8 km ( 5 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
1.8 04/26/2008 13:09 36.5 -89.53 7.2 7 km ( 5 mi) ESE of Marston, MO
1.7 04/26/2008 12:17 36.5 -89.53 7.2 7 km ( 5 mi) ESE of Marston, MO
3.7 04/25/2008 17:31 38.45 -87.87 13.2 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
1.9 04/25/2008 1:17 35.77 -90.15 0.4 9 km ( 5 mi) W of Victoria, AR
2.5 04/25/2008 0:45 35.91 -89.95 12.2 4 km ( 2 mi) SW of Blytheville, AR
2.6 04/24/2008 11:44 38.45 -87.9 18.3 7 km ( 5 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
1.8 04/23/2008 22:54 36.52 -89.58 7.1 3 km ( 2 mi) E of Marston, MO
2 04/23/2008 7:21 36.27 -89.5 7.2 2 km ( 1 mi) WNW of Ridgely, TN
2.4 04/23/2008 7:11 36.27 -89.5 7.1 2 km ( 1 mi) WNW of Ridgely, TN
2.1 04/23/2008 1:32 38.46 -87.86 14.4 9 km ( 6 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.4 04/22/2008 23:24 36.11 -89.75 8.2 8 km( 5 mi) ENE of Steele, MO
2 04/22/2008 10:49 36.48 -89.55 8.7 7 km ( 4 mi) SE of Marston, MO
1.6 04/22/2008 8:01 38.46 -87.9 13.7 8 km ( 5 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
2.2 04/21/2008 7:58 38.45 -87.88 17.3 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
4 04/21/2008 5:38 38.473 -87.823 10 8 km ( 5 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
2.3 04/20/2008 10:34 38.44 -87.9 16.9 6 km ( 4 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
1.3 04/20/2008 9:59 38.46 -87.84 13.7 8 km ( 5 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
1 04/20/2008 6:32 38.44 -87.85 17.1 8 km ( 5 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
1.7 04/20/2008 5:31 38.45 -87.88 14.2 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.8 04/20/2008 5:02 38.44 -87.85 16.3 8 km ( 5 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
1.7 04/19/2008 23:19 36.55 -89.65 7.6 5 km ( 3 mi) WSW of Howardville, MO
2.8 04/19/2008 16:55 38.44 -87.9 14.9 6 km ( 4 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
1.7 04/19/2008 12:45 38.45 -87.91 15.4 7 km ( 5 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
1.3 04/19/2008 9:46 38.44 -87.85 14.4 8 km ( 5 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL

62
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE TABLE J30B J30B RECENT RECENT EARTHQUAKE EVENTS 1.0 OR OR GREATER
2.7 04/19/2008 3:05 38.474 -87.795 2.9 7 km ( 4 mi) NNW of Mount Carmel, IL
4.6 04/18/2008 15:14 38.478 -87.869 10 11 km ( 7 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.6 04/18/2008 11:55 38.465 -87.854 10 9 km ( 6 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
1.2 04/18/2008 11:25 38.45 -87.88 15.4 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
1.5 04/18/2008 10:57 38.43 -87.92 17.3 5 km ( 3 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
2.2 04/18/2008 10:46 38.44 -87.88 17.8 7 km ( 4 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
1.6 04/18/2008 10:44 38.45 -87.85 15.9 8 km ( 5 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
2.1 04/18/2008 10:37 38.48 -87.85 14.2 10 km ( 6 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
3.4 04/18/2008 10:36 38.46 -87.86 17.8 9 km ( 6 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.5 04/18/2008 10:15 38.464 -87.846 10 9 km ( 5 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
1.9 04/18/2008 10:06 38.44 -87.88 19.2 7 km ( 4 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.2 04/18/2008 10:04 38.45 -87.86 13.2 8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
2.6 04/18/2008 9:59 38.469 -87.795 10 6 km ( 4 mi) NNW of Mount Carmel, IL
5.2 04/18/2008 9:37 38.45 -87.89 11.6 7 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
TABLE TABLE J30C J30C J30C HISTORICAL HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE EARTHQUAKE EVENTS
EVENTS
DATE DATE OF OF SEISMIC
SEISMIC
SEISMIC SEISMIC EVENT EVENT
MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE OF OF
OF FREQUENCY
FREQUENCY
EVENT EVENT
EVENT
SEI SEISMIC SEI SMIC EVENT EVENT
December 16, 1811 Earthquake occurred 195 miles south of
EWG region
8.0 -
February 7, 1812 Earthquake occurred 165 miles south of
EWG region
8.2 1
June 9, 1838 Earthquake occurred 60 miles south of
EWG region*
5.7 26
January 4, 1843 Earthquake occurred 231 miles south of
EWG region*
6.0 7
October 8, 1857 Earthquake occurred 51 miles south of
EWG region*
5.3 14
October 31, 1895 Earthquake occurred 135 miles south of
EWG region*
6.2 38
August 21, 1905 Earthquake occurred 138 miles south of
EWG region*
4.8 10
April 9, 1917 Earthquake occurred 51 miles south of
EWG region*
5.0 12
June 29, 1947 Earthquake occurred 33 miles south of
EWG region*
4.2 30
April 9, 1955 Earthquake occurred 42 miles south of
EWG region*
4.5 8
November 25, 1956 Earthquake occurred 120 miles south of
EWG region*
4.4 1
October 20, 1965 Earthquake occurred 71 miles south of
EWG region*
4.8 9
November 9, 1968 Earthquake occurred 100 miles south of
EWG region*
5.5 3
September 20, 1978 Earthquake occurred 4.7 miles south of
EWG region**
3.1 10
February 5, 1994 Earthquake occurred 101 miles south** 4.2 16
January 15, 1998 Earthquake occurred 13 miles south of 2.4 4
FREQUENCY 1

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 63
TABLE TABLE TABLE J30C J30C HISTORICAL HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE EARTHQUAKE EVENTS
EVENTS
DATE DATE OF OF SEISMIC
SEISMIC
SEISMIC SEISMIC EVENT EVENT
MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE OF OF
OF FREQUENCY
FREQUENCY
EVENT EVENT
EVENT
EWG region**
SEI SEISMIC SEI SMIC EVENT
June 6, 2003 Earthquake occurred 10 miles southeast
of Cairo, Ill; felt here
4.0 5
Source:* Earthquake History of the United States;
** Cooperative New Madrid Seismic Network Earthquake Bulletin, St. Louis
University (Compiled by M. Whittington, Earthquake Center, St. Louis
University)
*** USGS Earthquake Hazard Program
1 Number of years between seismic events
FREQUENCY 1
TABLE TABLE J30D J30D LANDSLIDE, LANDSLIDE, SINKHOLE SINKHOLE AND AND UNDERGROUND UNDERGROUND MINE MINE SHAFT SHAFT EARTH
EARTH
MOVEMENTS MOVEMENTS IN IN ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS METROPOLITAN METROPOLITAN REGION
REGION
LOCATION LOCATION
TYPE INSPECTION INSPECTION DATE DATE
Grubville Sinkhole collapse 08/08/1967
Jefferson County Landslide 07/09/1968
Fenton Landslide 06/14/1971
High Ridge Sinkhole collapse 10/03/1974
Franklin County Sinkhole collapse 05/06/1976
St. Charles County Sinkhole collapse 06/29/1977
St. Charles County Sinkhole collapse 12/14/1977
House Springs Sinkhole collapse 04/06/1978
Franklin County Sinkhole collapse 03/05/1982
Imperial Landslide 05/19/1983
Herculaneum Sinkhole collapse 11/23/1983
Herculaneum Landslide 02/25/1985
Green Jade Estates, Jefferson County Landslide 05/27/1990
Imperial Landslide 06/12/1990
Franklin County Sinkhole collapse 07/31/1990
Mehville Sinkhole collapse 03/17/1991
Hillsboro Underground mine shaft 03/27/1991
Franklin County Sinkhole collapse 01/02/1992
Franklin County Sinkhole collapse 03/23/1993
Stanton Sinkhole collapse 02/08/1994
Arnold Landslide 12/16/1994
Sulfur Springs Landslide 04/18/1997
Sullivan Sinkhole collapse 12/23/1997
Imperial Landslide 07/14/1998
House Springs Rock Collapse 12/19/2002
Jefferson County Landslide N.A.
Washington Underground mine shaft N.A.
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources

64
Frequency Frequency of of Occurrence
Occurrence
Jefferson County – Section 2
Seismic scientists cannot predict the frequency of occurrence of earthquakes, although
some have tried. Iben Browning predicted the onset of large-scale seismic events would
take place on December 3, 1990 but did not. Since 1811, (182 years) there have been 16
recorded earthquake events occurring in a random frequency as can be seen on Table J32
above. While estimates of the recurrence intervals of the large 1811-1812 earthquakes are
about 500-1000 years, smaller, but still destructive earthquakes are event more likely. The
recurrence interval for a magnitude-6 earthquake is about 100 years. The last such
earthquake was in 1895 near Charleston, Missouri.
However, scientists estimate that there is a 9-in-10 chance of a magnitude 6 to 7 tremblor
occurring in the NMSZ within the next 50 years. Because of differences in the geology east
and west of the Rocky Mountains, the effects of a magnitude 7 quake in the mid-continent
United States could be far worse than those of the 1989 magnitude 7 Loma Prieta,
California, earthquake.
In response to this threat, the USGS has been spearheading an effort to understand the
causes of earthquakes in the Mississippi Valley. Initiated in the 1980's, this ongoing
cooperative endeavor among universities, private agencies, state governments, and Federal
agencies has two goals--to evaluate the level of the earthquake hazard and to help reduce
the risk to lives and property from future quakes in the region. The USGS is currently
working with the Missouri and Illinois geological surveys to study soil conditions in and
around the St. Louis region. They are utilizing soil samples from borings taken from public
construction projects such as highways, bridges and sewers.
With respect to earth movements including landslides, sinkhole and mineshaft collapse,
these incidents have occurred on a fairly frequent basis; over 27 reports were made to the
Missouri Geological Survey over a period of 36 years.
Intensity Intensity or or Strength
Strength
Recent research suggests that the New Madrid Fault Zone is capable of producing
magnitude 8 earthquakes. Contemporary newspaper accounts of the 1811-1812
Mississippi Valley earthquake sequence are used to construct a generalized isoseismal map
of the first of three principal shocks of the sequence, that of December 16, 1811.
Earthquakes can be measured by intensity or by magnitude. The Richter magnitude scale
was developed in 1935 by Charles F. Richter of the California Institute of Technology as a
mathematical device to compare the size of earthquakes. The magnitude of an earthquake
is determined from the logarithm of the amplitude of waves recorded by seismographs.
Adjustments are included for the variation in the distance between the various
seismographs and the epicenter of the earthquakes. Because of the logarithmic basis of
the scale, each whole number increase in magnitude represents a tenfold increase in
measured amplitude; as an estimate of energy, each whole number step in the magnitude

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 65
scale corresponds to the release of about 31 times more energy than the amount
associated with the preceding whole number value. The Richter Scale is not used to
express damage, it measures the size of an earthquake at its sources.
Intensity scales, like the Modified Mercalli Scale measure the amount of shaking at a
particular location. The Mercalli Scale is based on observable earthquake damage. The
Richter scale is considered scientifically more objective and therefore more accurate. For
example a level I-V on the Mercalli scale would represent a small amount of observable
damage. At this level doors would rattle, dishes break and weak or poor plaster would
crack. As the level rises toward the larger numbers, the amount of damage increases
considerably. The higher number, 12, represents total damage. Refer to Figure J30.
They do not depend on where the measurement was made. The intensity of earth
movements including landslides, sinkhole and mineshaft collapse in the St. Louis
Metropolitan area are not as intense and widespread as the landslides in the western
portion of the U.S. Earth movements in the St. Louis Metropolitan area are usually
localized.
Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Injuries Injuries, Injuries , Property Property Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses
Losses
Another earthquake as powerful as the great quakes of 1811-12 may not occur for many
years. Because of differences in the geology east and west of the Rocky Mountains, the
effects of a magnitude 7 quake in the mid-continent United States could be far worse than
those of the 1989 magnitude 7 Loma Prieta, California, earthquake. Property damage
could range from minor cracks in structures to complete destruction. Infrastructure
including roads, bridges, water and gas lines may rupture, resulting in an abrupt halt to
electricity, heat/cooling source, communication, transportation, rescue and emergency
response services. Ruptured gas lines and power lines could potentially cause explosions
and fires. Cascading emergencies such as these will compound the initial disaster. Lives
lost, injuries, property damage and economic losses could potentially be in the same range
as the earthquake that struck San Francisco.
Landslides constitute a major geologic hazard because they are widespread, occurring in all
50 states, and cause $1-2 billion in damages and more than 25 fatalities on average each
year. Landslides pose serious threats to highways and structures that support fisheries,
tourism, timber harvesting, mining, and energy production as well as general
transportation. Landslides commonly occur with other major disasters such as earthquakes
and floods that exacerbate relief and reconstruction efforts and expanded development
and other land use has increased the incidence of landslide disasters.
If the New Madrid fault were to quake at a range of 6.7, such as the Northridge, CA in
1994, it would cause nearly $70 to $90 billion in direct building losses. (According to
Shannon Marquez, project manager with IEM). The entire infrastructure of communication

66
Jefferson County – Section 2
lines, electricity, bridges, and roads would be out of commission. According to Col. Mark
McCaster the residents would be on their own for the first 72 to 96 hours following a
major quake. According to Marquez, models have shown over 30,000 highway bridges
and 86,000 miles of highways could be damaged profoundly disrupting transcontinental
commerce. A 25% reduction in natural gases just “in the Chicago area alone could be
disrupted” (Marquez). Refineries producing over 300,000 barrels of oil a day could also be
affected. According to the Mid-America Earthquake Center at the University of Illinois at
Urbana Champaign: more than 250,000 buildings would suffer severed damage, 260,000
displaced, and over 60,000 casualties would result.
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
Refer to Figure J29 below that depicts the Peak Acceleration (%g) with a 10 percent
probability of exceedance within 50 years within the EWG planning region. As can be
seen, Jefferson County lies in four peak acceleration zones running northeast to southwest
ranging from a low of 7 in the northwestern corner to almost 15 %g of severity in the
southeastern corner of the county. The term Acceleration is used because the building
codes prescribe how much horizontal force a building should be able to withstand during
and earthquake.
Bridge Bridge Integrity/Mitigation Integrity/Mitigation Efforts
Efforts
An earthquake of 6.7 could affect between 230 to 700 counties in eight states.
Retrofitting of bridges and buildings are one way to decrease the potential economic,
socio, and lives lost. Located below is a list of bridges in Jefferson County rated by their
structural integrity. According to Patrick Martens of the Missouri Department of
Transportation there is currently no program to address seismic upgrades with the
exception of the Popular street approach double-decker complex. “There is just no money
for that type of program, and the expenses are too great to address this. It almost
becomes cheaper to replace the bridge then to try and retrofit them” (Martens). MODOT
assesses seismic needs in replacing bridges and in major rehab projects.
TABLE TABLE J31 J31 J31 JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON
COUNTY COUNTY BRIDGES
BRIDGES
Jefferson Jefferson County
County
Bridge Bridge
Status Status
Latitude Latitude Longitude
Longitude
RT M Not Deficient 38.37167 -90.501667
ANTIRE CR Structurally Deficient 38.48 -90.565
TRIB OF SALINE CR Structurally Deficient 38.46 -90.451667
SUGAR CR Structurally Deficient 38.46833 -90.426667
TRIB MERAMEC RVR Structurally Deficient 38.44667 -90.411667
SUGAR CR Structurally Deficient 38.48 -90.43
TRIB MERAMEC RVR Structurally Deficient 38.455 -90.465
UP RR Structurally Deficient 38.21833 -90.375
TRIB OF PLATTIN CR Structurally Deficient 38.21667 -90.401667

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 67
TABLE TABLE J31 J31 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON
COUNTY COUNTY BRIDGES BRIDGES
BRIDGES
Jefferson Jefferson County
County
Bridge Bridge
Status Status
Latitude Latitude Longitude
Longitude
JOACHIM CR Structurally Deficient 38.13333 -90.553333
TRIB OF JOACHIM CR Structurally Deficient 38.13167 -90.551667
TANYARD BR Structurally Deficient 38.12667 -90.558333
JOACHIM CR Structurally Deficient 38.13833 -90.556667
TRIB OF GLAIZE CR Structurally Deficient 38.35 -90.478333
TRIB OF GLAIZE CR Structurally Deficient 38.33 -90.45
HEADS CR Structurally Deficient 38.40333 -90.57
TRIB OF BELEWS CR Structurally Deficient 38.335 -90.57
TRIB OF BELEWS CR Structurally Deficient 38.32333 -90.571667
TRIB OF BIG RVR Structurally Deficient 38.38333 -90.583333
JOACHIM CR Structurally Deficient 38.26333 -90.385
GLAIZE CR Structurally Deficient 38.36167 -90.466667
TRIB OF SANDY CR Structurally Deficient 38.26167 -90.483333
JOACHIM CR Structurally Deficient 38.05667 -90.515
LITTLE CR Structurally Deficient 38.22667 -90.5
LITTLE CR Structurally Deficient 38.23 -90.485
TRIB OF COTTER CR Structurally Deficient 38.185 -90.576667
TRIB OF COTTER CR Structurally Deficient 38.19 -90.58
DRY CR Structurally Deficient 38.18667 -90.663333
TRIB OF BIG RVR Structurally Deficient 38.12833 -90.693333
TRIB OF BIG RVR Structurally Deficient 38.12333 -90.67
TRIB OF BIG RVR Structurally Deficient 38.085 -90.621667
FLUCOM BR Structurally Deficient 38.1 -90.443333
TRIB OF FLUCOM BR Structurally Deficient 38.09167 -90.421667
TRIB OF PLATTIN CR Structurally Deficient 38.09 -90.426667
TRIB OF FLUCOM BR Structurally Deficient 38.115 -90.441667
DRY CR Structurally Deficient 38.22333 -90.681667
ROCKY BR Structurally Deficient 38.07 -90.418333
PLATTIN CR Structurally Deficient 38.07 -90.416667
CST SUNSHINE DR, BNSF RR Structurally Deficient 38.22667 -90.406667
KOCHS CR Structurally Deficient 38.31667 -90.398333
JOACHIM CR Structurally Deficient 38.265 -90.388333
SANDY CR Structurally Deficient 38.29667 -90.528333
DUTCH CR Structurally Deficient 38.35833 -90.673333
ROCK CR Structurally Deficient 38.37333 -90.386667
MAUPIN CR Structurally Deficient 38.24333 -90.756667
DITCH CR Structurally Deficient 38.22 -90.756667
MUDDY CR Structurally Deficient 38.14167 -90.305

68
FIGURE FIGURE J29 J29 PEAK PEAK ACCELERATION
ACCELERATION
Source: United States Geological Survey
Jefferson County – Section 2
Franklin County lies in five peak acceleration zones running northeast to southwest ranging
from a high of almost 9 in the southeastern corner to a low of 4%g of severity in the
northwestern corner. St. Charles County lies within four peak acceleration zones running
northeast to southwest ranging from a high of 8 in the easternmost portion of the county
to a low of about 5%g severity in the northwestern corner of the county. St. Louis County
lies in four peak acceleration zones running northeast to southwest ranging from a high of
15 in the southeastern portion to a low of about 7%g severity in the northern and western
portions of the county. The City St. Louis lies in two peak acceleration zones ranging
between 26-28%g severity.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 69
FIGURE FIGURE J30 J30 MODIFIED MODIFIED MERCALLI MERCALLI SCALE
SCALE

70
Seasonal Seasonal Pattern
Pattern
Jefferson County – Section 2
There is no data that supports the relationship between the occurrence of earthquakes and
seasonal weather patterns.
There is data that supports the relationship between the occurrence of landslides, sinkhole
and mineshaft collapse and seasonal weather patterns. Rainfall events would introduce
moisture into the earth and geologic strata, thus creating the potential for earth
movement.
Speed Speed of of Onset Onset And/Or And/Or Existing Existing Warning Warning Systems
Systems
Earthquake prediction is a future possibility. Just as the Weather Bureau now predicts
hurricanes, tornadoes, and other severe storms, the National Earthquake Information
Center (NEIC) may one day issue forecasts on earthquakes. Earthquake research was
stepped up after the Alaska shock in 1964. Today, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and
other federal and state agencies, as well as universities and private institutions are
conducting research. Earthquake prediction may some day become a reality, but only after
much more is learned about earthquake mechanisms. The speed of onset is immediate.
See Table J32 below. An earthquake can can occur occur at at anytime anytime with with most most most not not receiving receiving receiving emergency
emergency
care care care for for the the first first 72 72 to to 96 96 hours. hours.
hours.
TABLE TABLE J32 J32 FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCES OCCURRENCES OF OF EARTHQUAKES
EARTHQUAKES
DESCRIPTOR DESCRIPTOR
MAGNITUDE ANNUAL AVERAGE
Great 8 and higher 1 ¹
Major 7 - 7.9 17 ²
Strong 6 - 6.9 134 ²
Moderate 5 - 5.9 1319 ²
Light (estimated) 4 - 4.9 13,000
Minor (estimated) 3 - 3.9 130,000
Very Minor (estimated) 2 - 2.9 1,300,000
¹ Based on observations since 1900.
² Based on observations since 1990.
The USGS estimates that several million earthquakes occur in the world each year.
Many go undetected because they hit remote areas or have very small magnitudes.
The NEIC now locates about 50 earthquakes each day, or about 20,000 a year.
Map Map of of Hazards
Hazards
Figure J31 below shows earthquakes that have occurred in the proximity of the St. Louis
Metropolitan area. Also please refer to Figure J26 (located in the back of the Technical
Appendix) that depicts areas that are susceptible to earthquakes. Areas outside of the soil
liquefaction zone will most likely be impacted from an earthquake, but probably to a lesser
degree. The figure also shows areas in the St. Louis region that would be predisposed to

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 71
earth movements including landslides, sinkhole and mine shaft collapse. A map showing
sinkholes and areas of Karst topography in the St. Louis region can be found in Volume 2.
Statement Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Future Future Severity
FIGURE FIGURE J31 J31 J31 EARTHQUAKES IN MISSOURI
Source: United States Geological Surve
The magnitudes of the historic earthquakes listed above in the New Madrid Fault Zone
range from 2.4 to 8.2. These most recent earthquakes did not affect Jefferson County.
The United States Geological Survey and the Center for Earthquake Research and
Information at the University of Memphis (CERI) have issued a new forecast. The estimated
probability of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake is 25-40% through the year 2053.
The January estimates show a 7-10% chance of magnitudes between 7.5 and 8.0 in a 50year
period through 2053. The probability of an earthquake event is rated as moderate
and the severity is rated as high.
MODIFIED MODIFIED MODIFIED MERCALLI MERCALLI INTENSITY INTENSITY SCALE
SCALE
MMI MMI VALUE VALUE FULL FULL DESCRIPTION
I People do not feel any earth movement
II Felt by persons at rest, on upper floors of tall buildings
III Felt by people indoors. Hanging objects swing back and forth.
Vibration from the earthquake may seem like the passing of light
trucks. May not be recognized as an earthquake.
IV Hanging objects swing. Vibration may seem like he passing of heavy
trucks or a jolt, like heavy ball striking the walls. Parked vehicles may

72
Jefferson County – Section 2
rock noticeably. Windows, dishes, doors may rattle and glasses clink.
In the upper range of IV, walls of wood frame buildings may creak.
V Almost everyone feels movement whether inside or outdoors.
Sleeping people are awakened. Liquids in containers are disturbed;
some are spilled. Small unstable objects are displaced or overturned.
Doors swing, close or open. Shutters, pictures on the wall move.
VI Felt by all; some are frightened and take cover. People have difficulty
walking due to motion. Objects fall from shelves and dishes,
glassware and ceramics may be broken. Pictures fall off walls.
Furniture moves or is overturned. Weak plaster and masonry cracked.
Damage slight in poorly constructed buildings. Trees, bushes shaken
visibly or are heard rustling.
VII People have difficulty standing. Drivers on the road feel their cars
shaking. Furniture may be overturned and broken. Loose bricks fall
from buildings a masonry walls and cracks in plaster and masonry
may appear. Weak chimneys may break at the roofline. Damage is
slight to moderate in well-built structures; considerable in poorly
constructed buildings and facilities.
VIII Drivers have trouble steering. Tall structures such as towers,
monuments may twist and fall. Wood frame houses that are not
bolted to their foundations may shift and sustain serious damage.
Damage is slight to moderate in well-constructed buildings,
considerable in poorly constructed buildings. Branches are broken
and fall from trees. Changes occur in flow or temperature of springs
and wells. Cracks appear in wet ground and steep slopes.
IX Masonry structures and poorly constructed buildings suffer serious
damage or collapse. Frame structures, if not bolted, shift off
foundations. Serious damage to reservoirs. Underground pipes
broken. Conspicuous cracks in the ground. In alluvial areas, sand and
mud ejected and sand craters are formed.
X Some well built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and
frame structures destroyed with foundations.
XI Few, if any masonry structures remaining standing. Bridges
destroyed. Rails bent greatly. Serious damage to dams, dikes and
embankments. Large landslides occur. Water thrown on the banks of
canals, rivers and lakes
XII Damage total. Line of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown
in air.
According to the SEMA map above, Jefferson County is at a risk for a Level VII impact on
the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale from a 7.6 earthquake. Secondary effects of such an
earthquake could include fire, building collapse, utility disruption, flooding, hazardous
materials release, environmental impacts and economic disruptions and losses. Based on
the projected Earthquake Intensities map and the Modified Mercalli damage scale, the
future probably severity for each level is shown below.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 73
Modified Mercalli Levels I-V Negligible
Modified Mercalli Levels VI Limited
Modified Mercalli Levels VII Critical
Modified Mercalli Levels VII-XIII Catastrophic
Landslides have been categorized by the USGS based on incidence and susceptibility. After
discussions with Missouri Geological Survey, there are have been no categories developed
for landslide, sinkhole and underground mine collapse.
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk/Likeliness Risk/Likeliness of of Future Future Occurrence
Occurrence
Jefferson County, as well as other counties in the East-West Gateway Council of
Governments planning region and the Midwest, is located in proximity to the New Madrid
Fault Zone. The other fault zones mentioned above including the Wabash and faults in the
vicinity of Farmington are also known to produce earthquakes in recent history, with a
lesser magnitude and intensity. Instruments were installed in and around this area in 1974
to closely monitor seismic activity. Since then, more than 4000 earthquakes have been
located, most of which are too small to be felt. On average one earthquake per year will
be large enough to be felt in the area.
The magnitudes of the historic earthquakes listed above in the New Madrid Fault Zone
range from 2.4 to 8.2. Based on the history of the New Madrid Fault Zone, the estimated
probability of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake is 25-40 percent through the year
2053. The January estimates show a 7-10 percent chance of magnitudes between 7.5 and
8.0 in a 50-year period through 2053.
Recommendation
Recommendation
The State of Missouri had its first earthquake exercise in 10 years last year. Allen Lehmen
of the State Emergency Management Agency stated the state is “enormously prepared.”
Though he does state “he does not know if we’re ever ready for anything.” A disaster of
this nature needs to be addressed on a National, State, and Local level for local
governments to understand “state assets are available to them.” Though most in the
region such as U.S. Republican Jo Ann Emerson R-Cape Girardeau blame Congress for
being slow in earmarking monies to address the potential of a major disaster.
Emergency preparedness is key in all-major disasters. The retrofitting of buildings and
transportation routes is a necessity but in the large part not economical. The National,
State, and Local governments must work together to create a annual plan on how the area
would respond to a major earthquake.
Probable Probable Risk Risk Risk of of Modified Modified Modified Mercalli Mercalli Mercalli Levels
Levels
I-V Highly Likely

74
VI Highly Likely
VII Highly Likely
VIII-XIII Likely
Jefferson County – Section 2
Landslides have been categorized by the USGS based on incidence and susceptibility.
These categories are found below. The probable risk of future occurrence in the St. Louis
metropolitan area would be ranked as low, less than 1.5% of the area involved, with a
moderate susceptibility and low incidence.
Landslide Landslide Incidence
Incidence
Low- less than 1.5% of area involved
Moderate- 1.5% to 15% of area involved
High- Greater than 15% of area involved
Landslide Landslide Susceptibility/Incidence
Susceptibility/Incidence
Moderate susceptibility/low incidence
High susceptibility/low incidence
High susceptibility/moderate incidence
In the USGS Map, Figure J25, susceptibility is not indicated with the same or lower
incidence. Susceptibility to landsliding was defined as the probable degree of response or
the rocks and soils to natural or artificial cutting or loading of slopes, or to anomalously
high precipitation. High, moderate, and low susceptibility are delimited by the same
percentages used in classifying the incidence of landsliding. Some generalization was
necessary at the map scale and several small areas of high incidence and susceptibility were
slightly exaggerated.
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on Community
Community
The next disaster’s likely adverse impact on Jefferson County could be critical in terms of
amount of damage to infrastructure (utilities, communications) buildings, deaths and other
cascading disasters including fire and explosions from natural gas and oil pipeline ruptures.
At the time of the New Madrid earthquake in 1811-1812, St. Louis and other major cities
in the central U.S. were sparsely settled and there were few man-made structures. Today,
this region is home to millions of people, including the populations of large cities, such as
St. Louis, Missouri, and Memphis, Tennessee. A repeat today of the earthquakes of 1811-
12 would cause widespread loss of life and billions of dollars in property damage. The
potential for the recurrence of such earthquakes and their impact today on densely
populated cities in and around the seismic zone has generated much research devoted to
understanding earthquakes. By closely monitoring the earthquake activity, scientists can
hope to understand their causes, recurrence rates, ground motion and disaster mitigation.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 75
Earthquakes pose a serious threat to many Missouri communities. Local governments,
planners, and engineers must consider the threat as they seek to balance development and
risk. Identifying locations susceptible to seismic activity generated by nearby faults,
adopting strong policies and implementing measures and using other mitigation
techniques are essential to reducing risk from seismic hazards in the East-West Gateway
Coordinating Council planning region.
Based on the January 2003 estimates, Jefferson County is at most risk for Modified Mercalli
Level VII (7.6 level) as likely adverse impacts. However, due to the geologic setting in
Jefferson County in terms of alluvial soils along the Missouri River, Level VIII should be used
for planning purposes. The possible effects at Level VIII are shown below.
Without Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measures Measures
Measures
Life Critical
Property Critical
Emotional Critical
Financial Critical
Comments Jefferson County is considered a high-risk area for damages from an
earthquake as a result of the population density, condition of existing buildings and
infrastructure and the geologic setting.
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Limited
Property Limited
Emotional Critical
Financial Limited
Comments With mitigation measures in place, this will assist with current and future
construction. Older masonry buildings will still be at risk.
Landslide, Landslide, Landslide, Sinkhole Sinkhole and and Underground Underground Mine Mine Collap Collapse Collap se Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
The next disaster’s likely adverse impact on Jefferson County could be limited to negligible
in terms of amount of damage to infrastructure (utilities, communications) buildings,
deaths and other cascading disasters including fire and explosions from natural gas and oil
pipeline ruptures. These types of hazards occur on a much smaller scale than do
earthquakes. The affected area may include one or two homes in a subdivision that have
been constructed on a failing hillside, or on the side of a sinkhole or mine tunnel. Clearly,
there are mitigation measures that can be taken to reduce or eliminate the risk of future
impact of the destruction of homes and structures located in areas that are predisposed to
these types of hazards.
Wit Without Wit hout Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Limited
Property Limited
Emotional Limited

76
Financial Limited
Comments none
With With Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Negligible
Property Negligible
Emotional Negligible
Financial Negligible
Comments none
Recommendation
Recommendation
Jefferson County – Section 2
Increased education, concern and subsequent action can reduce the potential effects of
earthquakes can be done in conjunction with preparations for other hazards. A program
that recognizes the risk of flooding, landslides and other dangers that incorporate
earthquake issues will be of most benefit to citizens. Individuals and government have
roles in reducing earthquake hazards. Individuals can reduce their own vulnerability by
taking actions in their own households. Local government can take action to lower the
threat through the proper use of poor sites, assuring that vital or important structures
(police, fire, school buildings) resist hazards and developing infrastructures in a way that
decreases risk. State agencies and legislature can assist the other levels of action and
provide incentives for minimizing hazards.
Communities and developers coordinate with NRCS, Division of Geology and Resource
Assessment regarding appropriate sitings of subdivisions and other structures.
Tornado/Severe Tornado/Severe Thundersto Thunderstorm Thundersto Thunderstorm
rm Hazard Profile
Background
Background
When severe storms hit a community, they leave behind a distinctive trail. Toppled trees,
damaged buildings and cars, downed power lines crossing roadways and widespread
power outages are signs that a storm has struck. After such events, it can take
communities weeks to return to normal. These storms result in costly structural damages,
personal injury, property damage and death.
Tornado intensity is determined by using the F-Scale (Fujita 1981), as listed in Storm Data.
This study follows the accepted nomenclature that F2 and F3 tornadoes are strong and F4
are violent. Ostby (1993) found that the occurrence of weak tornadoes (F0-F1) has shown
a dramatic increase since 1980, while the number of strong and violent tornadoes have
either remained steady or decreased. Reasons for this include improved verification efforts
by local NWS offices and the marked increase in storm chasing. Since strong and
violent tornadoes produce a more stable long-term data set, these categories were the
main focus of this study.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 77
Description Description of of Hazard
Hazard
A tornado is a vortex of rapidly rotating air that extends from a thunderstorm to the
ground. Supercell thunderstorms are often the producers of violent tornadoes. These
thunderstorms can also produce other dangerous weather conditions such as large hail
severe wind, lightning and flash floods. To be a tornado, the swirling winds must be at the
surface, capable of doing damage. If there is debris (dust and other objects swirling in the
winds), it is definitely a tornado, even if there is no visible funnel cloud. A tornado can
move over a surface with few objects to be picked up and swirled about it. All funnel
clouds should be treated as if they are potential tornadoes. See Figure J32 below.
FIGURE FIGURE J32 J32 J32 VIEW VIEW OF OF TORNADIC TORNADIC THUNDERSTORM
THUNDERSTORM
Source: NOAA

78
Jefferson County – Section 2
When storms influence a large area, the chances for significant hazards increase. The
majority of windstorms in a convective system are of marginal severity, with only isolated
events reaching high intensity. The most threatening situation would be for a very intense
convective wind event that also affected a large area. It appears that a few times each year
in North America, extreme convective wind events of this sort do occur. To date, no such
storm has struck a major city during a vulnerable time (e.g., the morning or evening rush
hours). When such storms are accompanied by large hail (e.g., > 5 cm in diameter), the
damage potential soars to even greater heights than when the wind occurs alone. The
occurrence of hail has resulted in some of the costliest storms in United States history;
joining a fall of large hail with winds approaching 50 m s -1 could produce incredible
damage in a populated area. Economic losses to agriculture from such storms are already
high, but do not attract much public attention, and such losses would be very difficult to
mitigate with a 20-30 min warning. Nevertheless, major property losses can result when
such storms cover a large area.
A timely forecast may not be able to do much to mitigate the property loss, but could
reduce the casualties. It appears possible to forecast these extreme events with some skill,
but further research needs to be done to test the existing hypothesis about the interaction
between the convective storm and its environment that produces the extensive swath of
high winds.
Convective winds do considerable damage and occasionally generate many casualties.
Most convection produces some straight-line wind as a result of outflow generated by the
convective downdraft. On rare occasions, the intensity of the wind achieves the potential
for doing damage. Whether or not damage actually occurs is the dependent on whether
structures are in the path of the wind that can sustain damage. Although engineered
structures typically are quite resistant to wind damage, many homes and outbuildings are
quite vulnerable to damage from even relatively modest windstorms. In the United States,
it is assumed that the potential for wind damage begins at around 56 miles per hour.
Wind damage is graded according to its character: e.g., damage to tree limbs is considered
non-severe, but uprooted trees are considered to represent a severe event. Refer to Figures
J33, J34, and J35 below.
Various human activities place people at risk from convective winds, notably aircraft
operations and recreation. Most casualties from convective windstorms in the United
States arise from such situations. Given the high vulnerability of aircraft operations during
takeoff and landing procedures (the aircraft are operating on the margins of their flight
"envelope" during such times); it does not take a particularly intense event from a
meteorological standpoint to create many casualties. Commercial aircraft are less
vulnerable than private aircraft, but their high occupancy means that rare events can have
a large impact on casualty figures. Recreational boating also can account for many
casualties in relatively modest windstorms, whereas most commercial craft are unlikely to
be affected by marginal convective wind events.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 79
SEVERE SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS
THUNDERSTORMS
Characteristics
Characteristics
FIGURE FIGURE J33 J33 FIGURE FIGURE J34
J34
Source: NOAA Source: NOAA
Hail Flooding
FIGURE FIGURE J35 J35
J35
Source: NOAA
Lightening
Severe windstorms range in type from downdrafts to tornadoes. The most frequent
surface winds in Missouri originate from the west and southwest. These winds are
associated with storms moving into the region from Kansas and Oklahoma. Tornadoes
range in size and severity. The dimensions of the storm can be measured by the size of the
damage path. The typical tornado damage path is about one or two miles, with a width of
about 50 yards. The largest tornado path widths can exceed one mile, and the smallest
widths can be less than 10 yards. Widths can vary considerably during a single tornado,
because the size of the tornado can change considerably during its lifetime. Path lengths
can vary from what is basically a single point to more than 100 miles. Tornado intensity
(the peak wind speeds) is not necessarily related to the tornado size. Detailed statistics
about the time a tornado is on the ground are not available. This time can range from an
instant to several hours. Five minutes on the ground or so is typical. Detailed statistics

80
Jefferson County – Section 2
about forward speed of tornadoes are not available. Movement can range from virtually
stationary to more than 60 miles per hour, typical storms move at roughly 10-20 miles per
hour.
Likely Likely Locations ocations
Whenever and wherever conditions are right, tornadoes are possible, but they are most
common in the central plains of North America, east of the Rocky Mountains and west of
the Appalachian Mountains. Refer to Figure J36 for a map of the U.S. that identifies the
wind speeds in various regions; the study area has a high likelihood of severe winds.
Statistically, Jefferson County has had 23 tornadoes. St. Charles County with 35 tornadoes
has had the most tornado outbreaks, with St. Louis County second with 28. St. Louis City
has the least with nine. However, these statistics do not necessarily predict future likely
locations of tornadoes since St. Louis and St. Charles Counties cover larger areas of land.
FIGURE FIGURE J36 J36 WIND WIND ZONES
ZONES
Source: FEMA

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 81
Type Type Type of of Damage amage
The damage from tornadoes comes from the strong winds they contain. It is generally
believed that tornadic wind speeds can be as high as 300 mph in the most violent
tornadoes. Wind speeds that high can cause automobiles to become airborne, rip ordinary
homes to shreds, and turn broken glass and other debris into lethal missiles. The biggest
threat to living creatures (including humans) from tornadoes is from flying debris and from
being tossed about in the wind. It was once thought that the low pressure in a tornado
contributed to the damage by making buildings "explode" but this is no longer believed to
be true. Tornadoes are classified according to the F-Scale developed by Theodore Fujita.
The F-scale ranks tornadoes according to wind speed, and the severity of damage caused
within the wind speed ranges. Table J33 below shows the Fujita Tornado Measurement
Scale.
TABLE TABLE TABLE J33 J33 J33 FUJITA FUJITA FUJITA TORNADO TORNADO MEASUSREMENT MEASUSREMENT SCALE SCALE
SCALE
Category F0 Gale Tornado (40-70 mph) Light damage. Some damage to chimneys;
break branches off trees; push over shallow
Category F1 Moderate tornado (73-112
mph)
Category F2 Significant tornado (113-157
mph)
rooted trees; damage to sign boards
Moderate damage. The lower limit is the
beginning of hurricane wind speed; peel
surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off
foundations or overturned; moving autos
pushed off roads
Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame
houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars
pushed over; large trees snapped or
uprooted; light-object missiles generated.
Category F3 Severe tornado (158-206 mph) Severe damage. Roofs and some walls torn
off well-constructed houses; trains
overturned; most trees in forest uprooted;
cars lifted off ground and thrown.
Category F4 Devastating tornado (207-260
mph)
Category F5 Incredible tornado (261-318
mph)
Devastating damage. Well- constructed
houses leveled; structure with weak
foundation blown off some distance; cars
thrown and large missiles generated.
Incredible damage. Strong frame houses
lifted off foundations and carried
considerable distance to disintegrate;
automobile-sized missiles fly through the air
in excess of 100 yards; trees debarked;
incredible phenomena will occur.
Figures J37 through J41 below depict the Fujita Scale as described in Table J35 above.

82
Hazard Hazard Hazard Event Event History
History
Jefferson County – Section 2
FIGURE J37 FIGURE FIGURE J38 J38
J38
F1 F2
FIGURE FIGURE J39 J39 FIGURE FIGURE J40
J40
F3 F4
FIGURE FIGURE J41
J41
F5
The May 27 th , 1896 tornado categorized as an F-4 that hit St. Louis was third on the list of
10 top weather events of the century. This storm killed 255 people and injured 1,000. The
estimated damage from these storms totals $1.365 million dollars. Missouri is considered
to be in the top ten lists for total number of tornadoes and number of killer tornadoes
(ranking number seven).

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 83
Since 1950,according to the NCDC, Jefferson County has had 23 tornadoes, three of which
have resulted in 48 injuries and five deaths. The estimated damage from these storms cost
approximately $9.7 million dollars. The most recent tornado in May 2003 in Jefferson
County resulted in one death and approximately $1million dollars in damage. The
tornadoes occurred between April and December. Jefferson County has had one F3
tornado in 1981. Tornado occurrences are found in Table J34.
Location Location or
or
County
County
TABL TABLE TABL E J34 TORNADO EVENTS IN IN JEFFERSON COUNTY
FROM FROM 1954 1954 TO TO 2001
2001
Date Date Time Time Type Type Mag Mag
1 Dth 2 Inj 3 PrD 4 CrD
1 JEFFERSON 05/06/1961 1615 Tornado F1 0 0 25K 0
2 JEFFERSON 05/07/1961 1615 Tornado F1 0 0 3K 0
3 JEFFERSON 09/04/1965 1930 Tornado F1 0 0 3K 0
4 JEFFERSON 05/28/1967 1650 Tornado F2 0 0 25K 0
5 JEFFERSON 06/10/1967 1700 Tornado F2 0 0 25K 0
6 JEFFERSON 10/24/1967 1055 Tornado F1 0 0 25K 0
7 JEFFERSON 04/03/1968 1800 Tornado F1 0 0 25K 0
8 JEFFERSON 05/15/1968 1940 Tornado F1 0 0 25K 0
9 JEFFERSON 06/04/1973 2100 Tornado F1 0 0 0K 0
10
JEFFERSON
07/27/1976 1330 Tornado F1 0 0 0K 0
11
JEFFERSON
05/12/1978 1700 Tornado F 0 0 250K 0
12
JEFFERSON
04/22/1981 1754 Tornado F3 1 0 2.5M 0
13
JEFFERSON
07/20/1981 1448 Tornado F1 0 0 3K 0
14
JEFFERSON
12/02/1982 12:00 AM Tornado F1 0 0 250K 0
15
JEFFERSON
11/09/1984 12:00 AM Tornado F0 0 0 0K 0
16 Cedar Hill
To
04/15/1994 12:00 AM Tornado F0 0 0 500K 5K
17 Ottoville To 04/15/1994 12:00 AM Tornado F0 0 0 50K 1K
18 Barnhart To 04/15/1994 12:00 AM Tornado F1 0 0 5.0M 5K
19 Crystal City 04/26/1994 2035 Tornado F0 0 0 5K 0
20 De Soto 04/16/1995 1557 Tornado F0 0 0 0K 0
21 Ware 05/06/2003 6:25 PM Tornado F0 0 0 0 0
22 De Soto 05/06/2003 6:30 PM Tornado F0 0 0 0 0
23 Hillsboro 05/27/2004 7:10 PM Tornado F0 0 0 0 0
24 Festus 03/11/2006 9:40 PM Tornado F0 0 0 0 0
25 Festus 03/11/2006 9:42 PM Tornado F3 0 0 0 0
CrD 5

84
Jefferson County – Section 2
26 Fletcher 09/22/2006 2:20 PM Tornado F1 0 0 0 0
27 Fletcher 09/22/2006 4:05 PM Tornado F1 0 0 0 0
1 Magnitude
2 Death
3 Injuries
4 Property Damage
5 Crop Damage
Source: NCDC
Additional data on significant Jefferson County thunderstorms (downbursts, lightening,
hail, heavy rains and wind) indicated a total impact of $877,000 in property damages from
113 storm events between 1950 and 2002. Severe thunderstorms and high winds are
summarized on Table J35 below.
TABLE TABLE J35 J35 SEVERE SEVERE THUNDERSTORM THUNDERSTORM EVENTS EVENTS IN
IN
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
Location Location or or County County Date Date
Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
1 JEFFERSON 05/16/1960 02/08/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
2 JEFFERSON 06/24/1962 05/14/1903 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
3 JEFFERSON 07/01/1966 11/30/1903 Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
4 JEFFERSON 06/10/1967 05/30/1904 Tstm Wind 70 kts. 0 0 0 0
5 JEFFERSON 08/09/1970 04/19/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
6 JEFFERSON 05/26/1973 07/27/1905 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
7 JEFFERSON 07/09/1973 03/09/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
8 JEFFERSON 08/12/1973 03/09/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
9 JEFFERSON 12/04/1973 11/25/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
10 JEFFERSON 04/03/1974 05/25/1903 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
11 JEFFERSON 06/09/1974 06/03/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
12 JEFFERSON 06/09/1974 07/18/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
13 JEFFERSON 06/09/1974 07/28/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
14 JEFFERSON 06/09/1974 07/28/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
15 JEFFERSON 03/07/1975 01/15/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
16 JEFFERSON 03/07/1975 01/30/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
17 JEFFERSON 07/31/1976 11/27/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
18 JEFFERSON 06/21/1977 01/30/1906 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
19 JEFFERSON 04/07/1980 02/02/1906 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
20 JEFFERSON 07/02/1980 11/20/1903 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
21 JEFFERSON 07/03/1980 09/01/1900 Tstm Wind 69 kts. 0 0 0 0
22 JEFFERSON 10/17/1980 11/25/1900 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
23 JEFFERSON 04/03/1981 03/04/1906 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
24 JEFFERSON 04/03/1981 04/18/1906 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
25 JEFFERSON 06/02/1981 09/06/1903 Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 0 0 0
26 JEFFERSON 04/16/1982 04/13/1905 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
27 JEFFERSON 04/16/1982 04/13/1905 Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
28 JEFFERSON 04/16/1982 04/23/1905 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
29 JEFFERSON 06/08/1982 04/16/1902 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
CrD 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 85
TABLE TABLE J35 J35 SEVERE SEVERE THUNDERSTORM THUNDERSTORM EVENTS EVENTS IN
IN
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
Location Location or or or County County Date Date
Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
30 JEFFERSON 06/15/1982 09/02/1903 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
31 JEFFERSON 12/02/1982 08/16/1905 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
32 JEFFERSON 06/27/1983 08/31/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
33 JEFFERSON 07/24/1983 10/23/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
34 JEFFERSON 08/22/1983 02/26/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
35 JEFFERSON 10/04/1983 02/18/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
36 JEFFERSON 03/15/1984 03/17/1905 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
37 JEFFERSON 05/25/1984 01/03/1905 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
38 JEFFERSON 09/08/1984 09/25/1904 Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
39 JEFFERSON 07/31/1985 02/27/1906 Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
40 JEFFERSON 08/06/1985 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
41 JEFFERSON 05/21/1987 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
42 JEFFERSON 07/05/1987 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
43 JEFFERSON 07/05/1987 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
44 JEFFERSON 04/05/1988 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 0 0 0
45 JEFFERSON 05/08/1988 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
46 JEFFERSON 06/08/1988 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
47 JEFFERSON 11/15/1988 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
48 JEFFERSON 03/11/1990 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 0 0 0
49 JEFFERSON 06/13/1991 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
50 JEFFERSON 06/15/1991 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
51 JEFFERSON 08/03/1991 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
52 JEFFERSON 08/03/1991 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
53 JEFFERSON 08/08/1991 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
54 JEFFERSON 11/29/1991 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
55 JEFFERSON 06/24/1992 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
56 JEFFERSON 07/10/1992 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 0 0
57 JEFFERSON 09/07/1992 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
58 De Soto 04/25/1993 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
59 De Soto 04/25/1993 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 0 kts. 0 0 50K 0
60 High Ridge 08/23/1993 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 0 kts. 0 0 5K 0
61 Cedar Hill 04/26/1994 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 52 kts. 0 0 5K 0
62 MOZ009 - 010 - 018 -
019 - 026 - 027 - 034>036
- 041 - 042 - 047>052 -
059>065 -
04/18/1995 12:00 AM High Winds 0 kts. 0 0 700K 0
63 Victoria 05/18/1995 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
64 Otto 07/04/1995 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 0 kts. 0 0 0K 0
65 St. Louis City 07/04/1995 12:00 AM Thunderstorm 0 kts. 0 0 1K 0
66 Hillsboro 04/19/1996 4:30 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
67 MOZ061>063 - 065 04/28/1996 8:00 AM High Wind 61 kts. 0 0 0 0
68 Arnold 07/19/1996 7:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
69 Pevely 07/19/1996 7:20 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
70 MOZ009>010 - 04/05/1997 3:00 PM High Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
CrD 2

86
TABLE TABLE J35 J35 SEVERE SEVERE THUNDERSTORM THUNDERSTORM EVENTS EVENTS IN
IN
Jefferson County – Section 2
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
Location Location or or or County County Date Date
Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
018>019 - 026>027 -
034>036 - 052 - 060>065
- 073>075
71 MOZ009>010 -
018>019 - 026>027 -
034>036 - 052 -
060>065
04/30/1997 1:00 PM High Wind 45 kts. 0 0 0 0
72 Byrnes Mill 05/25/1997 7:45 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
73 De Soto 05/25/1997 8:00 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
74 De Soto 06/21/1997 6:20 PM Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 0 100K 0
75 Hillsboro 03/27/1998 5:25 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
76 Arnold 07/22/1998 6:30 PM Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 0 5K 0
77 Hillsboro 11/10/1998 4:00 AM Tstm Wind 56 kts. 0 0 0 0
78 Dittmer 06/08/1999 2:40 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
79 Arnold 07/09/1999 6:10 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
80 High Ridge 06/24/2000 1:20 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
81 Cedar Hill 09/11/2000 10:48 PM Tstm Wind 56 kts. 0 0 0 0
82 House Spgs 09/11/2000 10:58 PM Tstm Wind 56 kts. 0 0 0 0
83 Hillsboro 09/11/2000 11:10 PM Tstm Wind 56 kts. 0 0 0 0
84 Imperial 09/11/2000 11:10 PM Tstm Wind 56 kts. 0 0 0 0
85 MOZ018>019 -
026>027 - 034>036 -
041>042 - 047>050 -
050>052 - 059>065 -
072>075 - 084>085 - 099
86 MOZ018>019 -
026>027 - 034>036 -
041>042 - 047>052 -
059>065 - 072>075 -
084>085 - 099
87 MOZ018>019 -
026>027 - 034>036 -
041>042 - 047>052 -
059>065 - 072>075 -
084>085 - 099
12/16/2000 8:00 PM Extreme
Windchill
CrD 2
N/A 0 0 0 0
02/25/2001 12:00 AM High Wind 40 kts. 0 0 0 0
03/13/2001 9:00 AM High Wind 45 kts. 0 0 0 0
88 Cedar Hill 07/18/2001 1:05 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
89 Hillsboro 07/18/2001 1:15 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
90 Imperial 09/08/2001 9:15 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
91 Arnold 09/08/2001 9:29 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
92 MOZ018>019 -
026>027 - 034>036 -
041>042 - 049>052 - 059
- 061>065
03/09/2002 6:00 AM High Wind 43 kts. 0 0 0 0
93 Hillsboro 05/07/2002 2:55 AM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
94 Festus 05/07/2002 3:00 AM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
95 Hillsboro 05/07/2002 3:00 AM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 87
TABLE TABLE J35 J35 SEVERE SEVERE THUNDERSTORM THUNDERSTORM EVENTS EVENTS IN
IN
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
Location Location or or or County County Date Date
Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
96 De Soto 07/03/2002 2:35 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 10K 0
97 High Ridge 07/10/2002 1:47 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
98 Cedar Hill 07/10/2002 1:50 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
99 Hillsboro 07/10/2002 2:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
100 Festus 07/10/2002 2:10 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
101 Cedar Hill 07/22/2002 6:45 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
102 High Ridge 07/22/2002 6:49 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
103 Otto 07/22/2002 6:55 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
104 De Soto 05/06/2003 6:30 PM Tstm Wind 75 kts. 0 0 0 0
105 De Soto 05/06/2003 6:47 PM Tstm Wind 87 kts. 0 0 0 0
106 Crystal City 05/06/2003 7:05 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0
107 Herculaneum 05/06/2003 7:05 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0
108 Pevely 05/06/2003 7:05 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0
109 Imperial 06/10/2003 4:50 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0
110 Arnold 06/10/2003 5:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
111 Barnhart 06/10/2003 5:00 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0
112 Arnold 07/18/2003 9:10 AM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
113 High Ridge 07/18/2003 9:10 AM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
114 House Spgs 07/18/2003 9:10 AM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
115 De Soto 08/01/2003 2:35 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
116 Pevely 09/26/2003 6:30 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 1 0 0
117 Cedar Hill 05/27/2004 6:54 PM Tstm Wind 56 kts. 0 0 0 0
118 Cedar Hill 05/27/2004 6:54 PM Tstm Wind 60 kts. 0 0 0 0
119 High Ridge 05/27/2004 6:55 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
120 Hillsboro 05/27/2004 7:20 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
121 De Soto 05/27/2004 7:25 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
122 Arnold 05/30/2004 3:52 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
123 Festus 06/18/2004 2:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
124 Hillsboro 08/24/2004 1:05 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
125 High Ridge 08/24/2004 12:50 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
126 House Spgs 08/24/2004 12:50 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
127 Grubville 08/27/2004 3:30 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
128 Crystal City 05/19/2005 11:25 PM Tstm Wind 53 kts. 0 0 0 0
129 Pevely 05/19/2005 11:25 PM Tstm Wind 53 kts. 0 0 0 0
130 Festus 05/19/2005 11:30 PM Tstm Wind 53 kts. 0 0 0 0
131 Festus 06/06/2005 12:00 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
132 High Ridge 06/09/2005 5:40 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
133 House Spgs 07/04/2005 1:05 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
134 High Ridge 08/13/2005 3:05 PM Tstm Wind 57 kts. 0 0 0 0
135 De Soto 11/27/2005 10:36 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
136 De Soto 11/27/2005 10:48 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
137 Barnhart 04/02/2006 4:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
138 Imperial 04/02/2006 4:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
CrD 2

88
TABLE TABLE J35 J35 SEVERE SEVERE THUNDERSTORM THUNDERSTORM EVENTS EVENTS IN
IN
Jefferson County – Section 2
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
Location Location or or or County County Date Date
Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
139 Pevely 04/02/2006 4:00 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
140 Byrnes Mill 04/02/2006 4:01 PM Tstm Wind 55 kts. 0 0 0 0
141 Arnold 07/19/2006 6:35 PM Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 0 0 0
142 Arnold 07/19/2006 7:00 PM Tstm Wind 61 kts. 0 2 0 0
143 De Soto 07/19/2006 7:25 PM Tstm Wind 70 kts. 0 0 0 0
144 De Soto 08/07/2006 3:05 PM Tstm Wind 50 kts. 0 0 0 0
145 De Soto 08/07/2006 4:30 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
146 Festus 08/07/2006 4:50 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0 0
147 Murphy 07/19/2007 16:10 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0K 0K
148 Hillsboro 10/18/2007 12:00 AM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0K 0K
149 High Ridge 05/25/2008 20:25 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 5K 0K
150 Horine 06/21/2008 14:40 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0K 0K
151 Hematite 06/21/2008 15:17 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0K 0K
152 Hillsboro 07/12/2008 14:50 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0K 0K
153 Oakvale 08/05/2008 17:30 PM Tstm Wind 52 kts. 0 0 0K 0K
TOTALS: 0 3 882K 0
1 Property Damage
2 Crop Damage
Source: NCDC
Frequency Frequency of of Occurrence ccurrence
The frequency of severe windstorms and tornadoes is difficult to predict. See Figure J42
below. They usually occur mostly during the spring and summer; the tornado season
comes early in the south and later in the north because spring comes later in the year as
one moves northward. Storms usually occur during the late afternoon and early evening,
but they have been known to occur in every state in the United States, on any day of the
year, and at any hour. Table J38 below depicts tornado occurrences are most commonly
seen in the spring months. In the southern states, tornado frequency peaks in March
through May; while in the northern states, peak frequency is during the summer months.
Along the gulf coast, a secondary tornado maximum occurs during the fall. In the western
states, the total number of tornadoes is higher than indicated. Sparse population reduces
the number reported. The map illustrates months of peak tornado activity by state (1950-
1991). (NOAA/NWS)
CrD 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 89
FIGURE FIGURE J42 J42 TORNADO TORNADO OCCURRENCES
OCCURRENCES
Source: NOAA

90
January
January
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE TABLE J36 J36 OCCURRENCES OCCURRENCES OF OF TORNADOES TORNADOES TORNADOES IN IN JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
FROM FROM 1950 1950 TO TO 1998
1998
February
February
Intensity Intensity or r r Strength
Strength
March
March
April
April
May
May
June
June
0 0 0 8 7 2 2 0 1 1 1 1
Storms in Jefferson County range from F0 to F4. There have been no recorded F5 storms.
Refer to Table J37 and Figure J43 below.
TABLE TABLE J37 J37 J37 STORM STORM INTENSITIES INTENSITIES FOR FOR JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
COUNTY
JURISDICTIONS JURISDICTIONS
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 Total
St. Louis City 0 2 3 2 2 9
St. Louis County 2 8 11 5 2 28
St. Charles County 6 10 11 7 1 35
Jefferson County 5 11 4 2 1 23
Franklin County 6 6 8 0 0 20
Total Total
19 37 37 16 6 115
Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Property Property Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Loss Losses/Other Loss Losses/Other
es/Other Losses
Losses
Even though only about 10 percent of tornadoes are significant, these tornadoes are
responsible for the majority of deaths caused by tornadoes in the country, with violent
tornadoes claiming 67 percent of the total casualties. Furthermore, the US suffers millions
of dollars in damage costs in the aftermath of such events- an important consideration for
the insurance industry.
Jefferson County has had 23 tornadoes, three of which have resulted in 48 injuries and
five deaths. The estimated damage from these storms cost approximately $9.7 million
dollars. The most recent tornado in May 2003 located in Desoto, Jefferson County resulted
in one death and approximately $1million dollars in damage. Missouri is considered to be
in the top ten lists for total number of tornadoes and number of killer tornadoes (ranking
number seven).
July
July
August
August
September
September
October
October
November November
Dec
December ember

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 91
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
FIGURE FIGURE J43 J43 BREAKDOWN BREAKDOWN OF OF CATEGORY CATEGORY TORNADOES
TORNADOES
Source: NOAA; U.S. data
Based on available data, there is no predictable pathway that tornadoes and windstorms
follow. In general, however, these storms run in a southwest to northeast direction.
Figure J44 below depicts the distribution of storms across the planning region. Based upon
Table J39 above, one can see that each jurisdiction has had multiple tornadoes. Jefferson
County has had the third largest number of storms in the EWG planning region.
FIGURE FIGURE J44 J44 REGIONAL REGIONAL TORNADO STORM TRACKS
Source: NOAA

92
Seasonal Seasonal Pattern
Pattern
Jefferson County – Section 2
Tornadoes occur mostly during the spring and summer; the tornado season comes early in
the south and later in the north because spring comes later in the year as one moves
northward. Tornadoes and storms usually occur during the late afternoon and early
evening, but they have been known to occur in every state in the United States, on any day
of the year, and at any hour.
Based on Table J38, in Jefferson County, most of the storms occurred in the month of April
with 8 tornadoes. May had a total of 7 tornadoes, both June and July had 2, and
September, October, November and December had 1 each per month.
Speed Speed of f Onset Onset Onset And/Or And/Or And/Or Existing Existing Existing Warning Warning Systems
Systems
Tornadoes and other severe windstorms can occur instantly. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Agency and other agencies (National Weather Service) have prioritized the
research and understanding of the development of these types of storms in order to
protect citizens and their property. Doppler Radar could help the National Weather Service
provide a much-improved severe thunderstorm and tornado warnings.The new Radar, or
NEXRAD for Next Generation Radar (officially WSR-88D), provides forecasters with a
detailed look at storms through reflectivity and velocity displays. Reflectivity indicates
rainfall or precipitation intensity and velocity displays the speed and direction of the winds
within the storm. Tornado warning lead times has increased in the last 10 years from less
than 5 minutes to nearly 12 minutes (NWS).
Phased Array Radar - NSSL will soon begin adapting SPY-1 radar technology for use in
spotting severe weather.
The mission of the Severe Weather Warning Applications and Technology Transfer (SWAT)
team is to develop severe weather warning applications and transfer them to users to
enhance their capability to warn of severe weather. There are two focus groups within
SWAT:
• National Weather Service Focus Group Staff Listing (SWAT-NWS)
• Federal Aviation Administration Focus Group Staff Listing (SWAT-FAA)
Map Map of of Hazards
Hazards
Refer to Figure J45 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix) that depicts those areas
in Jefferson County that are susceptible to severe windstorms.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 93
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Future Future Future Severity
Severity
Based on the previous twenty-three events in the Jefferson County, the future probable
severity is shown below.
Future Probable Severity By FF-Scale
F
Scale
F0 Negligible
F1 Limited
F2 Limited
F3 Critical
F4 Catastrophic
F5 Catastrophic
Statement Statement Statement of of of Probable Probable Probable Risk
Risk
The risk of tornadoes in Jefferson County is moderate with twenty-three tornadoes.
Surrounding counties such as St. Louis County and St. Charles County have greater
numbers: 28 and 35. By nature, tornadoes strike randomly. Based in information from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, tornadoes occur between five to seven
times per 10,000 square miles per year and downbursts occur between 14 to 17 times per
10,000 square miles per year within the EWG planning region. There are between 40 to
60 thunderstorm days per year and approximately five to eight annual events of hail per
10,000 square miles within the EWG planning region. These figures are different from the
Federal Emergency Management agency (FEMA) data. FEMA indicates that there are
between six to ten tornadoes per 1,000 square miles in the EWG planning region. Refer to
Table J38 below for risk.
TABLE TABLE J38 J38 TORNADO TORNADO RISK
RISK
F# F#
Events Risk Risk Probable Probable Risk of of
Occurrence
Occurrence
By By FF-Scale
F Scale Scale
F0 22% F0 Likely
F1 48% F1 Likely
F2 17% F2 Likely
F3 9% F3 Possible
F4 4% F4 Possible
F5 0 F5 Unlikely
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
Tornadoes have enormous power and destructive ability. Injuries, property damage and
risk of death remain high. Technological advances that facilitate earlier warning, combined
with public education and improved construction techniques, provide the opportunity for
reductions in the number of injuries, reduction in property damage and loss of life. Based
on history from 198 years, the likely adverse impact of future Jefferson County tornado and
thunderstorm events is shown below. The next tornado or severe windstorm will most

94
Jefferson County – Section 2
likely have a detrimental impact on the community in terms of injuries, property damage
(up to millions dollars in damages from property damage) and death, based upon the past
historic storm events. This is due to the dense population of residents and workers who
live and work in the planning region, as well as the construction methods and standards
used.
Without Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measures Measures
Measures
Life Catastrophic
Property Catastrophic
Emotional Catastrophic
Financial Catastrophic
Comments: None
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Limited
Property Limited
Emotional Limited
Financial Limited
Comments: None
Recommendations
Recommendations
That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee initiate a mitigation activity to
convince county residents to construct Tornado Saferooms to help reduce the loss of life
caused by tornadoes.
Severe Severe Wi Winter Wi Winter
nter Weather Weather Hazard Hazard (Snow, (Snow, Ice Ice and and Extreme Extreme Cold) Cold) Profile
Profile
Description
Description
Winter weather is different than other hazards in that the hazard tends to occur over a
much larger area, often times affecting areas from several counties to multiple states.
Winter weather includes heavy snow, ice, freezing rain/sleet and extreme cold
temperatures.
Characteristics
Characteristics
Snow can range from blizzard conditions to snow flurries and can accumulate to several
inches, resulting in dangerous driving conditions. Ice conditions including sleet and
freezing rain can result in roadways being covered in sheets of ice and ice jams resulting in
flooding. Sleet can accumulate like snow and cause a hazard to motorists. Freezing rain is
rain that falls onto a surface with a temperature below freezing. It then freezes to surfaces,
such as trees, cars, and roads, forming a glaze of ice. Even small accumulations of ice can
cause a significant hazard. An ice storm occurs when freezing rain falls and freezes

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 95
immediately on impact. Heavy accumulations of ice can bring down trees, electrical wires,
telephone poles and lines, and communication towers. Communications and power can be
disrupted for days while utility companies work to repair the extensive damage.
Sometimes winter storms are accompanied by strong winds creating blizzard conditions
with blinding wind-driven snow, severe drifting and dangerous wind chill. Strong winds
with these intense storms and cold fronts can knock down trees, utility poles and power
lines. Extreme cold often accompanies a winter storm or is left in its wake. Prolonged
exposure to the cold can cause frostbite or hypothermia and become life-threatening.
Infants and elderly people are most susceptible to extremely cold weather conditions. What
constitutes extreme cold and its effect varies across different areas of the United States. In
areas unaccustomed to winter weather, near freezing temperatures are considered
"extreme cold." Freezing temperatures can cause severe damage to citrus fruit crops and
other vegetation. Pipes may freeze and burst in homes that are poorly insulated or without
heat. In the north, below zero temperatures may be considered as "extreme cold." Long
cold spells can cause rivers to freeze, disrupting shipping, and Ice jams may form and lead
to flooding.
Extreme cold temperatures are ranked based upon a wind chill chart that figures the
temperature on how the wind and cold feel on exposed skin. As the wind increases, heat is
carried away from the body at a faster rate, driving down the body temperature. Frostbite,
hypothermia and death can result from winter weather. Seventy percent of snow injuries
result from vehicle accidents, 25 percent occur in people getting caught in the weather.
Cold injuries occur to 50 percent of people over 60 years old, 75 percent happen to males
and 20 percent occur in the home.
Likely Likely Locations ocations
Winter weather in the St. Louis region moves in an west to east direction. Late winter
storms that have a tendency to be intense tend to generate in the southwest portion of the
United States and move northeast, dependent upon the meteorology and the storm track.
The hazard tends to occur over a much larger area.
Type Type of of Damage amage
Types of damage that could occur in the EWG planning affect both property, as well as
injury and death to individuals. Each year dozens of people die due to exposure to cold. In
addition, vehicle accidents and fatalities, fires due to dangerous use of heaters and other
winter weather fatalities (heart attacks from shoveling snow, for example) result in a threat.
Threats such as hypothermia and frostbite can lead to the loss of fingers and toes or cause
permanent kidney, pancreas, liver damage and death. People can become trapped in their
homes and cars without utilities or assistance. Other damage can include rooftop collapse
due to the weight of a heavy snowfall event, automobile accidents and downed power
lines/power outages from ice storms. Heavy snow can strand commuters, close airports,
stop the flow of supplies and disrupt emergency and medical services. Livestock may be

96
Jefferson County – Section 2
lost on farms. The cost of snow and debris removal, repairing damages and the loss of
business can have a severe impact on the region.
Hazard Hazard Event Event History
History
St. Louis City
Injuries/Damage
St. Louis County
Injuries/Damage
St. Charles County
Injuries/Damage
Jefferson County
Injuries/Damage
TABLE TABLE TABLE J39 J39 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY WINTER WINTER STORMS
STORMS
1994
1994
2*
15/500K
2*
15/500K
2*
15/500K
1
500K
Franklin
County
2*
Injuries/Damage 15/500K
Total
9
Injuries/Damage 15/500K
* Denotes ice storm event
• Source NCDC/NOAA
1995 1995
3*
/.3 M
3*
/.3M
5*
/2.7M
3*
/.3 M
5*
/2.7M
19
/2.7M
1996
1996
1997
1997
1998
1998
1999
1999
2000
2000
2001
2001
2002
2002
2003 2003
Total
Total
3* 4 3 2* 4 1 4 1 27
3*
3*
2*
3*
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
2*
2*
3*
2*
14 20 18 11 18 4 20 7
The numbers in the table denote the number of winter storms that occurred in each year
listed. The winter storms listed include snow and ice events. Data from Table J41was
provided by the NCDC within NOAA. The report query noted that the data represent ice
and snow events between January 1, 1950 and February 28, 2003. However, no dates
prior to 1994 were displayed in the query results. It is for this reason that the data
provided in Table J41 and J42 above and below should be used with limited reliability in
depicting all events, related injuries and property damage during this time frame. NOAA
does not track winter weather to the same degree it has for severe Midwest spring storms.
This is mainly due to the fact that winter weather and winter storms are more "subjective"
and this kind of information has not been summarized (graphically or otherwise). The
Aviation Weather Service, a part of the NOAA maintains a list of historic weather facts. The
database noted that on November 6, 1951, St. Louis received 12.5 inches of snow, and on
January 31, 1982, regions surrounding St. Louis received 25 inches of snow and left
approximately 4,000 motorists stranded for two days.
4
4
3
3
1
1
1
0
4
4
4
4
2
2
1
1
35
31
26
27

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 97
Frequency Frequency of of Occurrence
Occurrence
NOAA weather data shows that winter weather most commonly occurs in January (44% of
storms occurred in this month), followed by December (22%). Records show that
temperatures drop to zero or below an average of two or three days per year, and
temperatures as cold as 32 degrees or lower occur less than 25 days in most years.
Snowfall has averaged a little over 18 inches per winter season, and snowfall of an inch or
less is received on five to ten days in most years.
TABLE TABLE J40 J40 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY WINTER WINTER STORMS STORMS 1994 1994 TO TO 2007
2007
Lo Location Lo
cation or or County County
Date Date Time Time Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
1 Central And Eastern M 04/05/1994 Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 500K 0
2 MOZ052 - 059>065 - 071>076 01/06/1995 Glaze Ice N/A 0 0 0.3M 1K
3 Southeast Mo 12/08/1995 Snow N/A 0 0 0 0
4 Central And East Cent 12/18/1995 Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
5 MOZ041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065 - 01/02/1996 3:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
072>075 - 084>085 - 099
Storm
6 MOZ041 - 047>052 - 059>065 - 072>073 -
084
11/25/1996 12:00 PM Ice Storm N/A 0 0 0 0
7 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 01/08/1997 3:00 PM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052 - 099
Storm
8 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 01/15/1997 10:00 PM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
Storm
9 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 01/27/1997 4:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
Storm
10 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 04/10/1997 6:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065
Storm
11 MOZ035>036 - 051>052 - 060>061 - 063 01/08/1998 8:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
- 065
Storm
12 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 01/12/1998 2:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
Storm
13 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 03/08/1998 10:00 PM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
Storm
14 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 - 12/21/1998 12:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052 084>085
Storm
15 MOZ041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065 01/01/1999 6:00 PM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
16 MOZ052 - 060>065 - 072>075 - 084>085 01/13/1999
- 099
4:30 AM Ice Storm N/A 0 0 0 0
17 MOZ065 - 072>075 - 084>085 - 099 03/13/1999 10:00 PM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
18 MOZ052 - 060>065 - 072>075 - 084>085 01/28/2000 6:00 PM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
- 099
Storm
19 MOZ041>042 - 049 - 052 - 059>065 - 072 03/11/2000 4:00 AM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
20 MOZ026>027 - 034>036 - 041>042 - 12/13/2000 6:00 AM Heavy N/A 0 0 0 0
CrD 2

98
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE TABLE J40 J40 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY WINTER WINTER STORMS STORMS 1994 1994 TO TO 2007
2007
Lo Location Lo
cation or or County County
Date Date Time Time Time Type Type Magnitude Magnitude Death Death Injury Injury PrD 1 CrD
047>052 - 059>065 - 072>075 - 084>085 Snow
21 MOZ052 - 060>061 - 063>065 01/26/2001 1:00 AM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
22 MOZ027 - 034>036 - 042 - 048>052 - 02/25/2002 8:00 PM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
059>065 - 072>075
Storm
23 MOZ041>042 - 049 - 051>052 - 059>065 03/25/2002 6:00 PM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
24 MOZ041 - 047>048 - 050 - 059>065 12/04/2002 1:00 AM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
25 MOZ065 - 072>075 - 084>085 - 099 12/24/2002 1:00 AM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
26 MOZ041 - 047>052 - 059>065 - 073 02/23/2003 5:00 PM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
27 MOZ051>052 - 060>065 - 072>073 12/13/2003 12:00 PM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0 0
28 MOZ018>019 - 026>027 - 034>036 - 01/25/2004 6:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0 0
041>042 - 047>052 - 059>
Storm
29 MOZ018>019 - 026>027 - 034>036 - 12/08/2005 6:00 AM Winter N/A 2 0 0 0
041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065
Storm
30 MOZ052 - 059>065 - 072 11/30/2006 4:00 AM Winter
Storm
N/A 0 0 0K 0K
31 MOZ018 - 026>027 - 034>036 - 041>042 12/01/2006 12:00 AM Winter N/A 0 0 0K 0K
- 047>052
Storm
32 MOZ018 - 026>027 - 034>036 - 041>042
Ice Storm
- 047>052 - 059>065 - 072 01/12/2007 22:00 PM
Winter
N/A 0 0 0K 0K
33 MOZ062>065 - 072>075 - 084 - 099 12/08/2007 20:00 PM Weather
Heavy
N/A 0 0 0K 0K
34 MOZ036 - 052 - 060>065 - 072 12/15/2007 5:00 AM Snow N/A 0 0 0K 0K
35 MOZ041 - 047>050 - 059 - 062 - 065 -
Winter
072>075 - 084>085 - 099 02/23/2008 20:00 PM Weather N/A 0 0 0K 0K
TOTALS: 2 15 800K 500
Intensity Intensity Intensity or or or Strength Strength
Strength
Winter storms in the EWG planning region, as compared to winter storms to the north and
west, are relatively mild. Severe winter weather is rare. Based on records maintained from
1900 through 2002, the region has experienced total annual snowfall over the average of
18 inches per year. Of these years, only six years experienced annual snowfall of over 40
inches.
Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Property Property Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses
Losses
Based on queries for St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Jefferson County
and Franklin County to NOAA, no deaths were reported due to winter storms. However,
CrD 2

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 99
fifteen injuries were noted from 1994 to 2003 and property damage totaled $800,000.
No other information was available from NOAA.
Winter storms are considered deceptive killers because most deaths are indirectly related to
the storm. People die in traffic accidents on icy roads and of hypothermia from prolonged
exposure to cold. Everyone is potentially at risk during winter storms. The actual threat
depends on the specific situation. Recent observations indicate the following:
• Related to ice and snow:
o About 70 percent occur in automobiles.
o About 25 percent are people caught out in the storm.
• Related to exposure to cold:
o 50 percent are people over 60 years old.
o Over 75 percent are males.
o About 20 percent occur in the home.
There are a variety of transportation impacts due to cold weather. Diesel engines are
stressed and fuel often gels in extreme cold weather impacting trucking and rail traffic.
Rivers and lakes freeze, stopping barge and ship traffic. Subsequent ice jams threaten
bridges and can close major highways. Cold temperatures take their toll on vehicle
batteries. Shear cold temperatures stress metal bridge structures. Transportation losses for
the winter of 1976 -77 came to $6.5 billion (in 1980 dollars) (NOAA, 1982).
Cold temperature impacts on agriculture are frequently discussed in terms of frost and
freeze impacts early or late in growing seasons. Absolute temperature and duration of
extreme cold can have devastating effects on trees and winter crops as well. Prolonged
cold snaps can impact livestock not protected from the frigid temperatures.
Energy consumption rises significantly during extreme cold weather. In the winter of 1976-
77 additional energy consumption cost $3.8 billion (1980 dollars). This includes increase
costs of electricity, fuel oil, and coal.
Extreme cold temperatures can cause significant ground freezing problems, especially if
there is little snow cover. Buried water pipes can burst causing massive ice problems and
loss of water pressure in metropolitan areas. This poses a variety of public health and
public safety problems. One case of a broken water main in Denver, Colorado forced the
entire evacuation in sub-zero temperatures of the medically fragile patients of the Veteran's
Hospital. Other cases of broken water mains have shut down subway systems and financial
centers.
Schools often close during extreme cold snaps to protect the safety of children who wait
for school buses.

100
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
Jefferson County – Section 2
Winter weather in the St. Louis region moves in a west to east direction. Late winter
storms that have a tendency to be intense tend to generate in the southwest portion of the
United States and move northeast, dependent upon the meteorology and the storm track.
Winter weather is different than other hazards such as tornadoes in that the hazard tends
to occur over a much larger area, often times affecting from several counties to multiple
states.
Seasonal Seasonal Pattern
Pattern
Missouri’s geographic location has the potential to experience severe winter weather
during the months of December through February, although winter weather has been
known to also occur in mid-November and into March.
Speed Speed Of Of Of Onset Onset And/Or And/Or And/Or Existing Existing Warning Warning Systems Systems
Systems
Winter weather typically does not hit the region without warning. The NOAA Weather
Radio, commercial radio, and television track and announce the latest winter storm
watches, warnings, and advisories. The National Weather Service sets up winter weather
warnings in stages of severity. These warnings are found below.
WIND CHILL ADVISORY:
Notice that wind chill conditions will be present and to dress appropriately
WINTER STORM WATCH:
Severe winter conditions, such as heavy snow and/or ice, are possible within
the next day or two. Prepare.
WINTER STORM WARNING:
Severe winter conditions have begun or are about to begin in your area. Stay
indoors!
BLIZZARD WARNING:
Snow and strong winds will combine to produce a blinding snow (near zero
visibility), deep drifts, and life-threatening wind chill. Seek refuge
immediately
WINTER WEATHER ADVISORY:
Winter weather conditions are expected to cause significant inconveniences
and may be hazardous. If caution is exercised, these situations should not
become life- threatening. The greatest hazard is often to motorists.
FROST/FREEZE WARNING:
Below freezing temperatures are expected and may cause significant damage
to plants, crops, or fruit trees. In areas unaccustomed to freezing
temperatures, people who have homes without heat need to take added
precautions.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 101
Map Map Map of of Hazards azards
Refer to Figure J45, located in the back of the Technical Appendix, for a map depicting
potential regions of Jefferson County that are susceptible to severe winter weather.
Statement Statement of f Probable Probable Future Future Future Severity
Severity
The probable future severity of severe winter weather will most likely be similar to the
climatologic past. Based on the climatic history of Jefferson County, winter weather and
extreme cold events are highly likely to occur. The future probably severity for each
category of winter events is shown below:
Winter Winter Winter Event Event Event Probable Probable Severity Severity
Heavy Snow Limited
Ice Event Critical
Extreme Cold Critical
Statement Statement of f f Probable Probable Risk/Likeliness Risk/Likeliness of f f Future Future Occurrence
Based upon Jefferson County’s climatic history, there is a highly likely risk of impacts in the
county due to severe winter weather.. Based in information from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and FEMA, severe winter weather occurs between two to
three times per year in the EWG planning region. NOAA has data from EWG planning
region indicating that during the winter months the probability of measurable snowfall
ranges between 91 and 100 percent, depending on the reporting weather station.
Records show that temperatures drop to zero or below an average of two or three days per
year, and temperatures as cold as 32 degrees or lower occur less than 25 days in most
years. The coldest day reported in the region from 1941 through 2001 was minus 18
degrees Fahrenheit on January 20, 1985. Snowfall has averaged a little over 18 inches per
winter season, and snowfall of an inch or less is received on five to ten days in most years.
Winter Winter Event Event Probable Risk
Heavy Snow Likely
Ice Event Likely
Extreme Cold Likely
Statement Statement Statement of f Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on n n Community
Community
The next severe winter storm will possibly have a detrimental impact on the community in
terms of injuries, property damage and death, based upon the past historic storm events.
This is due to the dense population of residents and workers who live and work in the
planning region. Based on recent history, the likely impact on Jefferson County is shown
below.

102
Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Catastrophic
Property Critical
Emotional Catastrophic
Financial Critical
Comments: none
Jefferson County – Section 2
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Limited
Property Limited
Emotional Limited
Financial Limited
Comments Public education about winter hazards and health dangers can reduce
deaths and injuries
Recommendation
Recommendation
Mitigation activities for Jefferson County should include the education of its workers and
residents about prevention of injuries and deaths from severe winter weather.
Drought Drought Drought Hazard Hazard Profile Profile
Profile
Description
Description
Drought is defined as the deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time,
usually a season or more. This deficiency results in a water shortage for some activity,
group or environmental sector. Drought should be considered relative to some long-term
average condition of balance between precipitation and evapotranspiration (i.e.,
evaporation + transpiration) in a particular area, a condition often perceived as “normal”.
It is also related to the timing (i.e., principal season of occurrence, delays in the start of the
rainy season, occurrence of rains in relation to principal crop growth stages) and the
effectiveness (i.e., rainfall intensity, number of rainfall events) of the rains. Other climatic
factors such as high temperature, high wind, and low relative humidity are often
associated with drought in many regions of the world and can significantly aggravate its
severity.
Drought should not be viewed as merely a physical phenomenon or natural event. Its
impacts on society result from the interplay between a natural event (less precipitation than
expected resulting from natural climatic variability) and the demand people place on water
supply. Human beings often exacerbate the impact of drought. Recent droughts in both
developing and developed countries and the resulting economic and environmental
impacts and personal hardships have underscored the vulnerability of all societies to this
hazard.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 103
There are two main kinds of drought definitions: conceptual and operational. Conceptual
definitions, formulated in general terms, help people understand the concept of drought.
Drought is a protracted period of deficient precipitation resulting in extensive damage to
crops, resulting in loss of yield. Operational definitions help define the onset, severity, and
end of droughts. No single operational definition of drought works in all circumstances,
and this is a big part of why policy makers, resource planners, and others have more
trouble recognizing and planning for drought than they do for other disasters. In fact,
most drought planners now rely on mathematic indices to decide when to start
implementing water conservation or drought response measures. Conceptual definitions
may also be important establishing when drought conditions are beyond those that could
be considered part of normal risk management.
In the early 1980s, research by Donald A. Wilhite, director of the National Drought
Mitigation Center, and Michael H. Glantz, of the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, uncovered more than 150 published definitions of drought. The definitions
categorized in terms of four basic approaches to measuring drought: meteorological,
hydrological, agricultural, and socioeconomic. The first three approaches deal with ways to
measure drought as a physical phenomenon. The last approach deals with drought in
terms of supply and demand, tracking the effects of water shortfall as it ripples through
socioeconomic systems.
Meteorological drought is usually an expression of precipitation’s departure from normal
over some period of time. These definitions are usually region-specific, and presumably
based on a thorough understanding of regional climatology. Meteorological measurements
are the first indicators of drought.
Agricultural drought occurs when there is not enough soil moisture to meet the needs of a
particular crop at a particular time. Agricultural drought happens after meteorological
drought but before hydrological drought. Agriculture is usually the first economic sector to
be affected by drought. Agricultural drought links various characteristics of meteorological
(or hydrological) drought to agricultural impacts, focusing on precipitation shortages,
differences between actual and potential evapotranspiration, soil water deficits, reduced
ground water or reservoir levels, and so forth. A good definition of agricultural drought
should be able to account for the variable susceptibility of crops and soil moisture during
different stages of crop development, from emergence to maturity.
Hydrological drought refers to deficiencies in surface and subsurface water supplies. It is
measured as streamflow and as lake, reservoir, and groundwater levels. There is a time lag
between lack of rain and less water in streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. When
precipitation is reduced or deficient over an extended period of time, this shortage will be
reflected in declining surface and subsurface water levels. Hydrological drought is
associated with the effects of shortfall in periods of precipitation (including snowfall) on
surface or subsurface water supply (i.e., streamflow, reservoir and lake levels, ground
water). The frequency and severity of hydrological drought is often defined on a watershed
or river basin scale. It takes longer for precipitation deficiencies to show up in components

104
Jefferson County – Section 2
of the hydrological system such as soil moisture, streamflow, and ground water and
reservoir levels. As a result, these impacts lag behind impacts in other economic sectors. For
example, a precipitation deficiency may result in a rapid depletion of soil moisture that is
almost immediately discernible to agriculturalists, but the impact of this deficiency on
reservoir levels may not affect hydroelectric power production or recreational uses for many
months. Also, water in reservoirs or rivers is often used for multiple and competing
purposes (e.g., flood control, irrigation, recreation, navigation, hydropower, wildlife
habitat). This further complicates the sequence and quantification of impacts. Competition
for water in these storage systems escalates during drought and conflicts between water
users increase significantly.
Hydrological Hydrological Drought Drought and and Land Land Use
Use
Although climate is a primary contributor to hydrological drought, other factors such as
changes in land use (e.g., deforestation), land degradation, and the construction of dams
all affect the hydrological characteristics of the basin. Because regions are interconnected
by hydrologic systems, the impact of meteorological drought may extend well beyond the
borders of the precipitation-deficient area. Similarly, changes in land use upstream may
alter hydrologic characteristics such as infiltration and runoff rates, resulting in more
variable streamflow and a higher incidence of hydrologic drought downstream.
Bangladesh, for example, has shown an increased frequency of water shortages in recent
years because land use changes have occurred within the country and in neighboring
countries. Land use change is one of the ways human actions alter the frequency of water
shortage even when no change in the frequency of meteorological drought has been
observed.
For the purposes of drought response planning, all three categories (meteorologic,
hydrologic and agriculture) can be regarded as equivalent, since each one relates to the
occurrence of drought to water shortfalls in some component of the hydrologic cycle. The
most commonly used drought severity indicators are the Palmer Drought Severity Index
(PDSI) and the Crop Moisture Index, published by NOAA and the USDA. The PDSI is more
widely used than any other single indicator. It provides a standardized means of depicting
drought severity throughout the US. It measures the departure of water supply (in terms
of precipitation and stored soil moisture) from demand (the amount of water required to
recharge soil and keep rivers, lakes and reservoirs at normal levels). By relating these
figures to the previous regional index a continuous stream of data is created reflecting
long-term wet or dry tendencies.
Socioeconomic drought occurs when physical water shortage starts to affect people,
individually and collectively.
The Palmer Drought Severity Index relates climate and weather to prolonged and abnormal
soil moisture deficiencies affecting water sensitive economies in the US. The index is useful
in delineating disaster areas and indicating the availability of irrigation water supplies,

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 105
reservoir levels, range conditions, amount of stock water, and potential intensity of forest
fires.
Missouri has six regions that display similar climatic characteristics. For each region,
drought severity can be determined according to the following Table J41:
TABLE TABLE J41 J41 PALMER PALMER CLASSIFICATIONS
CLASSIFICATIONS
Palmer Palmer Classifications
Classifications
4.0 or more extremely wet
3.0 to 3.99 very wet
2.0 to 2.99 moderately wet
1.0 to 1.99 slightly wet
0.5 to 0.99 incipient wet spell
0.49 to -0.49 near normal
-0.5 to -0.99 incipient dry spell
-1.9 to -1.99 mild drought
-2.0 to -2.99 moderate drought
-3.0 to -3.99 severe drought
-4.0 or less extreme drought
City of St. Louis, St. Louis, St. Charles and Franklin counties are included in the northeast
Region 2 that displays similar climatic characteristics. Jefferson County is included in the
southeast Region 5. See Figure J46 below.

106
Characteristics
Characteristics
FIGURE FIGURE J46 J46 MISSOURI MISSOURI DROUGHT DROUGHT REGIONS
REGIONS
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Jefferson County – Section 2
Drought characteristics include economic, social and environmental. The 1930s drought’s
direct effect is most often remembered as agricultural. Deficient rainfall, high
temperatures, and high winds, as well as insect infestations and dust storms that
accompanied these conditions damaged many crops. Although records focus on other
problems, the lack of precipitation would also have affected wildlife and plant life, and
would have created water shortages for domestic needs. The severity and aerial coverage
of the event played a part in making the 1930s drought the widely accepted drought of
record for the United States.
Likely Likely Locations ocations ocations
According to the State Drought Plan, Missouri is broken up into six climate divisions.
Franklin, St Charles, St. Louis City and St. Louis Counties are all found in the southeastern
section of climate Division 2. Jefferson County is in the northeast corner of climate Division
5. Based on the NDMC historic drought mapping of Regions 2 and 5, the most common
area for drought conditions to occur is within Region 2 (including St. Louis City, St. Louis,
St. Charles, and Franklin counties).

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 107
The State of Missouri has a State Drought Plan in place. Missouri’s plan is such that it
divides the state into three regions according to their susceptibility to drought depending
on the characteristics of surface and ground water supplies. Regions were judged to have
slight, moderate or high susceptibility to drought. Poor groundwater resources, surface
water supplies that become inadequate during extended drought and inadequate irrigation
water supplies characterize areas within Region C, considered to have severe drought
vulnerability. This region includes most of St. Louis County just south of the juncture of the
Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. Areas in this region are designated as "Priority Drought
Management Areas”. Areas within western St. Charles County, southern Franklin County
and most of central/western Jefferson County are included in Region B: Moderate
Susceptibility to Drought. Areas along the Mississippi and Missouri River valley floodplain
areas in the counties in this study are within Region A: Slight Susceptibility.
Information obtained from the Missouri Drought Response Plan (Water Resources Report
No. 44) has a map that depicts a similar concept of drought susceptibility. However, the
NDMC and the Missouri Plan are not in total agreement on common areas of drought.
The Missouri Drought Response Plan divides the state into three categories based on a
slight, moderate or high susceptibility to drought. The Missouri Plan depicts St. Louis City
as having a high susceptibility to drought, and St. Louis, Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles
Counties with a moderate susceptibility to drought. Certain Region A areas in St. Charles,
St. Louis, and Franklin Counties that are underlain by alluvial sands and gravels have a low
susceptibility to drought.
The plan complements and supports the State Consolidated Plan and the State Emergency
Operations Plan. Actions within the drought plan are triggered when the Palmer Drought
Index reaches certain levels. The Drought Assessment Committee (DAC), chaired by the
Director of the Department of Natural Resources, is activated in the Drought Alert Stage.
The DAC then activates the Impact Task Forces, which cover the following topics:
agriculture, natural resources and environmental recreation, water supplies, wastewater,
health, social, economic and post drought evaluation.
Type Type of of Damage
The drought of 1988-89 cost the U. S. an estimated $39 billion. To provide perspective,
estimated damages of the record flood of 1993 were in the range of $20 billion. The
social and economic costs of drought are substantial. Given the extent to which the U. S.
relies on acceptable water supply for health and well- being, the need for advanced
drought planning is obvious. Types of damage can include the increasing incidence of
range fires, depletion of groundwater supplies, poor crop growth, and a decrease in hay
for cattle (overgrazing) conditions. A shortage of hay forces ranchers to sell cattle at low
prices and food prices increase due to lower production levels for milk, meat, produce, and
other foodstuffs. Drought also results in reduced revenues from recreational areas,
environmental damages, contaminant levels in surface and groundwater rise due to
decrease in volume of stream flow. There can be a loss in revenues from agriculturally

108
Jefferson County – Section 2
related industries such as harvesting, trucking, and food processing. Reduced irrigation
water led to a reduction in vegetable production, with concomitant losses in jobs and
income.
Hazard Hazard Event History History
Some of the worst droughts on record to affect Region 2 in Missouri occurred in 1901-02,
1913-14, 1930-31, 1934, 1936, 1940-41, 1953-56, 1963-64, 1980-81, 1988-89, 1999-
2000 and 2005-2007. The 1953-56 drought is considered to be the worst on record for
Region 2.
Droughts on record to affect Region 5 in Missouri occurred in 1900-09, 1940-49, 1950-
59, 1964-66, 1980 and 2005-2007. The drought from 1954-56 was the worst on record
for Region 5. Table J42 below shows the Big River level stage during drought conditions.
TABLE TABLE J42 J42 J42 RIVER RIVER LEVEL LEVEL STAGES STAGES IN IN DROUGHT DROUGHT CONDITIONS CONDITIONS IN IN JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON
COUNTY COUNTY
COUNTY
Station Station
Stage (Flood Stage 16 ft) Date
Big River at Byrnes Mill 1.5 8/30/1936
1.5 9/13/2000
1.4 10/05/2001
An overall excellent drought resource on the Internet is the National Drought Mitigation
Center (NDMC). The NDMC provides historical drought information for the U.S. from 1895
through current. Linking to the following address will provide drought information:
http://www.drought.unl.edu/whatis/what.htm
Table J43 identifies, using the Palmer Drought Severity Index, the monthly average for the
period of record for the study area.
TABLE TABLE TABLE J43 J43 PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX MONTHLY
AVERAGE AVERAGE FOR FOR FOR PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD OF OF OF RECORD RECORD
RECORD
1895 TO 1995
Mon Month Mon th Division 22
2
Division 5
January -0.06 -0.04
February -0.42 -0.94
March -0.66 -1.16
April -0.99 -1.70
May -1.23 -1.62
June -1.17 0.57
July 1.24 1.64
August 1.68 1.65
September 1.48 -0.40
October 0.65 -0.93
November 0.81 0.30

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 109
TABLE TABLE TABLE J43 J43 J43 PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX MONTHLY
AVERAGE AVERAGE FOR FOR PERIOD PERIOD OF OF RECORD
RECORD
1895 TO 1995
December 2.37 1.79
Within the past few years, the National Drought Mitigation Center has created a U.S.
drought map that utilizes numerous indicators to determine the severity of a drought.
These indicators include the Palmer Index, Crop Moisture Index, Standardized Precipitation
Index, Percent of Normal Rainflow, Daily Streamflow, Snowpack, Soil Moisture, Vegetative
Index, and Fire Danger Classifications. There is also a lot of subjectivity that goes into the
map. The drought authors take heavily into consideration the input they receive from local
experts in terms of the impacts that are being felt.
Frequency Frequency of of Occurrence Occurrence
The NDMC has developed a graphic historic representation of the frequency of occurrence
of areas within the upper Mississippi River Basin experiencing severe to extreme drought
from 1895 to 1995. The graph below depicts the percentage of areas of the upper
Mississippi River Basin that were impacted by drought, including climatic zones 2 and 5.
Based on the NCDC 1980 report, heat and drought events result in the highest damage (in
the range of 120 billion dollars from 1980 to 1999 based on 46 weather related events)
when compared to other natural weather hazards. See Figure J47 below.

110
Intensity Intensity or or Strength trength trength
FIGURE FIGURE J47 J47 SEASONAL SEASONAL DROUGHT
DROUGHT
Jefferson County – Section 2
The Palmer Drought Severity Index can be utilized to determine the intensity or strength of
droughts. Table J45 above lists the average monthly Palmer Drought Severity Index from
1895 to 1995 for Regions 2 (St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Franklin
County) and 5 (Jefferson County).
Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Property Property Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Economic Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses Losses
Losses
The drought of 1988-89 cost the U.S. an estimated $39 billion. To provide perspective,
estimated damages of the record flood of 1993 were in the range of $12-$16 billion. The
social and economic costs of drought are substantial. Given the extent to which the U.S.
relies on acceptable water supply for health and well- being, the need for advanced
drought planning is obvious.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 111
Although the 1988–89 drought was the most economically devastating disaster in the
history of the United States (Riebsame et al., 1991), a close second is undoubtedly the
series of droughts that affected large portions of the United States in the 1930s.
Determining the direct and indirect costs associated with this period of droughts is a
difficult task because of the broad impacts of drought, the event’s close association with
the Great Depression, the fast revival of the economy with the start of World War II, and
the lack of adequate economic models for evaluating losses at that time. However, broad
calculations and estimates can provide valuable generalizations of the economic impact of
the 1930s drought. In 1937, the Works Progress Administration (WPA) reported that
drought was the principal reason for economic relief assistance in the Great Plains region
during the 1930s (Link et al., 1937). The first federal funds marked specifically for drought
relief were not released until the fall of 1933. In all, assistance may have reached $1 billion
(in 1930s dollars) by the end of the drought (Warrick et al., 1980).
According to the WPA, three-fifths of all first-time rural relief cases in the Great Plains area
were directly related to drought, with a disproportionate amount of cases being farmers
(68%) and especially tenant farmers (70% of the 68%). However, it is not known how
many of the remaining cases (32%) were indirectly affected by drought. The WPA report
also noted that 21% of all rural families in the Great Plains area were receiving federal
emergency relief by 1936 (Link et al., 1937); the number was as high as 90% in hard-hit
counties (Warrick, 1980). Thus, even though the exact economic losses are not known for
this time period, they were substantial enough to cause widespread economic disruption
that affected the entire nation.
Seasonal Seasonal Seasonal Pattern
Pattern
Based on Table J45 above from Missouri Regions 2 and 5, a trend emerges of mild drought
occurring from January through May from the period of record from 1895 to 1995.
Speed Speed Speed of f Onset Onset Onset And/Or And/Or Existing Existing Warning Warning Systems
Systems
By nature, drought occurs very slowly. Existing warning systems have been developed by
Missouri Department of Natural Resources (Missouri Drought Response Plan). The function
of the plan is to assist in the response, monitoring and prediction, communication, and
planning in the event of a drought. The plan provides for operations and administrative
procedures that activate the Drought Assessment Committee, Impact Task Forces,
Governor's Drought Executive Committee, and the State Emergency Operations Center. The
Governor's declaration empowers state agencies to implement water shortage emergency
actions. The statute or authority that regulates this activity is the State Water Resources
Plan (Revised statutes of Missouri Chapters 640.415). The primary agencies involved in
drought activities include: Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources (primary), Missouri Dept. of
Agriculture, Missouri Dept. of Public Safety, Missouri Dept. of Conservation, Missouri Dept.
of Social Services, University of Missouri-Columbia, DOC, USDA, US Army, DOI, EPA, and
FEMA. The drought plan serves the following groups: water supply systems of individual
ranchers and farmers, local governments, federal agencies, domestic water users, health

112
Jefferson County – Section 2
care facilities, public uses such as electric power generation, firefighting, key military
facilities, communications, and wastewater systems.
As a part of the plan, monthly drought monitoring (consisting of water monitoring data
and weather data) is provided to the State Emergency Management Agency by the
Department of Natural Resources and the National Weather Service. MDNR utilizes the
Palmer Drought Index as a trigger to determine drought phases and actions to be taken.
Palmer greater than or equal to -1.0: Phase 1 (Advisory Phase)
Palmer -1.0 to -2.0: Phase 2 (Drought Alert)
Palmer -2.0 to -4.0: Phase 3 (Conservation Phase)
Palmer less than or equal to -4.0: Phase 4 (Possible Local Rationing Phase)
Once the data demonstrates that there is a Phase 2 drought condition, the Water
Resources Program Director declares drought alert for any region of the state and the
Director of the Department of Natural Resources may activate and chair the Drought
Assessment Committee (DAC). The DAC then activates the Impact Task Forces that include
the following Departments:
Agriculture
Natural Resources and Environmental Recreation
Water Supplies and Wastewater
Health
Social
Economic
Post Drought Evaluation
The state drought plan still has unmet needs at federal, state, local levels. These needs
include changes from customer or "provider" perspective: 1) lack of U.S. coordinated
response to meld with state response plan, 2) need for state climatologist to be available
for consultation, and 3) lack of a permanent source or mechanism of drought response
and mitigation funds at the federal or state level.
There are program limitations to the state drought plan: 1) early stages are voluntary
conservation measures, 2) state mitigation grant or loan funds are limited and may be
available only through mechanisms not well coordinated with emergency response plan.
Map Map of of Hazards azards
Figure J48 below depicts the percent of time the various regions spent in severe and
extreme drought conditions from 1895 to 1995. This is defined as the percentage of time
when the Palmer Drought Severity Index was less than or equal to –3.0. Refer to Figure J45
(located in the back of the Technical Appendix) for another map of the hazard area.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 113
Statement Statement of f Probable Probable Future Future Severity
Severity
FIGURE FIGURE J48 J48 PALMER PALMER DROUGHT DROUGHT INDEX
INDEX
Utilizing MDNR’s drought response system as outlined above, the probable severity levels
of future drought are as follows.
Phase Phase Probable Probable Severity Severity
Phase 1 Negligible
Phase 2 Limited
Phase 3 Critical
Phase 4 Critical
Statement Statement of f Probable Probable Risk/Likeliness Risk/Likeliness of f Future Future Occurr Occurrence Occurr ence
The probable risk or likeliness of future occurrences of drought will most likely be similar to
the climatologic past. However, the past number and severity of events is not necessarily a

114
Jefferson County – Section 2
predictor of future occurrences. Based on information from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and FEMA, droughts occur approximately every 10 years in the
EWG planning region.
Phase Phase Probable Risk
Phase 1 Likely
Phase 2 Likely
Phase 3 Possible
Phase 4 Possible
Statement Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Lik Likely Lik Likely
ely Adverse Impact on on Community
Community
The next drought will possibly have a detrimental impact on the community in terms of
agricultural (lawns), economic (social) and environmental based upon the past historic
drought events.
Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Negligible
Property Limited
Emotional Limited
Financial Critical
Comments None
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Negligible
Property (crop damage) Negligible
Emotional Limited
Financial Limited
Comments Education of city residents on watering restrictions of
lawns
Recommendation
Recommendation
Education of city residents on watering restrictions of lawns.
Heat Heat Heat Wave Wave Wave Hazard Hazard Profile
Profile
Description
Description
Heat wave is defined as a prolonged period of excessive heat and humidity with more than
48 hours of high heat (90 o F or higher) and high humidity (80 percent relative humidity or
higher) are expected. The National Weather Service steps up its procedures to alert the
public during these periods of excessive heat and humidity. Based on the NCDC 1980
report, heat and drought events result in the highest damage (in the range of $120 billion

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 115
from 1980 to 1999 based on 46 weather related events) when compared to other natural
weather hazards.
Although heat waves are not often taken as seriously as other forms of severe weather, the
mortality from these weather events in the U. S. from 1979 to 1998 is greater than the
number of lives claimed by lightning, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes
combined (National Center for Environmental Health). Even during a normal year without
a catastrophic heat wave, the National Weather Service claims that an average of about
175 people succumb to summer heat. This number does not include deaths of people
already in poor health, whose deaths may have been advanced by exposure to extreme
heat. Despite the presence of improving technology (e.g., air conditioning, architectural
design, and improved accuracy in weather forecasting), heat waves continue to take many
lives. From the early 20th century to the present time, Americans have experienced a
significant rise in the cost of property damage from severe weather events, while at the
same time the number of lives lost has decreased. Unfortunately, it appears that heat
waves have not followed the same trend.
Like all other major weather events, a heat wave cannot be prevented from developing.
Serious consideration should be given to how our communities deal with heat waves when
they occur. First, it is often the case that many fatalities during even the most severe heat
waves occur after the first day of extreme heat. This means that there is time to help
people who do not have, or cannot afford, air conditioning. People in the U. S. over 65
years old are especially vulnerable to extreme heat, and this population is expected to grow
in the very near future.
Heat waves of the past have often been more intense in urban areas. More people would
be at risk when a heat wave occurs in the region and power companies would be heavily
stressed trying to keep more people cool.
Scientists have observed that the average global temperature increased by the end of the
20th century. This could pose an even greater problem for northern cities in the U.S.,
where people are not accustomed to long periods of high heat. Finally, there are a few
other societal impacts to be considered such as: water usage (heat waves often occur
during droughts), air pollution building up during heat waves, and the economic impact of
keeping millions of people cool.
Social conditions are major players in the hazards posed by heat waves. People most
affected by heat waves are the elderly and low income. In addition, there are still problems
with getting heat wave information out to all members of the public. Often, as with any
nature disaster impacted a city, it is not considered that many U.S. cities where English is
not their primary language.
Because problems still exist when dealing with heat waves in U.S. cities at the community
level, further solutions should come from the community level. In the case of Philadelphia,
both the NWS and Department of Public Health cooperate to reduce heat wave impacts,

116
Jefferson County – Section 2
and in Chicago the city government and human services departments also work hard to
reduce impacts. Additional solutions may come from community organizations working to
reduce heat wave impacts. An example of this can be seen in San Leandro, California's
"Triad Alliance" where community-based organizations, emergency management
departments, and the city government work together to mitigate disasters associated with
earthquakes. In the case of heat waves, the city government or mayor's office could still
facilitate the registering of people for well-being checks, but then distribute the lists of
people to be checked to the community organizations.
The challenge with developing community heat wave response organizations is finding
enough dedicated members to assist during heat waves or keeping the organization
prepared and ready to mobilize during the warmer parts of the year in U.S. cities. More
people may start to care the next time a heat wave threatens their community.
Education programs could also be given in schools. Children and young adults can
participate in the community organizations and become aware of the risks of excessive
heat exposure to young people (for example, overexertion during excessive heat periods).
Of course, some younger people and employers would have to make sacrifices during a
heat wave to put work aside and mobilize the community organizations to deal with the
situation. Looking at a whole city during a heat wave, we can compare it to a person.
When there is excessive heat a doctor would probably tell a person to rest and "take it
easy." The same could be said for a city as a whole, continue to function, but to slow down
during a heat wave and allow communities to come together to keep their people safe
during a heat wave. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley mentioned the importance of the
whole city's cooperation in his 1996 Summer Heat Preparedness Speech: "I want to
continue to stress, however, that the city's efforts alone cannot prevent the tragedies
related to extreme heat. We need everyone to get involved." (Daley 1996).
Extreme heat is a hazard that could rapidly increase in magnitude in the 21 st century. The
increasingly urbanization of the world’s population results in increasing numbers of
vulnerable people. Global warming also dictates a need to improve heat wave mitigation
and response systems.
Heat kills by taxing the human body beyond its abilities. In a normal year, about 175
Americans succumb to the demands of summer heat. Among the large continental family
of hazards, only the cold of winter--not lightning, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or
earthquakes-- takes a greater toll. In the 40-year period from 1936 through 1975, nearly
20,000 people were killed in the United States by the effects of heat and solar radiation. In
the disastrous heat wave of 1980, more then 1,250 people died. These are just the direct
casualties of heat waves. It is not known how many more deaths are advanced by heat
wave weather.
North American summers are hot; most summers see heat waves in one section or another
of the United States. East of the Rockies, and especially in the St. Louis Metropolitan area,

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 117
they tend to combine both high temperature and high humidity, although some of the
worst heat waves have been catastrophically dry.
In response to the tragic death toll of 1980, the National Weather Service (NWS) has
stepped up its efforts to more effectively alert the general public and appropriate
authorities to the hazards of heat waves.
Based on the latest research findings, the NWS has devised the "Heat Index"(HI),
(sometimes referred to as the "apparent temperature"). The HI, given in degrees F, is an
accurate measure of how hot it really feels when the relative humidity (RH) is added to the
actual air temperature.
To find the HI, look at the Heat Index Chart in Figure J49 below. As an example, if the air
temperature is 95 degrees F (found on the left side of the chart) and the RH is 55% (found
at the top of the chart), the HI- or how hot it really feels-- is 110 degrees F. This is at the
intersection of the 95-degree row and the 55% column.
FIGURE FIGURE J49 J49 HEAT HEAT INDEX
INDEX
Source: National Weather Service
The stagnant atmospheric conditions of a heat wave trap pollutants in urban areas and
add the stresses of severe pollution to the already dangerous affects of hot weather,
creating a health problem of undiscovered dimensions. A map of heat related deaths in St.
Louis during 1966, for example, shows a heavier concentration in the crowded alleys and
towers of the inner city, where air quality would also be poor during a heat wave.

118
Jefferson County – Section 2
The high inner-city death rates also result from poor access to air-conditioned rooms. While
air-conditioning may be a luxury in normal times, it can be a lifesaver during heat wave
conditions. Indications from the 1978 Texas heat wave suggest that some elderly people
on fixed incomes, many of them in buildings that could not be ventilated without air
conditioning, found the cost too high, turned off their units, and ultimately succumbed to
the stresses of heat.
Characteristics
Characteristics
Characteristics
A heat wave moves over an area as a large, deep air mass with descending air, retarding
the development of any significant precipitation that would provide relief to the ground
surface's rising temperatures. As this air mass moves slowly or just sits over one area for
days or even weeks, its rising surface temperatures begin to take its toll on the people who
are trapped in it.
Likely Likely Locations
Locations
Heat wave weather in the St. Louis Region is different that other hazards such as tornadoes
in that the hazard tends to occur over a much larger area, often times affecting from
several counties to multiple states.
Type Type of of Damage
Damage
Heat kills by taxing the human body beyond its abilities. Normally, the body has ways of
keeping itself cool, by letting heat escape through the skin, and by evaporating sweat
(perspiration). If the body does not cool properly, the victim may suffer a heat-related
illness. Anyone can be susceptible although the very young and very old are at greater risk.
Heat-related illnesses can become serious or even deadly if unattended. Damage to the
body ranges from heat cramps to death.
• Heat Heat Cramps: Cramps: Heat cramps are muscular pains and spasms due to heavy exertion.
They usually involve the abdominal muscles or the legs. It is generally thought that
the loss of water and salt from heavy sweating causes the cramps.
• Heat Heat Heat Exhaustion: Exhaustion: Heat exhaustion is less dangerous than heat stroke. It typically
occurs when people exercise heavily or work in a warm, humid place where body
fluids are lost through heavy sweating. Fluid loss causes blood flow to decrease in
the vital organs, resulting in a form of shock. With heat exhaustion, sweat does not
evaporate as it should, possibly because of high humidity or too many layers of
clothing. As a result, the body is not cooled properly. Signals include cool, moist,
pale, flushed or red skin; heavy sweating; headache; nausea or vomiting; dizziness;
and exhaustion. Body temperature will be near normal.
• Heat Heat Stroke: Stroke: Also known as sunstroke, heat stroke is life-threatening. The victim's
temperature control system, which produces sweating to cool the body, stops
working. The body temperature can rise so high that brain damage and death may
result if the body is not cooled quickly. Signals include hot, red and dry skin;

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 119
changes in consciousness; rapid, weak pulse; and rapid, shallow breathing. Body
temperature can be very high--sometimes as high as 105 o F.
Hazard Hazard Event Event History
History
The St. Louis Metropolitan area experienced a heat wave in July 1980. It was the first real
prolonged period of extreme heat for the metropolitan area since 1966 when 246 heat
deaths were reported. The heat began around the 4th of July. By July 12th, it was apparent
that there was a very real crisis in the City of St. Louis. Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
crews were finding dead or very ill persons in many areas of the city. Most were elderly
persons living alone and many had been dead for several days before being discovered. City
officials recommended to the mayor that a heat emergency be declared. The Governor
mobilized the National Guard. They searched door-to-door for victims. The Army Reserve
supplied portable air-conditioning to non-air-conditioned parts of City Hospital. The
American Red Cross opened emergency shelters. In 1980, 113 heat deaths were reported.
In August 1980, a team of researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control was sent
to St. Louis and Kansas City, Missouri, to find out why, when the July 1980 heat wave
affected a quarter of the country (the southeast), the death rates were excessively high in
these two cities. A case-control study outlined the reasons found and the risk factors for
heat illness and death in two articles published in the Journal of the American Medical
Association in June 1982.
Early in l981, city officials and representatives began meeting to form an organization to
prevent the crisis of 1980 from happening again. The first community-wide meeting was
held in December l981 after an announced cut in federal energy assistance funds. This was
the beginning of Operation Weather Survival (OWS).
At the same time, the City of St. Louis Department of Health and Hospitals put together a
heat illness prevention plan, titled "The Lion in Summer," that included a slide/sound show
and speakers (health educators and EMS personnel) that was marketed to community and
senior citizens' groups throughout the summer of l981 and again in 1982. Heat and cold
illnesses were also made reportable, first by the St. Louis City Health Commissioner and
eventually by the Missouri Department of Health.
By 1982, health officials in the City of St. Louis and St. Louis County had developed a joint
plan to monitor summer temperatures that would quickly warn citizens of anticipated
periods of excessive heat. This was done through the Wet Bulb Glove Temperature that was
used in St. Louis until 1997 when the protocol was changed at the request of the National
Weather Service (NWS) to reflect the terminology used across the nation by the NWS.
OWS began as a formal contract in 1982 between the City and several social service
agencies to provide necessary assistance during periods of extreme heat or cold. It
eventually became a broad group of public health, government, human service, utilities,
and for-profit companies and agencies that worked together to prevent illness or death

120
Jefferson County – Section 2
from either extreme heat or cold. In l996, a more formal structure was initiated to assure
the continuation of the organization because of many changes in the community and a
drop in attendance at meetings. OWS is staffed by the United Way and now includes all
the major counties in Missouri and Illinois that are considered part of the Metropolitan St.
Louis area.
St. Louis region experienced additional heat waves in l993, 1988 and in 1995 without
again experiencing death rates close to those in 1980. The major challenges of the ongoing
heat illness prevention program are, first, reaching the truly isolated elderly, high risk
person who has no meaningful interaction with anyone, and second, convincing many
seniors that they are at risk and that air-conditioning will save lives.
The major programs of heat illness prevention through NWS, in addition to the monitoring,
warning, education and data collection system of the health departments, are:
• A very successful air-conditioner loan program, funded by Union Electric Company
(now Ameren UE). The window air-conditioners are loaned, installed and
maintained for individuals who apply to the program with a medical "prescription."
At least 50 new air-conditioners are purchased each year.
• A program to weatherize homes for low-income elderly and disabled persons.
• Programs to provide energy assistance for low-income elderly and disabled persons.
• Information and referral for help, including home visits to high-risk individuals and
transportation to services, by a number of agencies.
• Emergency shelter through the St. Louis Homeless Network.
• Monitoring of weather by representatives of the National Weather Service.
• A free telephone reassurance program offered to all high-risk individuals during
declared periods of unusual heat or cold by a for-profit company, called TelAssure.
• A system of neighborhood institutions, primarily senior citizen centers, that offers
air-conditioned relief from the heat for the hottest part of the day.
• A well-informed media in St. Louis that provide invaluable assistance with
dissemination of needed information throughout the community.
Refer to Table J44 for a history of heat wave occurrences.
TABLE TABLE J44 J44 TOP TOP FIFTEEN FIFTEEN CONSECUTIVE CONSECUTIVE DAYS WITH TEMPERATURES 90 90
90
DEGREES DEGREES DEGREES OR OR HIGHER IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA
DATES DATES DATES
CONSECUTIVE DAYS TEMPERATURE TEMPERATURE RANGES
June-August, 1980 28+ days 100+
July 2-July 29, 1936 28 days 108
July 20- August 11, 1941 23 days N.A.
July 11- July 31, 1916 21 days N.A.
August 8-August 28, 1936 21 days 108
June 17-July 7, 1954 21 days 110-115
July 15- August 30, 1901 20 days 100+
June 28-July 17, 1921 20 days N.A.
July 8-July 26, 1934 19 days 108-111

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 121
TABLE TABLE J44 J44 J44 TOP FIFTEEN CONSECUTIVE DAYS WITH TEMPERATURES 90
90
DEGREES DEGREES DEGREES OR OR HIGHER IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA AREA
DATES DATES DATES
CONSECUTIVE DAYS TEMPERATURE TEMPERATURE RANGES
July 2- July 20, 1937 19 days N.A.
June 19-July 6, 1901 18 days 106-107
August 3- August 9, 1930 7 days 100+
July 27- August 2, 1953 7 days 100+
July 9- July 14, 1966 6 days 100+
June 27- July 1, 1931 5 days 100
Frequency Frequency Frequency of of Occurrence
Occurrence
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena. Frequency, intensity, and duration of heat waves,
however, vary drastically from year to year. As can be seen from the Table J46 above, there
have been 14 periods of heat waves ranging from a minimum of five consecutive days to a
maximum of 28 days, all over 90 degrees.
Intensity Intensity or or Strength
Strength
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States and
specifically the St. Louis metropolitan area. Frequency, intensity, and duration of heat
waves, however, vary drastically from year to year. The highest temperature documented
during the longest heat wave of 28 days was 108 degrees.
Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Property Property Property Damage, Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses Losses
Losses
Compared to other meteorological hazards that pose threats to property and human
health (e.g., floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes), heat waves rank first as the cause of
human mortality. Extremes of heat have a broad and far-reaching set of impacts on the
nation. These include significant loss of life and illness, economic costs in transportation,
TABLE TABLE J45 J45 HEAT HEAT MORBIDITY MORBIDITY IN IN ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS METROPOLIT
METROPOLITAN METROPOLIT
METROPOLITAN
AN REGION
REGION
Year Year
St. Louis City St. St. Louis County Outstate MO MO TOTAL
1989 13 0 5 18
1990 6 2 5 13
1991 4 4 2 10
1992 3 2 0 5
1993 4 1 1 6
1994 9 0 5 14
1995 26 6 18 50
1996 2 1 0 3
1997 5 1 3 9
1998 2 3 4 9
1999 38 5 29 72
2000 4 2 11 17
2001 10 7 17 34

122
Jefferson County – Section 2
TABLE TABLE J45 J45 HEAT HEAT HEAT MORBIDITY MORBIDITY MORBIDITY IN IN ST. ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS METROPOLIT
METROPOLITAN METROPOLIT AN REGION
REGION
Year Year
St. Louis City St. St. Louis County Outstate MO MO TOTAL
2002 7 5 9 21
Source: Missouri Department of Health and Social Services City of St Louis Department of Health
agriculture, production, energy and infrastructure. In June to September 1980 the nation
saw a devastating heat wave and drought that claimed at least 1,700 lives and had
estimated economic costs $20 billion in 1980 dollars. Tables J45 above and J46 below
identifies specific damages to the St. Louis metropolitan area
TABLE TABLE J46 J46 J46 ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS METROPOLITAN METROPOLITAN REGION REGION HEAT
HEAT
WAVES WAVES 11994
1 994 TO 2008 AND AND ASSOCIATED ASSOCIATED DAMAGES
DAMAGES
Date Date Deaths Deaths Injuries Injuries Property
Property
Damage
Damage
Crop
Crop
Damage
Damage
06/12/1994 4 55 0 50K
07/17/1995 20 225 75K 0.4M
07/28/1995 0 120 15K 25K
08/01/1995 9 230 0 400K
05/17/1996 0 25 0 0
06/18/1996 0 0 0 0
06/22/1996 1 0 0 0
06/30/1996 1 0 0 0
07/07/1996 0 8 0 0
07/18/1996 0 11 0 0
06/25/1997 1 0 0 0
07/12/1997 0 14 0 0
07/20/1997 1 0 0 0
08/17/1997 1 0 0 0
06/23/1998 3 143 0 0
07/18/1998 0 137 0 0
08/23/1998 0 10 0 0
09/04/1998 0 13 0 0
07/18/1999 42 397 0 0
07/02/2000 4 103 0 0
08/28/2000 1 125 0 0
09/01/2000 1 38 0 0
06/18/2001 1 0 0 0
07/07/2001 5 61 0 0
07/17/2001 0 19 0 0
07/21/2001 3 71 0 0
07/29/2001 0 4 0 0
08/01/2001 0 34 0 0

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 123
TABLE TABLE J46 J46 J46 ST. ST. LOUIS LOUIS METROPOLITAN METROPOLITAN REGION REGION HEAT HEAT
HEAT
WAVES WAVES 11994
1 994 TO 2008 AND AND ASSOCIATED ASSOCIATED DAMAGES
DAMAGES
Date Date Deaths Deaths Injuries Injuries Property
Property
Damage
Damage
Crop
Crop
Damage
Damage
08/07/2001 1 10 0 0
08/12/2001 3 0 0 0
08/21/2001 0 14 0 0
05/31/2002 2 0 0 0
06/01/2002 0 14 0 0
06/25/2002 1 0 0 0
07/08/2002 1 26 0 0
07/17/2002 1 0 0 0
07/20/2002 0 47 0 0
07/26/2002 0 185 0 0
08/01/2002 1 59 0 0
08/26/2002 1 0 0 0
07/03/2003 3 93 0 0
08/15/2003 2 54 0 0
08/24/2003 0 0 0 0
07/09/2004 1 45 0 0
07/20/2004 0 25 0 0
06/06/2005 1 0 0 0
06/23/2005 0 0 0 0
07/20/2005 4 65 0 0
07/13/2006 4 437 0 0
07/29/2006 1 14 0 0
08/01/2006 0 59 0 0
08/07/2006 1 0 0 0
05/12/2007 0 2 0 0
05/13/2007 0 0 0 0
08/04/2007 2 519 0 0
07/20/2008 0 60 0 0
Totals 128 3571 5.09M 875K
Source: NCDC
There are several impacts on transportation documented in case studies. Aircraft lose lift at
high temperatures. The Phoenix airport has been closed due to periods of extreme heat
that made aircraft operations unsafe. Highways and roads are damaged by excessive heat.
Asphalt roads soften. Concrete roads have been known to "explode" lifting –three to four
foot pieces of concrete. During the 1980 heat wave hundreds of miles of highways buckled
(NOAA, 1980). Stress is placed on automobile cooling systems, diesel trucks and railroad
locomotives. This leads to an increase in mechanical failures. Train rails develop sun kinks

124
Jefferson County – Section 2
and distort. Refrigerated goods experience a significant greater rate of spoilage due to
extreme heat.
Various sectors of the agriculture community are affected by extreme heat. Livestock are
severely impacted by heat waves. Millions of birds have been lost during heat waves. Milk
production and cattle reproduction also decreases during heat waves. Pigs are also
adversely impacted by extreme heat. In terms of crop impacts in the summer of 1980, it is
unclear what the impacts are of very high temperatures for a few days, versus the above
average summer temperatures or the drought. High temperatures at the wrong time can
inhibit crop yields. Wheat, rice, corn, potato, and soybean crop yields can all be
significantly reduced by extreme high temperatures at key development stages.
The electric transmission system is impacted when power lines sag in high temperatures. In
2002 a major west coast power outage impacting four states was blamed in part on
extreme high temperatures causing sagging transmission lines to short out. The
combination of extreme heat and the added demand for electricity to run air conditioning
causes transmission line temperatures to rise.
The demand for electric power during heat waves is well documented. In 1980, consumers
paid $1.3 billion more for electric power during the summer than the previous year. The
demand for electricity, 5.5 percent above normal, outstripped the supply, causing electric
companies to have rolling black outs.
The demand for water increases during periods of hot weather. In extreme heat waves,
water is used to cool bridges and other metal structures susceptible to heat failure. This
causes a reduced water supply and pressure in many areas. This can significantly contribute
to fire suppression problems for both urban and rural fire departments.
The rise in water temperature during heat waves contributes to the degradation of water
quality and negatively impacts fish populations. It can also lead to the death of many other
organisms in the water ecosystem. High temperatures are also linked to rampant algae
growth, causing fish kills in rivers and lakes.
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
Impacts from heat waves are widespread, not selective. Impacts and areas where there are
impacts are dependent upon the weather systems, which affect wide expanses of land.
Season Seasonal Season al Pattern
Pattern
Heat waves typically occur during the warm summer months including June, July and
August as seen on Table J48 above.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 125
Speed Speed of of Onset Onset and/or and/or Existing Existing Warning Warning Systems
Systems
Heat wave weather in the St. Louis region slowly descends into the area. It is different that
other hazards such as tornadoes in that the hazard tends to occur over a much larger area,
often times affecting from several counties to multiple states.
The NWS will initiate alert procedures when the Heat Index is expected to exceed 105
degrees F to 110 degrees F (depending on the local climate) for at least two consecutive
days. The expected severity of the heat determines whether advisories or warnings are
issued. A common guideline for the issuance of excessive heat alerts is when the maximum
daytime HI is expected to equal or exceed 105°F and a nighttime minimum HI of 80°F or
above for two or more consecutive days. Some regions and municipalities are more
sensitive to excessive heat than others. As a result, alert thresholds may vary substantially
from these guidelines. Excessive heat-alert thresholds are being tailored at major
metropolitan centers based on research results that link unusual amounts of heat-related
deaths to city-specific meteorological conditions.
The alert procedures are:
• Include HI values in zone and city forecasts.
• Issue Special Weather Statements and/or Public Information Statements presenting
a detailed discussion of (1) the extent of the hazard including HI values, (2) those
individuals most at risk, (3) safety rules for reducing the risk.
• Assist state and local health officials in preparing Civil Emergency Messages in severe
heat waves. Meteorological information from Special Weather Statements will be
included as well as more detailed medical information, advice, and names and
telephone numbers of health officials.
• Release to the media and over NOAA's own Weather Radio all of the above
information.
Operation Weather Survival was created in l981 to address the needs of the community
during extreme weather conditions. It is comprised of public and private organizations
working together to prevent illness or death from extreme heat, cold conditions and
ground level ozone. The phone number is 1-800-427-4626
OWS OWS OWS Summer Summer Outreach Outreach Programs that work to prevent HEAT-related illness through OWS
are:
• Health Departments: Preventive education, temperature monitoring, alerts,
warnings, and data collection
• OWS Air-Conditioner Program: Provides air conditioners to individuals who are
medically at risk. Air conditioners are purchased with funds primarily donated by
AmerenUE.
• Cooling Sites: Cooling sites are open year-round. During severe heat, hours and
services are extended.
• TelAssure Telephone Reassurance Services: Complimentary service at-risk individuals
during weather emergency Agency referrals needed. TelAssure Telephone

126
Jefferson County – Section 2
Reassurance Services Utility Assistance: Assistance is provided through OWN
member agencies to prevent electrical disconnection for individuals and families atrisk.
Map Map of of Hazards
Hazards
Figure J45 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix) depicts the potential heat wave
areas in the county. In addition, Figure J50 below depicts the Heat Wave Hazard Impact
areas in the St. Louis Metropolitan area during the heat wave from 1980.
FIGURE FIGURE J50 J50 1980 1980 MIDWEST MIDWEST HEAT HEAT WAVE
WAVE
Source: National Climatic Data Center

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 127
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Future Future Future Severity
Severity
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States. Frequency,
intensity, and duration of heat waves, however, vary drastically from year to year.
The levels of severity, by Heat Index apparent temperature are found below.
• Extreme Danger (heat stroke or sunstroke highly likely at 130 degrees F or
higher).
• Danger (sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or heat exhaustion likely at 105 degrees F
to 129 degrees F).
• Extreme Caution (sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or heat exhaustion possible at
90 degrees F to 104 degrees F)
• Caution (fatigue possible at less than 90 degrees F).
The future probably severity for Jefferson County is shown below according to the Heat
Index levels of severity.
Heat Index Probable Severity
Heat Index of 130°F or higher Catastrophic
Heat Index of 105°F to 129°F Critical
Heat Index of 90°F to 104°F Limited
Heat Index of less than 90°F Negligible
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk/Likeliness Risk/Likeliness of of Future Future Occurrence
Occurrence
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States. Frequency,
intensity, and duration of heat waves, however, vary drastically from year to year.
Based in information from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and
FEMA there have been at least fifteen heat wave related events from 1901 to 1980 and 43
periods of heat wave related events from 1994 to 2003. In the St. Louis metropolitan area,
days with temperatures of 90 degrees or greater generally occur from June through August
based on Table J48 above. The future probable risk for Jefferson County is shown below
according to the Heat Index levels of severity.
Heat Index Probable Risk
Heat Index of 130°F or higher Unlikely
Heat Index of 105°F to 129°F Possible
Heat Index of 90°F to 104°F Likely
Heat Index of less than 90°F Highly Likely
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on Co Community Co mmunity
The next heat wave will possibly have a detrimental impact on the community in terms of
agricultural, economic (social) and environmental based upon the past historic heat wave
occurrences. The adverse impacts of future heat waves affecting Jefferson County is shown
below.

128
Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Catastrophic
Property Limited
Emotional Catastrophic
Financial Limited
Comments Based on worst case scenario
Jefferson County – Section 2
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Limited
Property Negligible
Emotional Limited
Financial Negligible
Comments Jefferson County has been proactive in protecting those
At-risk residents by organizing OWS.
Recommendation
Recommendation
Recommendation
Educate those people who work outdoors of the dangers of extended exposure to a
combination of high temperatures and high humidities. The people to be educated are
those at risk including:
• "Homeless" living outside
• Poor, elderly, chronically ill persons living alone
• Individuals working outside in extreme heat
Dam Dam Failure Failure Hazard Hazard Profile
Profile
The purpose of a dam is to impound (store) water, wastewater or liquid borne materials for
any of several reasons, including flood control, human water supply, irrigation, livestock
water supply, energy generation, containment of mine tailings, and recreation or pollution
control. Many dams fulfill a combination of the above functions.
Manmade dams may be classified according to the type of construction material used, the
methods used in construction, the slope or cross-section of the dam, the way the dam
resists the forces of the water pressure behind it, the means used for controlling seepage
and, occasionally, according to the purpose of the dam. The materials used for
construction of dams include earth, rock, tailings from mining or milling, concrete,
masonry, steel, timber, miscellaneous materials (such as plastic or rubber) and any
combination of these materials. Dams can be owned and operated by individuals, private
and public organizations and the government. Associated works include spillways, water
supply facilities, and lake drain structures. Most dams have an earth embankment and one
or two spillways.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 129
Embankment dams are the most common type of dam in use today. In Missouri 99
percent of all dams in Missouri are made of earthen materials, the remaining are
constructed of concrete. Materials used for embankment dams include natural soil or rock,
or waste materials obtained from mining or milling operations. An embankment dam is
termed an “earthfill” or “rockfill” dam depending on whether it is comprised of compacted
earth or mostly compacted or dumped rock. The ability of an embankment dam to resist
the reservoir water pressure is primarily a result of the mass weight, type and strength of
the materials from which the dam is made.
Concrete dams may be categorized into gravity and arch dams according to the designs
used to resist the stress due to reservoir water pressure. Typical concrete gravity dams are
the most common form of concrete dam. Because the purpose of a dam is to retain water
effectively and safely, the water retention ability of a dam is of prime importance. Water
may pass from the reservoir to the downstream side of a dam by:
• Passing through the main spillway or outlet works
• Passing over an auxiliary spillway
• Overtopping the dam
• Seepage through the abutments
• Seepage under the dam
Overtopping of an embankment dam is very undesirable because the embankment
materials may be eroded away. Additionally, only a small number of concrete dams have
been designed to be overtopped. Water normally passes through the main spillway or
outlet works; it should pass over an auxiliary spillway only during periods of high reservoir
levels and high water inflow. All embankment and most concrete dams have some
seepage. However, it is important to control the seepage to prevent internal erosion and
instability. Proper dam construction, and maintenance and monitoring of seepage provide
this control.
Description
Description
Thousands of people have been injured, many killed and billions of dollars of property
damaged by dam failures in the United States, including the catastrophic dam failure
upstream from Johnstown, Pennsylvania that killed 2,209 people in May 31, 1889 as a
result of a poor and inappropriate maintenance of a poorly constructed dam. The problem
of unsafe dams in Missouri was underscored by dam failures at Lawrenceton in 1968 (just
south of Jefferson County), Washington County in 1975 and a near failure in Franklin
County in 1978.
Safety is of paramount importance to the effectiveness of a dam. Dam failures can be
devastating for the dam owners, to the dam’s intended purpose and, especially, for
downstream populations and property. Property damage can range in the thousands to
billions of dollars. No price can be put on the lives that have been lost and could be lost in

130
Jefferson County – Section 2
the future due to dam failure. Inundation from a dam failure could affect several states and
large populations.
Although the majority of dams in the U.S. have responsible owners and are properly
maintained, still many dams fail every year. In the past several years, there have been
hundreds of documented failures across the nation (this includes 250 after the Georgia
Flood of 1994). Dam and downstream repair costs resulting from failures in 23 states
reporting in one recent year totaled $54.3 million.
Early in the twentieth century, as many dams failed due to lack of proper engineering and
maintenance, it was recognized that some form of regulation was needed. One of the
earliest state programs was enacted in California in the 1920s. Federal agencies, such as
the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation built many
dams during the early part of the twentieth century and established safety standards
during this time. Slowly, other states began regulatory programs. But it was not until the
string of significant dam failures in the 1970s that awareness was raised to a new level
among the states and the federal government.
In Missouri, the first state legislation aimed at regulating dams was passed in 1889 and
was called the Dam Mills and Electric Power Law. The law was concerned only with
damaged caused by construction and lake formation. It did not address the engineering
aspects of design or downstream safety of dams.
In 1972, Congress passed the National Dam Safety Act (P.L. 92-367) that called for an
inventory of dams in the U.S. and one time inspection of dams that would result in loss of
life from a failure. In 1986, Congress enacted the Water Resources Development Act (P.L.
99-662). Title XII-Dam Safety authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to
maintain and periodically update the inventory of dams. In 1988 funds were appropriated
for this effort. FEMA and USACE developed a Memorandum of Agreement where FEMA
assumed responsibility for maintaining and updating the inventory using the funds
authorized. The Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-303) Section 215 reauthorized
periodic update of the National Inventory of Dams (NID) by USACE and
continued a funding mechanism. For the 1998 update, the USACE resumed the lead
responsibility and worked with FEMA and other agencies. There are about 77,000 dams in
the inventory.
The 1996 Act does not apply to any such artificial barrier which is not in excess of six feet
in height, regardless of storage capacity, or which has a storage capacity at a maximum
water storage elevation not in excess of fifteen acre-feet, regardless of height (P.L. 92-367;
Dam Safety Act of 1972) unless such barrier, due to its location or other physical
characteristic, is likely to pose a significant threat to human life or property in the event of
its failure.” (P.L. 99-662, Water Resources Development Act of 1986).

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 131
Criteria for dams in the NID are as follows:
• All high hazard potential classification dams
• All significant hazard potential classification dams
• Low hazard or undetermined potential classification dams which
• Equal or exceed 25 feet in height and which exceed 15 acre-feet in storage
• Equal or exceed 50 acre-feet storage and exceed 6 feet in height.
The NID has definitions for downstream hazard potential. These definitions are different
from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey and Resource
Assessment, Dam and Reservoir Safety Program. The NID definitions, as accepted by the
Interagency Committee on Dam Safety are as follows:
1. Low Hazard Potential
Dams assigned the low hazard potential classification are those where
failure or disoperation results in no probable loss of human life and low
economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to
the owner’s property.
2. Significant Hazard Potential
Dams assigned the significant hazard potential classification are those
dams where failure or disoperation results in no probable loss of human
life but can cause economic loss, environmental change, disruption of
lifeline facilities, or impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential
classification dams are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural
areas but could be located in areas with population and significant
infrastructure.
3. High Hazard Potential
Dams assigned the high hazard potential classification are those where
failure or disoperation will probably cause loss of human life.
In September 1979, the first state legislation was passed, the Missouri House Bill 603
(called the Dam Safety Law) and became effective in September 1979. As a result of the
USACE inspection program in Missouri led the country in total number of unsafe dams.
House Bill 603 (now contained in Sections 236.400 through 236.500 of the revised statues
of Missouri) excluded regulation-dams less than 35 feet high, and allowed exemptions for
others used for agricultural purposes and those regulated by other state or federal
agencies. The law requires that a construction permit application be made to construct
new dams or modify, remove or alter existing dams. Owners of existing dams 35 feet or
more in height must obtain a registration permit and owners of new dams 35 feet or more
in height must obtain a safety permit after construction to operate the structures. All

132
Jefferson County – Section 2
regulated dams must be inspected periodically to assure that their continued operation
does not constitute a hazard to public safety, life and property. The Missouri Department
of Natural Resources, Geological Survey and Resource Assessment, Dam and Reservoir
Safety Program inspects the dams. The Dam and Reservoir Safety Program operates under
the general guidance of the Dam and Reservoir Safety Council. The Council is responsible
for the development of the rules and regulations and the determination of enforcement
procedures to make the law operative. The Governor appoints all seven council members.
There are around 4,000 dams in Missouri of which approximately 600 are regulated under
the Missouri law.
The Missouri Dam and Reservoir Safety Program is responsible for ensuring that all new
and existing non-agricultural, non-federal dams 35 feet or more in height meet minimum
safety standards. The program reviews engineering plans and specifications; conducts
hydrologic, hydraulic and structural analysis of dams; monitors construction of new dams
and modification of existing dams; performs safety inspections of existing dams; responds
to dam safety emergencies so that public safety, life and property are protected. The
program also prepares inundation mapping, which is provided to recorder of deeds for
each county showing areas impacted by dam failure.
Dam owners are solely responsible for the safety and the liability of the dam and for
financing its upkeep, upgrade and repair. While most infrastructure facilities (roads,
bridges, sewer systems, etc.) are owned by public entities, the majority of dams in the
United States are privately owned. Many different types of people and entities own and
operate dams. About 58 percent are privately owned. Local governments own and
operate the next largest number of dams, about 16 percent. State ownership is next with
about four percent; the federal government, public utilities and undetermined interests
each own smaller numbers of dams (5 percent).
Contact:
Chief Engineer
MO Department of Natural Resources
Dam and Reservoir Safety Program
PO Box 250
Rolla, MO 65402-0250
Phone: 573/368-2175
Fax: 573/368-2111
Web: http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/geology/damsft/damsfthp.htm
2003 Statistics:
Number of Missouri state-regulated dams: 638
Number of Missouri dams in National Inventory of Dams: 4,096

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 133
Charact Characteristics
Charact eristics
The characteristics of a dam failure, based on the International Commission of Large Dams
(ICOLD) include following the three major categories of dam failure: (1) overtopping by
flood; (2) foundation defects; and (3) piping. For earthen dams, the major reason for
failure is piping or seepage. For concrete dams, the major reasons for failure are associated
with foundations. Overtopping has been a significant cause of dam failure primarily in
cases where there was an inadequate spillway. Dam failures are most likely to happen for
one of five reasons:
• Overtopping caused by water spilling over the top of a dam
• Structural failure of materials used in dam construction
• Cracking caused by movements like the natural settling of a dam
• Inadequate maintenance and upkeep
• Piping—when seepage through a dam is not properly filtered and soil particles
continue to progress and form sink holes in the dam
Likely Likely Locations
Locations
The National Inventory of Dams, the State of Missouri, and FEMA have summarized the
status of dams in Missouri by hazard classification. Refer to Figure JF51 (located in the
back of the Technical Appendix) that shows the location of the high hazard dams in
Jefferson County, based on MDNR’s inventory. High hazard potential is defined as dams
that are more than 30 years old, have a high ratio of maximum storage to dam height
and/or high population density downstream. Table J47 identifies the national and state
inventory of dams. Table J48 lists Jefferson County high hazard potential dams.
TAB TABLE TAB LE J47 SUMMARY SUMMARY STATUS OF MISSOURI DAMS BY HAZARD
CLASSIFICATION
CLASSIFICATION
NATIONAL NATIONAL INVENTORY INVENTORY
STATE STATE REGULATED
REGULATED
Hazard Hazard Classification Classification
Hazard Hazard Classification
Classification
Total Total High High High Significant Significant Low Low Total Total High High High Significant Significant Significant Low Low
4095 607 912 2576 630 440 127 63
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
TABLE TABLE J48 J48 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HIGH HIGH HAZARD HAZARD DAMS DAMS
DAMS
DAM DAM NAME NAME RECEIVING RECEIVING RIVER RIVER BUILT BUILT LENGTH
LENGTH
DAM
DAM
HEIGHT HEIGHT HEIGHT VOLUME
VOLUME
STATE
STATE
REGULATED
REGULATED
Fondulac Dam Tr- Saline Creek 1954 0 28 296 N
Glen Rose Lake Dam Tr to Rock Creek 1962 0 30 46 N
Steeger Lake Dam Trib-Sugar Creek 1976 0 33 58 N
Lake Kearney Dam Tr to Sugar Creek 1800 0 25 16 N

134
TABLE TABLE J48 J48 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HIGH HIGH HAZARD HAZARD DAMS
DAMS
Jefferson County – Section 2
DAM
DAM
STATE
STATE
DAM DAM NAME NAME RECEIVING RECEIVING RIVER RIVER
Tributary to Belew
BUILT BUILT LENGTH
LENGTH HEIGHT HEIGHT HEIGHT VOLUME
VOLUME REGULATED
REGULATED
REGULATED
Lake Tishomingo Dam Creek
Lake Wauwanoka
1950 870 68 2376 Y
Dam Dry Creek 1942 1045 50 2370 Y
Lake Montowese Dam Tr Big River 1942 1000 54 606 Y
Lembeck Lake Dam
Upper Valle Mines
Whitehead Creek 1958 0 26 117 N
Dam Tr To Joachim Creek 1958 0 34 142 N
Williams Dam Tr-Joachim Creek 1965 0 26 93 N
Lake Briarwood Dam Ball Branch 1970 1400 57 1398 Y
Spring Lake Dam
Hickory Hills Golf Club
Tr Ball Branch 1970 0 20 33 N
Dam Tr Joachim Creek
West Fork Plattin
1965 0 25 19 N
Laguna Palma Dam Creek 1947 530 26 98 N
Kinnippi Lake Dam Tr to Dry Creek
Tributary to Butcher
1960 0 27 64 N
Anderson Lake Dam Branch. 1958 0 26 57 N
Lake Adelle Dam
Conservation Club
Tr-Skullbones Creek 1950 0 29 73 N
Lake Dam Tr. to Mississippi River 1951 0 30 135 N
River Cement Tributary to
Company Dam Mississippi Riv. 1965 605 57 300 Y
Dehner Lake Dam Tr to Sandy Creek 1958 0 29 27 N
Hideout Lake Dam Tr to Sandy Creek 1945 0 33 69 N
Lake Virginia Dam Tr Joachim Creek 1954 0 25 176 N
Leonard,Glen Dam Tr-Heads Creek 1956 0 29 75 N
Lake Ararat Dam Heads Creek
Tributary of Sandy
1960 0 34 248 N
Lake Lorraine Dam Creek 1957 1100 46 400 Y
Lake Bono Del Dam Tr to Belew Creek
Tributary to Belew
1954 0 27 35 N
Becker Lake Dam
Sweetwater Dam -
Creek 1965 0 28 80 N
Noname 251 Tr-Dulin Creek 1960 0 29 74 N
Clear Lake Dam
Lower Valle Mines
Tr to Joachim Creek 1961 0 34 144 N
Dam Tr to Joachim Creek 1952 0 22 54 N
Liguori Lake Dam - Tributary to Glaize
Nonane 255 Creek
Tributary to Rock
1950 0 25 28 N
Autumn Lake Dam Creek 1962 0 32 81 N
Pine Lake Dam
Weber Hill Terrace
Tr-Rock Creek 1961 0 33 77 N
Lake Dam Tr-Bear Creek 1957 519 36 117 Y
Land Of Lakes Dam Tr-Bear Creek 1946 0 30 26 N

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 135
TABLE TABLE J48 J48 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HIGH HIGH HAZARD HAZARD DAMS
DAMS
DAM
DAM
STATE
STATE
DAM DAM NAME NAME RECEIVING RECEIVING RIVER RIVER BUILT BUILT LENGTH
LENGTH HEIGHT HEIGHT HEIGHT VOLUME
VOLUME REGULATED
REGULATED
REGULATED
Tamarack Dam Tr-Sand Creek 1964 0 29 141 N
Little Lake Dam Tr to Joachim Creek 1961 0 32 24 N
Sunrise Big Lake Dam Tr to Joachim Creek 1961 480 38 97 Y
Summer Set Lake Dam Falling Rock Branch
Deerwood Lake No.3
1974 1200 59 1336 Y
Dam
Bequette Dam -
Trib-Isom Creek 1960 0 25 30 N
Noname 262 Tr-Isum Creek
Tributary to La Barque
1967 0 31 31 N
Glenwilfern Lake Dam Creek 1953 540 38 93 Y
Cedar Hill Lake No. 3 Tributary to
Dam
Skullbones Creek 1949 0 28 60 N
Fisherman's Lake Dam Tr Ball Branch 1970 0 34 167 N
Dresser No. 10 Dam Tr Big River 1974 765 100 1118 Y
Atwood Lake Dam
Sunrise Lake Upper
Tr to Sandy Creek 1969 0 27 43 N
Dam
Winter Haven Lake
Tr to Joachim Creek 1961 360 37 175 Y
Dam Falling Rock Branch 1978 730 49 224 Y
Spring Lake Dam Tr-Falling Rock Branch 1976 600 42 133 Y
Siesta Lake Dam Tr to Fritz Creek 1957 0 30 58 N
Gwenmil Lake Dam Tr to Isum Creek 1957 0 29 23 N
Francois Lake Dam Tr to Mississippi River 1979 470 38 19 Y
Highway 21 Lake Dam Trib-Heads Creek 1940 0 28 47 N
Dresser No. 11 Tr to Big River 1975 500 90 50 Y
Silver Lake Dam Ditch Creek 1981 1600 80 0 Y
Raintree Dam #2 Belew Creek Tributary 1989 1000 55 988 Y
Stonehenge #1 Dam Trib to Sugar Creek
Brian Haskins Lake
1990 360 41 13 Y
Dam
Ralph McNail Lake
1990 0 22 0 N
Dam 1988 0 24 0 N
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Information on the extent of inundation resulting from dam failure is not available at this
time. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), Dam and Reservoir Safety
Program, has begun an effort to map and analyze potential inundation areas for all stateregulated
dams in Missouri. This effort will be done on an county-by-county basis. An
inundation map is to be part of the Emergency Action Plan prepared by all dam owners. In
2010, MNDR will work with dam owners to understand their responsibilities and to
develop Emergency Action Plans. It is anticipated that inundation information should be
available for the next update.
For more information go to: http://www.damsafetyaction.org/about-eaps/mapping.php .

136
Type Type Type of of Damage
Damage
Jefferson County – Section 2
When dams fail, the results can be catastrophic. Dams are innately hazardous structures.
Failure or disoperation can result in the release of the reservoir contents--this includes
water, mine wastes or agricultural refuse--causing negative impacts upstream or
downstream or at locations remote from the dam. Negative impacts of primary concern
are loss of human life, economic loss including property damage, lifeline disruption and
environmental damage.
While the definition varies from place to place, it generally means if failure of a high-hazard
dam occurs, there probably will be loss of life. I t must be emphasized that this
determination does not mean that these dams are in need of repair--these dams could be
in excellent condition or they could be in poor condition. "High-hazard" just reflects the
dam's potential for doing damage downstream should it fail. The current issue and debate
is over the increasing number of these high-hazard structures--not because more highhazard
dams are being built, but that more development is occurring downstream. Dam
and reservoir safety regulators generally have no control over local zoning issues or
developers' property rights.
Some dams are considered to have a greater hazard potential than others. There are
approximately 10,000 state-regulated "high-hazard" potential dams in the U.S. "Highhazard"
is a term used by a majority of state dam safety programs and federal agencies as
part of a three-pronged classification system used to determine how hazardous a dam's
failure might be to the downstream area. Historically, dams that failed had some
deficiency, as characterized above, which caused the failure. These dams are typically
termed "unsafe." Currently, there are about 2,000 "unsafe" dams in the U.S. There are
unsafe dams in almost every state. (A majority of states and federal agencies define an
"unsafe" dam as one that has been found to have deficiencies that leave it more susceptible
to failure.)
Hazard Hazard Event Event History
History
Thousands of people have been injured, many killed, and billions of dollars of property
damaged by dam failures in the United States. Dam failures at Lawrenceton in 1968,
Washington County in 1975, Fredericktown in 1977, and a near failure in Franklin County
underscored the problem of unsafe dams in Missouri in 1978.
Frequency Frequency of of Occurrence
Occurrence
Table F49 below summarized the frequency of dam failures in Missouri. Four dams failed
in ten years.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 137
Intensity Intensity Intensity or or or Strength Strength
Strength
TABLE TABLE J49 J49 RECENT RECENT DAM DAM FAILURES FAILURES IN IN MISSOURI
MISSOURI
Community Community
Date
Lawrenceton 1968
Washington County 1975
Frederickton 1977
Franklin County (near failure) 1978
The intensity or strength of resultant damages from dam failures is dependent upon the
amount of water stored behind the dam as well as the weather. A large rain event can
exacerbate an already critical emergency situation. Damage from dam failures can be
catastrophic.
Lives Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Injuries, Property Property Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses
Losses
The cost of a dam failure is difficult to assess because flooding can affect large areas. Local
communities may be directly impacted due to building damage, injuries fatalities, lost
water supply, damaged transportation and infrastructure and lost recreational assets. The
extent of an owner’s liability will vary from state to state depending on the statutes and
case law precedents. The concept of strict liability imposes liability on a dam owner for
damages that occur regardless of the cause of failure. The alternative theory of negligence
considers the degree of care employed by the owner in constructing, operating and
maintaining a dam. Historically, courts have sought to compensate those injured by a dam
failure. When assessing liability, the standard of care exercised by an owner will be closely
examined and should be in proportion to the downstream hazards involved. Where the
risk is great, owners must be cautious. In many cases, dams regulated by the federal
government or a state dam safety program must be designed to withstand an
unprecedented flood or earthquake. Thousands of people have been injured, many killed,
and billions of dollars of property damaged by dam failures in the United States.
1972-Buffalo Creek Dam, West Virginia-125 dead, $400 million in damages.
1976-Teton Dam, Idaho-14 dead, over $1 billion in damages
1977-Laurel Run Dam, Pennsylvania-40 dead, $5.3 million in damages
1977-Kelly Barnes Dam, Georgia-39 dead, $30 million in damages
1982-Lawn Lake Dam, Colorado-3 dead, $25 million in damages
1988-Quail Creek Dam, Utah-$12 million in damages
The failures of Teton Dam and the Kelly Barnes Dam focused national attention to the
problem of unsafe dams. Dam failures, however, continue to occur with destructive and
sometimes fatal results.

138
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
Jefferson County – Section 2
Locations affected by dam failure will be low-lying areas that are below dams, near a creek,
stream or river valley. Residents, businesses and infrastructure in the path of the dam
waters can become quickly inundated and destroyed.
Seasonal Seasonal Pattern Pattern
Pattern
There is no seasonal pattern to dam failure. However, various climatic conditions and other
situations may result in dam failure including such elements of risk as natural phenomena
such as floods and landslides during wet weather seasons. These hazards threaten dam
structures and their surroundings. Floods that exceed the capacity of a dam's spillway and
then erode the dam or abutments are particularly hazardous, as is seismic activity that may
cause cracking or seepage. Similarly, debris from landslides may block a dam's spillway and
cause an overflow wave that erodes the abutments and ultimately weakens the structure.
Speed Speed of of Onset Onset Onset And/Or And/Or And/Or Existi Existing Existi Existing
ng Warning Systems
A few large Missouri dams have monitoring systems, emergency action plans and warning
systems. However, most dams in Missouri do not.
Map Map of of Hazards Hazards
Hazards
Refer to Figure J51in the back of the Technical Appendix that depicts the regulated dams in
the EWG planning region.
Information on the extent of inundation resulting from dam failure is not available at this
time. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), Dam and Reservoir Safety
Program, has begun an effort to map and analyze potential inundation areas for all stateregulated
dams in Missouri. This effort will be done on an county-by-county basis. An
inundation map is to be part of the Emergency Action Plan prepared by all dam owners. In
2010, MNDR will work with dam owners to understand their responsibilities and to
develop Emergency Action Plans. It is anticipated that inundation information should be
available for the next update.
For more information go to: http://www.damsafetyaction.org/about-eaps/mapping.php .
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Probable Future Future Severity
Severity
Missouri Geological Survey and Resource Assessment Division has defined three levels of
hazard potential: high, significant and low hazard, as accepted by the Interagency
Committee on Dam Safety.
High: Failure or disoperation will probably cause loss of human life

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 139
Significant: Failure or disoperation results in no probable loss of human life, but can
cause economic loss, environmental damage, disruption of lifeline facilities,
or impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential classification dams
are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas but could be
located in areas with population and significant infrastructure.
Low: Failure or disoperation results in no probably loss of human life and low
economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to the
owner’s property.
According to MDNR’s Dam and Reservoir Safety Program, Jefferson County has 145 dams.
The mean dam height is 36 feet with the mean storage capacity of 247 acre-feet. Many
are less than 35 feet high and are not regulated by MDNR. People living in low-lying areas
downstream of the smaller unregulated dams, depending upon the safety of the dams may
be at risk if these dams should fail. Of the dams in Jefferson County, 60 are rated by
MDNR as “high risk”. Only nineteen are regulated by MDNR. The oldest dam on this list
was built in 1800, the most recent one was built in 1990.
The probably future severity of a dam failure for Jefferson County is below.
Hazard Hazard Level Level Level Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity
High Catastrophic
Significant Critical
Low Negligible
Statement Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk/Likeli Risk/Likeliness Risk/Likeli Risk/Likeli ness Of Of Future Occurrence
According to the Dam and Reservoir Safety Program within MDNR, the likeliness of a future
occurrence of dam failure is very likely, due to the conditions of dams in Missouri. While
the definition varies from place to place, it generally means if failure of a high-hazard dam
occurs, there probably will be loss of life. It must be emphasized that this determination
does not mean that these dams are in need of repair--these dams could be in excellent
condition or they could be in poor condition. "High-hazard" just reflects the dam's potential
for doing damage downstream should it fail.
High-hazard potential dams exist in every state and affect the lives of thousands
downstream. The current issue and debate is over the increasing number of these highhazard
structures--not because more high-hazard dams are being built, but that more
development is occurring downstream. Dam and reservoir safety regulators generally have
no control over local zoning issues or developers' property rights. So this issue continues to
worry regulators as the trend persists.
Hazard azard azard Level Level Level Probable Risk Risk
High Likely
Significant Likely

140
Low Likely
Statement Statement Of Of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact On On Community
Community
Jefferson County – Section 2
The impact on the downstream community, dependent upon what is downstream could
be very serious. The adverse impacts of future dam failures affecting Jefferson County at
the high hazard level are shown below. Intersecting almost all the issues above is the issue
of public education about dams. The ordinary citizen is unaware that the lakes on which
they use are only there because of manmade dams. Developers build in dam break flood
inundation areas unaware of the potential that an upstream dam has, to cause devastation
should it fail. Even if everyone understands and are aware of dams, they still can be overly
confident in the infallibility of these manmade structures. Living in dam break flood-prone
areas is a risk. Many dam owners do not realize their responsibility and liability toward the
downstream public and environment.
Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Catastrophic
Property Catastrophic
Emotional Catastrophic
Financial Catastrophic
Comments None
With With Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Negligible
Property Negligible
Emotional Negligible
Financial Negligible
Comments None
Recommendation
Recommendation
Implementation of dam safety actions with dam owners and jurisdictions downstream.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 141
Wildland Wildland Fires Fires Hazard Hazard Profile
Profile
Description Description
Description
The term wildfire is defined as "a highly destructive, uncontrollable fire." During a wildfire,
the fire produces the same amount of energy in 10 minutes as a nuclear bomb.
FIGURE FIGURE J52
J52
Fires that burn forest plants can be classified in three ways: ground
fires, surface fires, and crown fires. Ground fires burn the humus
layer of the forest floor, surface fires burn forest undergrowth and
surface litter, and crown fires advance through the tops of trees.
Atmospheric factors such as temperature, humidity, and rainfall
are important factors in determining the combustibility of a given
forest. See Figure J52.
Humans, either through negligence, accident, or intentional arson,
have caused approximately 90 percent of all wildfires in the last
decade in the U.S. Accidental and negligent acts include
unattended campfires, sparks, burning debris, and irresponsibly
discarded cigarettes. Refer to Table 52 below. The remaining 10
percent of fires are mostly caused by lightning, but may also be
caused by other acts-of-nature such as volcanic eruptions or
earthquakes.
During March and April 2000 Missouri sustained devastating fire damage to thousands of
acres resulting from wildland fires. Warm temperatures and low humidity increased the
occurrence and fueled the flames scorching many areas of the state. In an attempt to raise
the public’s awareness of the hazardous situations, the Governor and the State Fire
Marshal issued a statewide voluntary burn ban, urging citizens to refrain from conducting
any open burning. In addition, the Missouri Department of Conservation and U.S. Forestry
Service issued burn bans throughout state and federally owned land.
TABLE TABLE J50 J50 J50 RREASONS
R EASONS FOR FIRES IN MISSOURI
Lightning Lightning
>1%
Camping Camping
1%
Smoking Smoking
4%
Debris Debris Burning Burning
58%
Arson Arson
20%
Equipment Equipment Use Use
3%
Railroads Railroads
1%
Children Children
1%
Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Causes Causes
12%

142
Jefferson County – Section 2
The Missouri Division of Fire Safety has urged that fire service agencies and local
governments begin planning for this situation by adopting a local ordinance to prohibit
open burning during a high fire hazard time period. Missouri statutes do not allow the
state to issue a MANDATORY burn ban at the state level.
One responsibility of the Forestry Division is protecting state and private land from the
destructive effects of wildfires. The Forestry Division works closely with rural fire
departments to assist with fire suppression activities. Nearly 900 rural fire departments
have mutual aide agreements with the division. Forestry personnel provide training,
equipment and grants to rural fire departments to help them become a more effective firefighting
team.
Statutory authority is given to fire protection districts via RSMo 321.220 (12) to "adopt and
amend bylaws, fire protection and fire prevention ordinances, …". However, coordination
with the county prosecuting attorney’s office is strongly recommended before
implementing such an ordinance to ensure enforcement ability. Voluntary fire service
associations should also coordinate similar efforts at the local level to adopt open burning
laws.
Not only is the land affected, but also personnel throughout many fire service agencies are
pushed to their limit battling these types of fires. These situations place Missouri citizens
and responding fire fighters at risk.
Fire danger is based upon the burning index (BI). The burning index takes into account the
fuel moisture, relative humidity, wind speed, temperature and recent precipitation. The
burning index is the basis for fire suppression crew staffing levels. The vegetative types and
fuel types are different than in the western U.S. As compared to the western U.S., with the
humid climate of the Midwest, fuel decomposes much faster. As a result of this, the
wildfires in Missouri are rare and are nearly not as severe as the fires that the western states
experiences.
Characteristics
Characteristics
Fires in the counties of Franklin, Jefferson, St. Louis City, St. Louis and St. Charles Counties
are different than those in the West as described above; Missouri does not have large
conflagrations and crown fires, where embers from the fire are thrown a long way from
the fire that results in fire ignition of other dry areas. Damage may result in the burning of
outbuildings, possibly a home and nearby grassy areas. Missouri fires consist of grassy
areas, leaves, ground letter, plants, shrubs, and trees. . However, as new housing
development in forested rural areas, the likelihood of fires will increase, especially in
Jefferson County.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 143
Likely Likely Locations
Locations
Fires typically occur in highway medians and shoulders, near homes and outbuildings.
People who live at the edge of the woods and vegetative debris, especially in Jefferson
County are at a higher risk of having a fire affect their homes and property.
Type Type of of Damage
Damage
Damage may result in the burning of outbuildings, maybe a home. Missouri does not have
large crown fires like the West has, where embers from the fire are thrown a long way
results in fire ignition of other dry areas. Missouri Department of Conservation and Public
Safety recommend that homes in these types of areas should not be built with cedar shake
shingles. Typically homes catch on fire when dry brush, bushes and trees are very close to
the house.
Hazard Hazard Event Event History History
History
In accordance with Missouri Statute 254.230 and 321.220(12), the state is currently
setting up a central fire reporting system. In the past, it was the responsibility of volunteer,
local and district fire departments are supposed to report wildland fires to the state.
However, this is rarely done. MDC is preparing an online central reporting system that will
keep track of fires. As a result, an historical summary of fires was impossible due to the
way in which MDC currently has their records stored.
No Missouri fires are listed among the significant wildfires in the U.S. since 1825. Fires
covering more than 300 acres are considered large in Missouri. Based on limited MDC
data, it was reported that during March and April 2000 all of Missouri sustained
devastating fire damage to thousands of acres resulting from wildland fires. Each year,
about 3,700 wildfires burn more than 55,000 acres of forest and grassland. Missouri's
wildfire season is in the spring and fall, unlike the Western states that have a summer fire
season. Dead vegetation, combined with the low humidities and high winds typical of
these seasons, makes wildfire risk greater at these times.
According to the MDC-Forestry Office, in the past twenty years, there have been only about
five fires in the State of Missouri that MDC has been involved with in the St. Louis
Metropolitan area. For the most part the rural fire departments fight their own fires.
Some areas of land are not covered even by volunteer fire departments. In this event, the
MDC will cover fires in these areas. Missouri has very few fires that occur as a result from
lightening. Most fires result from arson, campers and from residents that burn trash.

144
Frequency Frequency Of Of Occurrence
Occurrence
Jefferson County – Section 2
Due to the timing factor and the stage of the MDC database development, frequency of
occurrences was not obtained. Generally, occurrences of fires are based on the weather,
humidity and available fuel.
Intensity Intensity Or Or Strength
Strength
Fires that due occur are neither intense nor strong as a result of the weather and fuel
conditions found in Missouri, as compared to the fires in the West.
Lives Lives Lives Lost, Lost, Lost, Injuries, Injuries, Injuries, Property Property Property Damage, Damage, Damage, Economic Economic Economic Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses/Other Losses Losses
Losses
Due to the timing factor and the stage of the MDC database development, specific
information on lives lost, injuries, property damage and economic losses was not obtained.
Locations/Areas Locations/Areas Affected
Affected
Fires typically occur in highway medians and shoulders, near homes and outbuildings.
People who live at the edge of the woods and vegetative debris, especially in Jefferson
County are at a higher risk of having a fire affect their homes and property.
Seasonal Seasonal Pattern
Pattern
The season for wildfires in Missouri is between the end of February and the end of April, or
whenever the environment is dry from lack of rain. Due to the lack of moisture throughout
many areas Missouri, from late winter (February) through spring (May) often times the
conditions are favorable for the high risk of wildland fires.
Speed Speed Of Of Onset Onset And And /Or /Or Existing Existing Warning Warning Sy Systems Sy Systems
stems
The Department of Conservation relies upon the news media to help warn citizens of high
fire danger. A set of standardized fire danger adjectives has been developed for fire
warnings. These adjectives include a brief description of burning conditions, open burning
suggestions for homeowners and fire crew staffing levels. Residents should always check
with their local fire department or District Forester for local burning conditions.
Map Map Of Of Of Hazards
Hazards
Refer to Figure J53 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix) for a map that depicts
areas of potential wildfire hazard. These would include those areas of rural homes near
forested areas.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 145
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Future Future Future Severity
Severity
Location Location
Future Probable Severity
Buffer areas Negligible
Forests Negligible
Grassy areas Negligible
Statement Statement Of Of Probable Probable Risk/Likeliness Risk/Likeliness Of Of Future Future Occurrence
Occurrence
There is a somewhat greater likelihood of future occurrences in Jefferson County as a result
of the influx of greater numbers of residents moving into rural areas where the homes are
close to forested areas and vegetative debris. Dry weather, available fuel and fires are
sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States. Frequency, intensity, and
duration of these conditions vary drastically from year to year.
Based upon Jefferson County’s lack of a great number of wildfires, a conflagration similar
to those out West is unlikely, especially in light of the fact that the humidity and fuel
source is not available. Fires will possibly occur, but on a much smaller scale. These will
consist of grass fires along side roads and railroad tracks and fires near homes in rural
areas. The following fire danger index used by MDC will be the criteria by which an
evaluation of probable risk for Jefferson County will be developed.
Level Level
Probable Risk of Occurrence
Low Fire Danger Possible
Moderate Fire Danger Possible
High Fire Danger Unlikely
Extreme Fire Danger Unlikely
Statement Statement Of Of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact On On Community
Community
Missouri Department of Conservation does not believe that Missouri, much less the EWG
planning region as being included in a wildland fire disaster category. It may be a disaster
to an individual, but it is not a disaster to a community. There is a somewhat greater
likelihood of future occurrences in Jefferson County as a result of the influx of greater
numbers of residents moving into rural areas where the homes are close to woods and
vegetative debris.
Without Without Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Negligible
Property Negligible
Emotional Negligible
Financial Negligible

146
With With Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Measures
Life Negligible
Property Negligible
Emotional Negligible
Financial Negligible
Recommendation
Recommendation
Recommendation
Jefferson County – Section 2
Missouri Department of Conservation and Jefferson County Fire Districts to develop an
education outreach program for communities that have a greater chance of future fires.
MDC has an ongoing educational effort in certain at risk areas. This effort includes visiting
schools, local fairs and other events to educate and pass out fire prevention pamphlets in
terms of seasonal or broad fire prevention approach. Establishing local ordinances to
prohibit open burning during hazardous conditions is a proactive approach and will help
reduce the number of wildland fires in the future.
Multi Multi-Jurisdictional Multi Jurisdictional Risk Risk As Assessment As
sessment In In In Jefferson Jefferson County County County and Communities
Jefferson County hazards tend to be either geographically random or regional in nature.
Some areas of the County have experienced affects from some tornadoes and localized
flash flooding. The historic floods along the Mississippi River, especially the 1993 flood,
greatly impacted the County. The County is also susceptible to impacts from earthquakes
due to the proximity to the New Madrid Fault Zone, density of population, condition of the
buildings, and geological environment. The County has experienced only scattered damage
from winter storms, thunderstorms, and drought.
Certain incorporated communities within Jefferson County that exhibit a unique flooding
hazard profile, due to its location on the Mississippi and Meramec River floodplains include
the following jurisdictions:
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Crystal City
DeSoto
Festus
Herculaneum
Kimmswick
Pevely
Scotsdale
Consequences from riverine and flash flooding could be catastrophic in terms of safety of
lives and property. Riverine flooding is considered a primary hazard for the County.
Significant Mississippi River flooding inundated the above communities in July 1947, July
1951, August 1993, and May 1995. Significant Meramec River flooding also inundated

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 147
Byrnes Mill and Arnold in May 1973, December 1982, August 1993, and April 1994.
During the 1993 flood, in Jefferson County, $1,527,199 in public assistance was paid to
claimants as a result of flood damage. In one community, the wastewater treatment plant
was inundated by floodwaters; the community is currently constructing a levee and
floodwall to protect the new infrastructure. Significant flash flooding occurred in the
Meramec, Bourbeuse and Big River basins from an intense rainfall on May 7, 2000. The
flooding resulted in two deaths, extensive damage to structures, roads and bridges and
major economic losses from communities and businesses throughout the area.
Communities including Byrnes Mill and Eureka (St. Louis County) were overwhelmed by the
deluge that consisted of a thunderstorm that delivered up 15 inches of rain in 13 hours. A
Federal Disaster declaration was made (DR-1328); damages and losses incurred totaled
$483,511.22 in individual assistance, $473,000 in small business loans, and $574,002.26
in public assistance. In 2003, flash flooding and a severe tornado resulted in inundation,
one death and property storm damage in DeSoto with an estimated at $1 million dollars in
damage.
Consequences from earthquakes (and cascading hazards) could also be catastrophic in
terms of human lives and property in the event of a larger magnitude earthquake (in the
range of 6.7 to 8.6). The nearby New Madrid Fault Zone has the potential to produce an
earthquake of this magnitude and cause damage similar to the earthquake that struck the
San Francisco Bay region during the World Series. The nearby the Wabash Valley Fault and
the fault zones in the vicinity of Farmington (including Big River Fault and the St. Genevieve
Fault Zone) are also capable of producing lesser magnitude earthquakes. The earthquake
hazard is also considered a primary hazard. Certain regions within the County are more
susceptible to greater damage from earthquakes due to their position within the soil
liquefaction zone, as identified by Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Geological
Survey Resource Assessment Division, Earthquake Hazards Map of the St. Louis Metro Area.
Areas outside of the soil liquefaction zone will most likely be impacted from an earthquake,
but probably to a lesser degree. These incorporated communities within Jefferson County
that exhibit a unique earthquake hazard profile, due to its location on the Mississippi and
Meramec River floodplains include the following jurisdictions:
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Crystal City
DeSoto
Festus
Herculaneum
Kimmswick
Pevely
Scotsdale
Refer to Figure J54 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix), which identifies the
combined hazards for Jefferson County.

148
Jefferson County – Section 2
Vulnerability Assessment Worksheets for Jefferson County are located in the back of the
Technical Appendix. These worksheets represent the loss estimates for each hazard
affecting the county, including the communities listed above.
Loss estimates were calculated using a combination of information found below. Rough
economic estimates were also included.
• The number of buildings was based on the recorded number of buildings from the
assessor’s database.
• Values of buildings represent the market value, rather than the dollar loss likely to
result from a given event. Building damages could range from minimal to total
devastation.
• The number of people was derived from the 2000 U.S. Census, EWG, and Office of
Social and Economic Development (OSEDA) databases.
• Dollar figures were based on county assessor’s data and Saylor Construction Cost
Index data.
• Sources for these worksheets include the Missouri Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Economic Development, Missouri Department of
Conservation, Missouri Office of Economic Data Analysis; county assessor’s data,
Saylor Construction Cost Index, and EWG databases.
• Projected figures were calculated using the above numbers and factoring in
population projection percentages from the community profile.
For purposes of this assessment, “Developed Land” and “Undeveloped Land” categories
EWG used the definition of the National Resources Conservation Service’s National
Resources Inventory, 2001 (NRI).

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 149
WORKSHEETS
WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE WORKSHEETS
WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZAR HAZARD HAZAR D PROFILE WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS
WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY RISK RISK INDEX INDEX WORKSHEETS
WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY WORKSHEETS
WORKSHEETS
Municipality Municipality and and School School District District Risk Risk Analysis/Mitigation Analysis/Mitigation Measure(s)/
Measure(s)/
Benefit Benefit Cost Cost Cost Review Review can can be be found found in in Vo Volume Vo Vo lume 22
2

150
Hazard: Hazard: Dam Dam Failure Failure
Failure
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Jefferson County – Section 2
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.)
A dam failure is defined as structural failure of materials used in dam construction,
inadequate maintenance, overtopping by flood, foundation defects and piping/cracking
caused by movements from settling of dam.
Damage occurs downstream from a failing dam to lives of residents and their property,
businesses, infrastructure. Depending upon volume of water released, damage could be
catastrophic in a limited area.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses, etc.)
Based on the National Dam Inventory maintained by the USCOE, Missouri has 607
dams that are considered a high hazard. Historic dam failures have occurred just
south of the EWGCC region near Lawrenceton in 1968 (Ste. Genevieve County),
Washington County in 1975, in Fredericktown in 1968 (Madison County) and a near
failure in Franklin County in 1978. The EWGCC region has the largest number of
dams in Missouri. No lives have been lost as a result of these dam failures. No data
is available on the number of injuries or economic losses as a result of these failures.
Statement Statement of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Severity
of future dam failures will be catastrophic in the path of the released waters. For
topographically higher areas surrounding the failed dam, negligible impacts will occur.
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely). According to Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Dam
and Reservoir Safety Program, it is likely that future occurrences of dam failures will occur
based on the poor conditions of the existing dams.
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Severity of future dam failures will be catastrophic
in the path of the released waters. For topographically higher areas surrounding the failed
dam, negligible impacts will occur.
Without mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Comments:
Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic
Catastrophic
With mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 151
Comments:
Recommendation: Recommendation: EWGCC Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to initiate mitigation
activity to convince legislators to provide adequate funding to staff the Dam and Reservoir
Safety Program for inspections, permit issuance in order to protect human life and property.

152
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Drought
Drought
Jefferson County – Section 2
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.) Drought is defined as the deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time,
usually a season or more; resulting in extensive damage to crops. Meteorological drought is
the expression of precipitation’s departure from normal over some time period. Agricultural
drought occurs when there isn’t enough soil moisture to meet the needs of a particular
crop at a particular time. Hydrologic drought refers to the deficiencies in surface and
subsurface water supplies; measured as stream flow, lake and groundwater levels.
Socioeconomic drought occurs when physical water shortage starts to affect people.
Drought characteristics include economic, social and environmental. The amount of
damage depends on 1). The length/severity of the drought, 2). Damage can range from very
slight to total.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.) Droughts are classified according to various classifications. The National Drought
Mitigation Center created a drought map that uses the Palmer Index, Crop Moisture Index,
Standardized Precipitation Indices, Percent of Normal Rainflow, Daily Streamflow,
Snowpack, Soil Moisture, Vegetative Index and Fire Danger Classifications. According to
The Missouri Climate Center at UMC, the Drought Monitor map is the drought indicator of
choice and is superior to the Palmer Index. The Palmer Index is good for past droughts.
However, the NDMC drought monitor map is the best tool to use.
The EWGCC planning region is divided into two climate divisions (CD): St. Louis City, St.
Louis, St. Charles, and Franklin counties are within CD #2. Jefferson County is located in
CD #5. According to the Missouri Climate Center, the worst droughts on record to affect
CD#2 occurred in 1901-1902, 1913-14, 1930-31, 1934, 1936, 1940-41, 1953-56, 1963-
64, 1980-81, 1988-89 and 1999-2000. Droughts on record that affected CD#5 occurred
in 1900-09, 1940-49, 1950-59, 1964-66 and 1980. In addition, MDNR divided the state
into three regions, prioritized according to drought susceptibility, slight, moderate and
severe. The EWGCC region is within all three regions. St. Louis city and northern Jefferson
County is in region C (high susceptibility). East half of St. Chalres County and northern
portions (floodplain areas) of St. Louis and Franklin Counties are within Region A (slight
susceptibility). The western half of St. Charles County is included in Region B (moderate
susceptibility).
On average, drought costs the U.S. economy about $7-$9 billion a year according to the
National Drought Mitigation Center. Losses from the drought from 1988 to 1989 are
estimated to have cost $39 billion dollars.
Statement Statement of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-
Catastrophic to limited.
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence-Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)- Likely

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 153
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-Catastrophic to limited
Without Mitigation Measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Comments:
Negligible Limited Limited Limited Limited Critical
With Mitigation Measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Comments
Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited Limit
Limited
Recommendations: Recommendations: That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
initiate a mitigation activity to convince state and local government, and county residents to
help reduce the impacts caused by droughts, by implementing the state drought plan.

154
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Earthquake
Earthquake
Jefferson County – Section 2
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.)
The characteristics of earthquakes include the rolling or shaking of the ground surface,
landslides, liquefaction and amplification. The severity depends on several factors including
soil/slope conditions, closeness to the fault, earthquake magnitude and type of earthquake.
Any person or structure that is present in the land closest to the epicenter will be most
severely affected. Persons or structures farther away from the epicenter will be less severely
affected, dependent upon the geology of the area. The amount of damage depends on 1).
The intensity/strength of the earthquake, 2). The proximity of the earthquake, 3). The
strength/construction of the structure, 4). How well a person is sheltered. Damage can
range from very slight to total.
Histori Historical Histori Histori cal Statistics Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.)
Since 1811 there have been 16 earthquakes affecting the EWGCC ranging in magnitude
from 2.4 to 8.2 on the Richter scale. The earthquakes have caused multiple deaths,
.injuries, and damaged properties in the past. The Center for Earthquake Studies estimated
that from a 7.6 scale earthquake, there will be over 1400 deaths, and $2.5 million dollars in
property damage and $500K in utility damage. This data excludes St. Charles and Franklin
Counties due to unavailability.
Statement Statement of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Catastrophic
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)
Possible
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-Catastrophic
The Center for Earthquake Studies estimated that from a 7.6 scale earthquake, there will be
over 1400 deaths, and $2.5 million dollars in property damage and $500K in utility
damage. This data excludes St. Charles and Franklin Counties due to unavailability.
Without mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Catastrophic Catastrophic CCatastrophic
C atastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic
With mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Limited Limited Limited Limited Critical Critical Limited
Limited

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 155
Recommendation: The County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to initiate a
mitigation activity to convince various government agencies, businesses, county
residents to retrofit buildings/infrastructure, businesses and homes in earthquake
prone areas to help reduce the loss of life caused by earthquakes.

156
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Flood Flood
Flood
Jefferson County – Section 2
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.) A flood is defined as an overflow or inundation that comes from a river or other
body of water or causes or threatens damage, or any relatively high streamflow that
overtops the natural or artificial banks in any reach of stream. The National Flood Insurance
Program defines a flood as a general and temporary condition of partial or complete
inundation of two or more acres of normally dry land or of two or more properties from
inland waters, unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of waters from any source or a
mudflow. Floods are most likely to occur in the spring, but can occur in any time of the
year. Any person or structure that is present in the path of floodwaters as described above
could be damaged. Damage is most likely to occur within the flood insurance rate map
designated 100 and 500-year areas. The amount of damage depends on 1). The
intensity/strength of the flood, 2). The proximity of the flood to the person/structure.
Damage can range from very slight to total. Hazards range from death to total property
damage from floodwaters.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.) The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council planning region has many river and
small tributaries in both the unincorporated and incorporated areas that are susceptible to
flooding. Catastrophic floods have occurred in the EWGCC region in 1927, 1951, 1973,
1979, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1993, 1994, 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999 and 2000. In the
Chesterfield Valley of St. Louis County alone, damage from the 1993 flood totaled $200
million. (In the 1993 flood approximately $21 billion dollars in damage and costs and 48
deaths resulted (NOAA.) Multiple lives have been lost from flooding; 49 deaths were
recorded from the 1993 Flood.
Statement Statement of of Futu Future Futu re Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible) Critical
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)-Highly Likely to occur in future
Statement Statement Statement of of of Next Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Adverse Im Impact Im Impact
pact on on on the the the Community Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Without mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic
Catastrophic
With mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Limited Limited Limited Limited

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 157
Recommendation: The County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to initiate a
mitigation activity to convince county residents to build, move to higher ground or
to retrofit homes in flood prone areas to help reduce the loss of life caused by
floods.

158
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Heat Heat Wave
Wave
Jefferson County – Section 2
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.) A heat wave is defined as a prolonged period of excessive heat and humidity (three
consecutive days of 90 degrees plus, Fahrenheit). This usually occurs in June, July and
August. This can result in heat related deaths and damage to infrastructure. The amount of
damage depends on 1). The intensity/length of the heat wave, 2). How well a person is
sheltered.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.)
Heat wave are likely to occur as frequently as in past history, or between 10 and
100% in the next 10 years. In 1966, 246 individuals were reported to have died as
a result of the heat in the St. Louis metropolitan area. St. Louis experienced heat
waves in 1993, 1988, 1995, without experiencing death rates close to the total of
113 in 1980. A total of 134 heat related deaths have occurred in St. Louis City from
1989 through 2003. Thirty-nine deaths in this same time period occurred in St.
Louis County. No information was available for the other counties. St. Louis ranks
in the top five in the U.S. for heat related deaths.
Statement Statement of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Negligible to catastrophic dependent upon the location within the EWGCC
region. The EWGCC region has a history of having multiple heat related
deaths.
Statement Statement of of Proba Probable Proba Probable
ble Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely). It is highly likely that heat waves will occur in the future.
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Catastrophic
Without mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Catastrophic Catastrophic Critical Critical Catastrophic Catastrophic Limited
Limited
With mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Limited/Critical Negligible Limited Negligible
Recommendation: The EWGCC Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee will support
continuation of mitigation activity Operation Weather Survival that will assist at risk
residents during heat waves in the region.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 159
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Tornadoes/Severe Tornadoes/Severe Storms Storms (Downbursts, (Downbursts, (Downbursts, Lightening, Lightening, Ha Hail, Ha il, Heavy Rains, Rains,
Wind)
Wind)
Description Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.) Tornadoes are cyclical windstorms or violently rotating column of air. Accompanying
storm activities include severe thunder/electrical storms, down-bursts, straight-line winds,
lightning, hail and heavy rain. The average forward speed of a tornado is about 30 m.p.h.
but may vary from nearly stationary to 70 m.p.h. The average pathway may vary in any
direction, but the average tornado moves from southwest to northeast. Tornadoes are
most likely to occur between 3:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. but may ensue at any hour of the
day. Any person or structure at any location could be damaged by a tornado. The amount
of damage depends on 1). The strength of the tornado, 2) the tornado’s proximity to the
person/structure, 3) the strength the structure, 4) how well a person is sheltered. Damage
can range fro very slight to total. On average, tornadoes stay on the ground 30 minutes,
covers 15 miles, is up to 300 years wide, although NOAA determined that the mean path
length was 2.27 miles long and .14 square mile path in length. Most storms move from
southwest to northeast and occur between 3 and 9 in the afternoon hours in the spring
months.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.) Tornadoes are classified according to the F-scale (developed by Dr. Theodore Fujita).
The F-scale ranks tornadoes according to its wind speed based on the severity of damage it
caused. On May 27, 1896, 18 tornadoes struck St. Louis, resulting in 306 deaths and $15
million dollars in damages. On May 9, 1927 two tornadoes struck St. Louis, the first killing
306 people and causing $13 million in damages (between Missouri and Illinois). The
second tornado killed 79 people and resulted in $23 million in damages. In November 1988
a tornado struck the St. Charles community. Businesses were able to obtain Small Business
Loans to recover from this disaster. Since 1950, St. Louis County has had 23 tornadoes, St.
Charles has had 24, St. Louis City has had 3, Jefferson County has had 23 and Franklin has
had 16 tornadoes. Since 1950, 11 deaths in St. Louis City have resulted from tornadoes. In
this same period for St. Louis County, 13 deaths have resulted, one death in Jefferson
County, and none in St. Charles and Franklin Counties.
F-SCALE SPEED IN M.P.H. COUNTY TORNADOES BY F-SCALE
SINCE 1950?
FO 40-72 F0 16 %
F1 73-112 F1 32
F2 113-157 F2 32
F3 158-206 F3 14
F4 207-260 F4 5
F5 261-318 F5 0

160
Jefferson County – Section 2
Statement Statement of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-
Catastrophic
F-SCALE SPEED IN M.P.H. COUNTY TORNADOES BY F-SCALE
SINCE 1950?
FO 40-72 F0 16%
F1 73-112 F1 32
F2 113-157 F2 32
F3 158-206 F3 14
F4 207-260 F4 5
F5 261-318 F5 0
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence-(Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)- highly likely
F-SCALE SPEED IN M.P.H. COUNTY TORNADOES BY F-SCALE
SINCE 1950?
FO 40-72 F0 16%
F1 73-112 F1 32
F2 113-157 F2 32
F3 158-206 F3 14
F4 207-260 F4 5
F5 261-318 F5 0
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-Catastrophic
Without Mitigation Measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic
With Mitigation Measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Limited Limited Limted Limted Limit Limited Limit ed Limited
Limited
Recommendations: Recommendations: That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
initiate a mitigation activity to convince county residents to construct Tornado Saferooms to
help reduce the loss of life caused by tornadoes.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 161
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Wildland Wildland Fire
Fire
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.)
A wildland fire is defined as any nonstructure fire, other than prescribed fire, that
occurs in the wildland. Wildland fires impact areas where a common urban/forest
boundary, prairie and grassland is present. The line, area or zone where structures
and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or
vegetative fuels. The type of damage depends on the size of the fire. Typically in
the EWGCC region, wildland fires are not a concern. Damage may be a partially
burned outbuilding.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.)
Fires usually occur in the spring and fall seasons. According to Missouri Department
of Conservation, Forestry staff, in the past 20 years, approximately 4 to 5 fires have
erupted in the EWGCC region. Most firefighting work in Missouri is done in
regions that have large stands of trees and as support to fires in the western United
States.
Statement Statement of of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-
Negligible
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)-Possible
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Without mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible
With mitigation measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Negligible
Recommendation: Recommendation: The EWGCC Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee recommends
mitigation activity to convince county residents to help reduce the damage to property and
the potential loss of life caused by wildfires.

162
HAZARD HAZARD ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS NARRATIVE NARRATIVE
NARRATIVE
Hazard: Hazard: Severe Severe Winter Winter Weather
Weather
Jefferson County – Section 2
Description Description of of Hazard Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.) Severe winter weather is defined as sleet, freezing rain, and heavy snow. This can be
accompanied by strong winds creating blizzard conditions, severe drifting and dangerous
wind chill. Ice storms cause significant hazards as well. Communications and power can be
disrupted for days, resulting in residents using alternate fuel sources that are likely to start
fires. Strong winds with intense storms and cold fronts knock down trees, utility poles,
power lines. Extreme cold often accompanies a winter storm in its wake. Winter weather
can result in injuries, death, and property damage. Prolonged exposure to cold can cause
frostbite, hypothermia can become life-threatening. The average pathway may vary in any
direction, but the average winter storm moves from west to east. Winter storms are most
likely to occur in November through February but may ensue from October through April.
Any person or structure at any location could be damaged by a winter storm.
Historical Historical Statistics Statistics Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.) Economic losses are difficult to measure. Local governments, home and business
owners can be faced with spending millions of dollars for snow removal, restoration of
services, debris removal and landfill hauling. NOAA weather indicates that the Missouri
counties north of the Missouri River receive an average snowfall of 18-22 inches, and
counties south of the river receive an average of 8-12 inches. Historical statistics for the
EWGCC include the winter storm in January 1994 that resulted in temperatures dropping to
–20 F degrees below zero, with wind chills to –50 degrees F below zero. In January 1977,
the EWGCC region received the maximum snowfall for the area at 23.9 inches of snow with
temperatures hovering around –14 degrees F below zero. Also in January 1982, the
EWGCC region received a 24 maximum snowfall of 13.9 inches with temperatures around –
15 degrees F below zero. In February 1914, the EWGCC received the maximum snowfall for
the area for this month at 23.5 inches of snow. In December 1973, the EWGCC region
received its maximum snowfall for the area for this month at 26.3 inches. The coldest
December on record was 1983 with temperature average of 20.5 degrees F. Multiple
homes and businesses had water pipes break, people were admitted to hospitals for
hypothermia/frostbite and schools were closed.
Statement Statement of of Future Future Probable Probable Severity Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Ice
storms could be limited to catastrophic
Statement Statement of of Probable Probable Risk Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence-(Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely) Winter/ice storms are likely to occur in the future.
Statement Statement of of Next Next Disaster’s Disaster’s Likely Likely Adverse Adverse Impact Impact on on the the Community
Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 163
Without Mitigation Measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical
Critical
With Mitigation Measures: Life Property Emotional Financial
Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited
Limited
Recommendations: Recommendations: That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee initiate a
mitigation activity to convince county local governments, residents to help reduce the loss
of life and property damage caused by winter storms by preparing for the storms and
adhering to NOAA winter storm weather warnings.

164
EA EARTHQUAKES
EA RTHQUAKES
Jefferson County – Section 2
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY EARTHQUAKE EARTHQUAKE HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
X Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
_ Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limited: 10 to 25%
_ Negligible: Negligible: Less than 10%
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
_ Likely: Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
X Possible: Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEAS SEASONAL SEAS ONAL PATTERN:
There is no known relationship between the occurrence of earthquakes and seasonal
weather patterns.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY TO TO BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR):
SECTOR):
All areas in county(s) will be affected due to the widespread nature of earthquakes. Those
counties farther south (Jefferson, southern, central St. Louis County and City will most likely
be impacted more than farther counties north and west (Franklin and St. Charles) due to
the closer proximity to the New Madrid Fault zone.
PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION: DURATION:
DURATION:
Initial earthquakes and subsequent aftershocks have been known to last in the range of
three or more months (1811-1812 New Madrid Earthquake).
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
X Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
_ More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: None
COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS: ANALYSIS: ANALYSIS: Based on a Mercalli Scale Level VII earthquake, with
an estimated damage in 80% of the county, it was estimated that in the developed

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 165
portions of the county approximately 129,000 people would be impacted, 30,000
buildings affected valued at $3 billion dollars. Projected risk for undeveloped areas: 54,450
persons in 21,000 buildings valued at $1.5 billion dollars.
COMMUNITIES: COMMUNITIES: Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, Crystal City, DeSoto, Festus,
Herculaneum, Kimmswick, Pevely, Scotsdale.

166
FLOOD FLOOD HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
FLOOD FLOOD HAZARD
HAZARD
Jefferson County – Section 2
COMMUNITIES: COMMUNITIES: Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, Crystal City, DeSoto, Festus,
Herculaneum, Kimmswick, Pevely, Scotsdale
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
_ Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
X Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limited: 10 to 25%
_ Negligible: Less than 10%
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
X Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
_ Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASO SEASONAL SEASO SEASONAL
NAL PATTERN:
Floods can occur anytime of the year; however, the most likely time of the year is in the
spring due to winter thaw and spring rains.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY TO TO BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR):
SECTOR):
Areas likely to be affected are areas designated on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Areas
likely to be affected are dependent upon weather systems and storm track.
PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION:
DURATION:
Duration of flood can last a few hours up to three or more months of inundation.
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
X Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
_ More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: National Weather Service
COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS: ANALYSIS: ANALYSIS: Based on a 100-year flood causing damage in 11%
of the county (including Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, Crystal City, DeSoto, Festus,
Herculaneum, Kimmswick, Pevely, Scotsdale), in the developed portions of Jefferson

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 167
County, approximately 36,000 persons and 5,400 buildings valued at $$540 million dollars
could be affected. In the undeveloped portions of the county, approximately 11,000
persons, and 3,800 buildings values at $280 million dollars could be impacted.

168
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
HAZARD: HAZARD: Dam Failure
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE
MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
X Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
_ Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limited: 10 to 25%
_ Negligible: Less than 10%
Jefferson County – Section 2
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
X Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
_ Possible: Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL SEASONAL PATTERN:
PATTERN:
Dam failures would be related to seasonal patterns in terms the inability of a dam to
withhold/withstand the deluge of a catastrophic rain event (spring rains) hitting a
weakening dam infrastructure.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY TO TO BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR): SECTOR):
SECTOR):
Areas most likely affected will be downstream from dams; torrential floodwaters from
failed dam descending upon residential homes, businesses, schools, agricultural lands, and
outbuildings.
PROBABLE PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION: DURATION:
DURATION:
By the nature of dam failures, the duration of the event will be instantaneous and the
duration of the failure could last up approximately six hours dependent upon the size of
the reservoir.
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
X Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
_ More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS:
SYSTEMS:
A few large Missouri dams have monitoring systems, emergency action plans and warning
systems. However, most dams in Missouri do not.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 169
COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS: ANALYSIS: Based on a single dam failure causing damage in
½% of the county, in the developed portion of the county, it has been estimated that
approximately 1,050 persons and 250 buildings valued at $25 million dollars may be
impacted from water inundation. In the undeveloped portion of the county, it has been
estimated that approximately 200 persons and 75 buildings valued at $80,000 may be
impacted from water inundation.

170
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
HAZARD: HAZARD: Drought
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
_ Ca Catastrophic
Ca
tastrophic tastrophic: tastrophic More than 50%
X Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limited: 10 to 25%
_ Negligible: Negligible: Less than 10%
Jefferson County – Section 2
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
X Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
_ Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL SEASONAL PATTERN: PATTERN: Droughts usually occur over an extended period of time, usually a
season or more. Droughts can begin during any season in a year.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY TO TO TO BE BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR): SECTOR):
SECTOR):
All areas will most likely to be affected by drought including agricultural, hydrologic
(streamflow, reservoir, groundwater resources) impacts (associated uses including
irrigation, recreation, navigation, hydropower/utilities, wildlife habitat).
PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION:
DURATION:
Droughts have been known to last up to ten years in duration.
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
The onset of drought is very slow.
_ Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
X More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: Missouri Department of Natural Resources has a warning
system in place.
COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANAL ANALYSIS: ANAL YSIS: Based on regional drought statistics, the county
could represent 1% of those damages. In the developed portion of the county, it was
estimated that approximately 2,100 persons and 500 buildings/properties valued at $50
million dollars could be impacted from the drought. In the undeveloped portion of the

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 171
county, it was estimated that approximately 200 persons and 75 buildings/properties
valued at $75,500 could be impacted from the drought.

172
HAZARD: HAZARD: Wildland fires
fires
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
_ Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
_ Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limited: 10 to 25%
X Negligible: Negligible: Less than 10%
Jefferson County – Section 2
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
_ Likely: Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
X Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL SEASONAL PATTERN:
Typically occur in warm months of year. Commonly occurs when there has been little
rainfall.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY LIKELY TO TO BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR): SECTOR):
SECTOR):
Areas most likely to be affected are in rural areas where buildings, homes are next to
forest.
PROBABLE PROBABLE DDURATION:
D URATION:
Wildland fires in Missouri are typically short lived due to the type of fuel and climatic
conditions. Fires that do occur may last up a couple of days.
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
X Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
_ More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: Local fire department.
COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS:
ANALYSIS:
The EWGCC region is not vulnerable to wildland fires in Missouri are typically short lived
due to the type of fuel and climatic conditions. Fires may concentrate near the grasses
along roadsides or where rural homes are adjacent to forested areas. Based on a large
wildfire causing damage in 1% of the county, in the developed portion of the county, it

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 173
was estimated that approximately 1,050 people and 250 buildings valued at $25 billion
dollars in damage could be impacted from a fire. In the undeveloped portion of the
county, it was estimated that approximately 250 persons and 75 buildings valued at
$79,000 dollars in damage could be impacted from a fire.

174
HAZARD: HAZARD: Heat Wave
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
_ Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
X Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limite Limited: Limite
d: 10 to 25%
_ Negligible: Negligible: Less than 10%
Jefferson County – Section 2
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
X Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
_ Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL SEASONAL PATTERN:
PATTERN:
Heat waves typically occur in the summer months of June, July and August.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY TO TO TO BE BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR): SECTOR):
SECTOR):
Every sector of the entire planning region will be affected by a heat wave.
PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION: DURATION:
DURATION:
Heat wave occurrences have been known to last approximately one month.
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
_ Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
X 12 to 24 hours warning
_ More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: National Weather Service
COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS:
ANALYSIS:
The EWGCC region is extremely vulnerable to heat wave hazard based upon the summer
weather characteristics; St. Louis has been included in the top five cities in the U.S. for
having the largest number of heat related deaths. Based on regional heat wave statistics,
the county could represent 5% of those damages. In the developed portion of the county,
it was estimated that approximately 2,100 persons and 500 buildings valued at $49 million
dollars could be impacted by a heat wave. In the undeveloped portion of the county, it

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 175
was estimated that approximately 200 persons and 75 buildings valued at $79,000 dollars
could be impacted by a heat wave.

176
HAZARD: HAZARD: Tornado
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZARD HAZARD PROFILE PROFILE WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
_ Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
_ Critical: 25% to 50%
_ Limited: 10 to 25%
X Neglig Negligible: Neglig
ible: ible: Less than 10%
Jefferson County – Section 2
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
X Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
_ Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL SEASONAL PATTERN: PATTERN: Tornadoes normally occur in the spring and early summer
months.
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY TO TO TO BE BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR): SECTOR):
SECTOR):
Areas most likely to be affected are dependent upon weather system and storm track.
PROBABLE PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION: DURATION: Tornadoes move through at an average speed on 30 miles per
hour.
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
X Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
_ More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS:
SYSTEMS:
National Weather System and tornado weather sirens.
COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS:
ANALYSIS:
The EWGCC region is extremely vulnerable for tornado hazards, with 115 total tornadoes
recorded by the National Weather Service. St. Louis has a history of six F4 devastating
tornadoes. This analysis is based on an F4 tornado causing damage in 5% of the county.
In the developed portion of the county, it was estimated that 10,500 persons and 2,500
buildings valued at $245 million dollars could be affected by this disaster. In the

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 177
undeveloped portion of the county, it was estimated that 4,500 persons and 1,750
buildings valued at $131million dollars could be affected by this disaster.

178
HAZARD: HAZARD: Winter Winter Weather
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY HAZA HAZARD HAZA RD PROFILE WORKSHEET
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
_ Catastrophic
Catastrophic: Catastrophic
More than 50%
_ Critical: 25% to 50%
X Limited: 10 to 25%
_ Negligible: Negligible: Less than 10%
Jefferson County – Section 2
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY OF OF OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
OCCURRENCE:
_ Highly LLikely:
L
ikely: Near 100% probability in next year
X Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
_ Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years.
_ Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL SEASONAL PATTERN: PATTERN: Late fall, winter and early spring months
AREAS AREAS LIKELY LIKELY LIKELY TO TO BE BE AFFECTED AFFECTED AFFECTED MOST MOST (BY (BY SECTOR): SECTOR):
SECTOR):
Areas most likely to be affected are dependent upon weather patterns and track of storms.
PROBABLE PROBABLE DURATION: DURATION: Two to three days
POTENTIAL POTENTIAL SPEED SPEED OF OF ONSET
ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
_ Minimal (or no) warning
_ 6 to 12 hours warning
_ 12 to 24 hours warning
X More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING EXISTING WARNING WARNING SYSTEMS: SYSTEMS: National Weather Service
COMPLETE COMPLETE VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ANALYSI ANALYSIS: ANALYSI ANALYSI S: This analysis is based on regional severe winter
statistics; the analysis assumes that the county could represent 1% of those damages. In
the developed portion of the county, it was estimated that approximately 2,100 persons
and 500 buildings valued at $50 million dollars could be affected by this disaster. In the
undeveloped portion of the county, it was estimated that approximately 3 persons and
1building valued at $1million dollars could be affected by this disaster.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 179
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY
Dam Dam Failure Failure
Failure
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at at Risk
Buildings downstream from failed dam
Population at Risk
Individuals living downstream from dams
that are failing
Infrastructure at Risk
Roads, bridges, utilities
Property Property at at Ris Risk Ris
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent of of Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property
Property
Catastrophic
Catastrophic- Catastrophic in areas
5
affected, affected, damage damage could
could
be be catastrophic catastrophic catastrophic in in path
path
of of released released released waters
waters
Critical Critical
5
Limited Limited-topographically
Limited topographically
10
higher higher areas areas
areas
Negligible Negligible
80
RISK RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFE JEFFERSON JEFFE
RSON COUNTY
Drought
Drought
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk
All essential facilities that depend on water
will be at risk.
Population at Risk
In severe drought, entire population living
and working in Jefferson County, the health
and welfare of humans and animals is at risk.
Infrastructure at at Risk
Entire infrastructure pertaining to water
supply, water treatment, utility operations
will be affected.
Property at Risk Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent of of Sector Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property Property
Property
Catastrophic
Catastrophic- Catastrophic
45
Critic Critical Critic Critical
al-Damage al Damage to
essential essential essential facilities,
facilities,
45

180
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFE JEFFERSON JEFFE
RSON COUNTY
Drought
Drought
population,
population,
infrastructure,
infrastructure,
infrastructure,
agricultural agricultural industry industry will will
will
be be be critical critical critical to to catastrophic
catastrophic
Limited Limited
5
Negligible Negligible
5
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
Earthquake
Earthquake
Flood Flood
Flood
Jefferson County – Section 2
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk Risk
Worst case scenario-older buildings or those
not constructed to building code, near total
devastation from New Madrid earthquake
Population at Risk
Entire population at risk in older buildings or
those not constructed to building code
Infrastructure at at Risk
Entire infrastructure at risk in older facilities
or those not constructed to building code
Property at Risk Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent of of Sector Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property
Property
Catastrophic
Catastrophic-near Catastrophic near total
45
devastation
devastation
Critical Critical
45
Limited Limited
5
Negligible Negligible
5
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk
Those facilities in low lying areas within 100
or 500 year floodplains not constructed to
building code.
Population at Risk

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 181
Flood
Flood
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY
Those living and working in low lying areas
within 100 or 500-year floodplains in
buildings not constructed to building code.
Infrastructure at Risk
Infrastructure in poor condition or located in
low-lying areas within 100 or 500-year
floodplains in facilities not constructed to
building code.
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent Percent of of Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property
Property
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Critical
Critical
Limited Limited-11%
Limited 11%
11% 11% area of county
subject to flooding risk
to 100-year event
Negligible Negligible
89%
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY
Heat Heat Wave
Wave
Sector ector Essential Facilities at Risk
All facilities affected by heat (no air
conditioning) are at risk
Population at Risk
Entire population at risk; elderly, young, ill,
homeless people
Infrastructure at at Risk
All infrastructure affected by heat (roads,
bridges, rail lines) is at risk
Property at Risk Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent of of Sector Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property
Property
Catastrophic
Catastrophic-limited Catastrophic limited to
Approximately 14%
elderly, elderly, ill ill population
population
Critical Critical Critical
3
Limited Limited
3
Negligible Negligible
80

182
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFER JEFFERSON JEFFER
SON COUNTY
Tornado
Tornado
Jefferson County – Section 2
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk
Buildings in path of storm not constructed to
building code.
Population at Risk
Populations that do not have safe rooms to
seek refuge
Infrastructure at Risk
Infrastructure in path of storm
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent of of Sector Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property
Property
Catastrophic
Catastrophic-in Catastrophic
Catastrophic path of
storm; dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be
catastrophic
Critical Critical-in Critical Critical path of storm;
dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be critical
Limited Limited-in Limited path of storm;
dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be limited
Negligible Negligible-in Negligible path of
storm; dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be
negligible
1%
4%
5%
90%
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY
Wildland Wildland Fi Fire Fi Fire
re
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk
Buildings in path of fire may be burned
Population at Risk
Residents living and working near forested
areas
Infrastructure at at Risk Risk
May burn utility lines
Property at Risk Risk

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 183
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY
Wildland Wildland Fi Fire Fi re
Expected Extent of
Damage Damage
Damage
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Critical
Critical
Perce Percent Perce nt of Sector
Property Property
Property
Limited Limited
1
Negligible Negligible-wildfires
Negligible wildfires
possible, possible, limited limited to
to
negligible negligible magnitude
magnitude
99
RISK RISK ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY
Winter Winter Weather Weather
Weather
Sector Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk
Some buildings in path of storm may have
power outages.
Population at Risk
Dependent upon where storm hits, entire
population, especially those who work
outdoors, drive for a living, homeless people.
Infrastructure at at Risk
Utility poles downed by ice storms; roads,
bridges impassible
Property at Risk Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent Percent of of Sector Sector
Sector
Damage
Damage
Property
Property
Catastrophic Catastrophic
1%
Critical Critical
1%
Limited Limited Limited
90%
Negligible Negligible
8%

184
RISK RISK INDEX INDEX INDEX WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET- WORKSHEET Jefferson County County
HAZARD FREQUENCY MAGNITUDE WARNING
TIME
Dam
Failure
Highly likely4
Likely3
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Drought Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Possible2
Unlikely1
Earthquake Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2 Possible2
Possible2
Unlikely1
Flood Highly likely4
Likely3
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Heat Wave Highly likely4
Likely3
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Tornado Highly likely4
Likely3
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Wildland
Fire
Winter
Weather
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2 Possible2
Possible2
Unlikely1
Highly likely4
Likely3
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic
Critical3 Critical3
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Catastrophic4
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2 Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Ranking is top bold number
Score is bottom number
Minimal4
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ 24+ hours1
hours1
Minimal4
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12 12-24 12
24
hours
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12 12-24 12
24
hours
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12 12-24 12
24
hours
hours
24+ hours1
Jefferson County – Section 2
SEVERITY SPECIAL
CHARACTERISTICS
& PLANNING
CONSIDERATIONS
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Limited2
Negligible1
RISK
PRIORITY
2
11
4
8
1
14
2
11
5
7
2
11
4
8
3
9

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 185
TORNADO: TORNADO: TORNADO: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(The (The estimates estimates below below are are based based on on an an F4 F4 tornado tornado causing causing damage damage in in 5% 5% of of the the county.)
county.)
DEVELOP DEVELOPED DEVELOP DEVELOP ED LAND UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # # of
of
# # of
of # # of
of
# # # of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Approx. Value
Value People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Value
Value
Residential 5,725 2,260 $160,295,000 4,200 1,725 $125,000,000
Commercial / Industrial 2,040 140 $44,470,000 230 15 $5,065,000
Key Non-profit public service facilities 15 1 $250,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 30 2 $500,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant N.A. 1 $100,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Water treatment plant N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Roads N.A. N.A. $2,500,000 N.A. N.A. $192,500
Police 4 1 $180,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Fire 3 1 $150,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 2,000 5 $22,925,500 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 25 1 $1,000,000 N.A. N.A. $305,000.
Hospital/medical/dental 30 1 $1,180,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Nursing homes 160 2 $2,298,750 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 450 30 $9,000,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
TOTAL 10,482 2445 $242,849,250 4430 1740 $130,562,500
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
The entire county is vulnerable to tornado and severe thunderstorm hazards. Data limitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of
this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to
georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

186
FLOOD: FLOOD: FLOOD: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY VULNERA VULNERABILITY VULNERA VULNERABILITY
BILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(The (The (The estimates estimates estimates below below are are based based on on a a 100 100-year 100 100 year year flood flood causing damage in 11% 11% of the the county) county)
Jefferson County – Section 2
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAND LAND
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # # of
of
# # of
of
# # # of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Approx. Value Value # # of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Value
Value
Residential 12,600 5,000 $352,650,000 10,130 3,805 $270,000,000
Commercial / Industrial 4500 300 $98,500,000 510 35 $12,000,000
Key Non-profit public service facilities 35 2 $550,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 70 4 $110,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 150 1 $220,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Water treatment plant 150 1 $220,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Roads N.A. N.A. $5,475,000 N.A. N. A. $415,000
Police 10 1 $400,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Fire 7 1 $330,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 4,500 15 $50,450,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 55 2 $2,200,000 N.A. N. A. $670,000
Hospital/medical/dental 70 1 $2,600,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 360 4 $5,100,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N. A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 1,000 65 $19,800,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
TOTAL 36,437 5,397 $538,605,000 10,640 3840 $283,085,000
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
Specific riverine and/or flash flood hazard areas include the Meramec, Mississippi Rivers. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time
limitations of this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due
to georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and
data.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 187
SEVERE SEVERE WINTER WINTER STORM: STORM: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(Using (Using regional regional regional severe severe winter winter statistics, statistics, the the county county could could could repr represent repr represent
esent 1% of of those damages.)
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAND LAND
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # # of of
of
# # # of of
of
SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE WINTER WINTER STORM STORM STORM
# # of of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Value Value # # of of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Approx. Value
Value
Residential 1145 450 $32,060,700 3 1 $71,000
Commercial / Industrial 410 30 $8,950,200 0 0 0
Key Non-profit public service facilities 3 1 $50,000 0 0 0
Public buildings and critical facilities 6 1 $100,000 0 0 0
Sewage treatment plant 5 1 $20,000 0 0 0
Water treatment plant 0 0 0 0 0 0
Roads 0 0 $498,800 0 0 0
Police 1 1 $36,000 0 0 0
Fire 1 1 $30,000 0 0 0
Schools/colleges 400 1 $4,585,100 0 0 0
Utilities/communications 5 1 $200,000 0 0 $865,000
Hospital/medical/dental 6 1 $235,500 0 0 0
Nursing/disability homes 30 1 $459,750 0 0 0
Hazardous facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other county, state, and federal government 90 6 $1,800,000 0 0 0
TOTAL 2102 495 $49,026,050 3 1 $936,000
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
The entire county is vulnerable to severe winter storm hazards. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS
analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing
shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

188
Jefferson County – Section 2
DROUGHT: DROUGHT: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(Using (Using regional regional drought drought drought statistics, statistics, the the the county county county could could represent represent represent 1% 1% of of those those damages.)
damages.)
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAND LAND
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # # of
of
# # # of
of Approx. Approx.
Approx.
# # # of of People
People Building Buildings Building Approx. Approx. Approx. Value Value # # # of of People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value
Residential and/or agricultural 1145 450 $32,060,700 195 75 $38,000
Commercial / Industrial 410 30 $8,950,200 0 0 $40,500
Key Non-profit public service facilities 3 1 $50,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 6 1 $100,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 5 1 $20,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Water treatment plant 0 0 0 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Roads 0 0 $498,800 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Police 1 1 $36,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Fire 1 1 $30,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 400 1 $4,585,100 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 5 1 $200,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Hospital/medical/dental 6 1 $235,500 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 30 1 $459,750 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities 0 0 0 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 90 6 $1,800,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
TOTAL 2102 495 $49,026,050 195 75 $75,500
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
The entire county is vulnerable to the effects of drought. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in
Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and
attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 189
HEAT HEAT WAVE: WAVE: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(Using (Using regional regional regional heat heat wave wave statistics, statistics, the the county county could could represent represent 1% 1% of of those those damages.)
damages.)
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAN LAND LAN
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # # of of
of
# # # of of
of Approx.
Approx.
# # of of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Value Value Value # # of of of People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value
Residential 1145 450 $32,060,700 195 75 $38,000
Commercial / Industrial 410 30 $8,950,200 0 0 $40,500
Key Non-profit public service facilities 3 1 $50,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 6 1 $100,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 5 1 $20,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Water treatment plant 0 0 0 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Roads 0 0 $498,800 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Police 1 1 $36,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Fire 1 1 $30,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 400 1 $4,585,100 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 5 1 $200,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hospital/medical/dental 6 1 $235,500 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 30 1 $459,750 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 90 6 $1,800,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
TOTAL 2102 495 $49,026,050 195 75 $78,500
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits and schools)
The entire county is vulnerable to the effects of heat wave. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis
in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and
attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

190
EARTHQUAKE: EARTHQUAKE: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(Based (Based (Based on on a a Level Level VII VII earthquake earthquake earthquake causing causing damage damage in in 80% 80% of of the the cou county) cou nty)
Jefferson County – Section 2
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAND LAND
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # of
of
# # of
of Approx.
Approx.
# # of of of People
People Buildings Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Approx. Value Value # # of of of People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value
Residential 70,000 28,000 $2,000,000,000 51,700 20,800 $1,470,000,000
Commercial / Industrial 24,480 1,600 $536,775,000 2,750 180 $60,800,000
Key Non-profit public service facilities 180 15 $3,000,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 360 25 $6,000,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 1090 2 $1,200,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Water treatment plant N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N. A. N.A.
Roads - - $30,000,000 N.A. N. A. $2,280,000
Police 50 2 $2,160,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Fire 40 2 $1,800,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 25,000 60 $275,110,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 300 15 $12,000,000 N.A. N. A. $3,650,000
Hospital/medical/dental 375 1 $14,135,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 2000 25 $30,000,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities 0 0 0 N.A. N. A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 5,400 360 $108,000,000 N.A. N. A. N.A.
TOTAL 129,275 30,107 $3,050,180,000 54,450 20,980 $1,536,730,000
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
The entire county is vulnerable to critical damage severity due to earthquake hazards. The eastern portion of the county is especially vulnerable to the
threat of liquefaction due to the alluvial soils in the Mississippi River. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS
analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing
shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 191
DAM FAILURE: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(B (Based (B ased on a single dam failure causing damage in 1/2% of of the the county)
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAND LAND
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # of of
of
# # of of
of Approx.
Approx.
# # # of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Approx. Value Value Value # # # of of People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value
Residential 570 225 $16,025,350 195 75 $38,000
Commercial / Industrial 200 15 $4,475,100 0 0 $40,500
Key Non-profit public service facilities 1 1 $25,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 3 1 $50,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 2 1 $10,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Water treatment plant 0 0 0 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Roads 0 0 $250,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Police 1 1 $18,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Fire 1 1 $15,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 200 1 $2,292,550 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 2 1 $100,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hospital/medical/dental 3 1 $117,750 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 15 1 $229,875 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities 0 0 0 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 45 3 $900,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
TOTAL 1043 252 $24,508,625 195 75 $78,500
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim
product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete.
MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

192
WILDFIRE: WILDFIRE: JEFFERSON JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
(Based (Based (Based on on a a large large wildfire wildfire causing causing damage damage in in 1% 1% 1% of of the the the county.)
county.)
Jefferson County – Section 2
DEVEL DEVELOPED DEVEL DEVELOPED
OPED LAND UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# # of of
of
# # of of
of Approx.
Approx.
WILDFIRE WILDFIRE WILDFIRE
# # # of of People
People Buildings Buildings Approx. Approx. Approx. Value Value Value # # # of of People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value
Residential 570 225 $16,025,350 195 75 $38,000
Commercial / Industrial 200 15 $4,475,100 0 0 $40,500
Key Non-profit public service facilities 1 1 $25,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 3 1 $50,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 2 1 $10,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Water treatment plant 0 0 0 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Roads 0 0 $250,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Police 1 1 $18,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Fire 1 1 $15,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 200 1 $2,292,550 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 2 1 $100,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hospital/medical/dental 3 1 $117,750 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 15 1 $229,875 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities 0 0 0 N.A. N.A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 45 3 $900,000 N.A. N.A. N.A.
TOTAL 1043 252 $24,508,625 195 75 $78,500
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
There is a very low threat of wildfire across the county. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in
Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and
attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 193
TOTAL TOTAL JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY SUMMARY
SUMMARY
DEVELOPED DEVELOPED LAND LAND
UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED UNDEVELOPED LAND
LAND
Total Total #
# Total Total #
#
# # of
of Total Total Total #
#
Combined Combined Totals Totals Totals Represent Represent All All All Natural Natural
of of
of of
Total Total Approx. Approx.
Approx. Critical
Critical of
Total Total Total # # # of
of Total Total Total Approx.
Approx.
Hazards Hazards Occurring Occurring in in Jefferson Jefferson County
County People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value Facilities
Facilities People
People Buildings
Buildings Value
Value
# # of
of
Critical
Critical
Facilities Facilities
Facilities
Residential 92,900 37,060 $2,641,177,800 185 66,813 26,561 $1,865,223,000 132
Commercial / Industrial 32,650 2160 $715,545,800 10 920 230 $78,027,000 1
Key Non-profit public service facilities 241 23 $4,000,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Public buildings and critical facilities 483 36 $701,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Sewage treatment plant 1259 9 $1,600,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Water treatment plant 1240 3 $1,420,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Roads - - $39,971,400 - N.A. N.A. $2,887,500 N.A.
Police 69 9 $2,884,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Fire 55 9 $2,400,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Schools/colleges 33,700 85 $366,825,900 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Utilities/communications 399 23 $16,000,000 1 N.A. N.A. $5,490,000 1
Hospital/medical/dental 499 8 $18,857,000 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Nursing/disability homes 2640 36 $39,237,750 3 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Hazardous facilities N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
Other county, state, and federal government 7210 476 $124,200,000 2 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
TOTAL 173,345 39,940 $3,938,846,394 210 67,733 26,791 $1,951,627,500 134
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim
product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete.
MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION SECTION 3
3
County County Capability Capability Assessment
Assessment
Mitigation Mitigation Management Management Policies
Policies
The Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency is charged with preparing for
disasters. That duty includes advising the County Commission on mitigation measures and
implementing those measures deemed appropriate by the Commission. In general, the
County’s policies encourage cooperation and coordination within the Jefferson County
agencies; as well as cooperation, including mutual aid compacts, between neighboring
counties and the municipalities within Jefferson County. The Emergency Operations Plan
(EOP) provides for an integrated countywide emergency preparedness and response plan,
utilizing public, nonprofit, and private resources.
Existing Existing Plans
Plans
The County has recently completed the Jefferson County Official Master Plan with the
anticipation that it will be formally adopted in the near future. The Plan was developed to
provide the framework for planned supportable growth, including promoting best practice
policies relating to stormwater and floodplain management. The Plan identifies a Preferred
Growth Alternative, with the intent to “achieve a balance of growth with preservation of
existing natural features and protection of the rural character of the county.” In general,
growth will be targeted around currently developed areas, utilizing existing transportation
corridors and extending utility and transportation infrastructure in a logical and progressive
manner, thereby ensuring capacity to service new development.
The County’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) is approved by the County Commission.
The Plan identifies facilities and resources that require special security during a disaster;
promotes the development and maintenance of mutual aid agreements with nearby
agencies; requires participation in drills and exercises; identifies human and capital
resources available throughout the county for disaster response; and includes an
evacuation plan. The EOP includes hazard mitigation measures and a damage assessment
plan.
Mitigation Mitigation Programs
Programs
The main mitigation programs are the County’s floodplain management regulations and
participation in and administration of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The
county coordinates with Mississippi River levee districts through the U.S. Corps of
Engineers. Additional programs include the following:
• The County’s floodplain regulations are aimed at restricting any new development in
the floodplain. The current ordinance requires two feet of additional freeboard for
1

2
Jefferson County – Section 3
new structures and requires an increase, if necessary, to that elevation when
structures are significantly reconstructed within the floodplain. Minimum elevation
is one foot above for structures in the identified regional floodplains.
• The county has participated in floodplain property acquisition, funded through
FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Program.
• Stormwater management and sedimentation and erosion control standards that
comply with Phase II Federal Stormwater Regulations was implemented in 2004.
• Development is prohibited in identified floodways and wetlands.
• Development can occur on slopes steeper than 3 feet to one foot only after
geotechnical analysis and receipt of an engineer’s recommendation.
• The county is able to receive NWS warnings; equipment is radio-activated. During
waking hours, using all available communications, less than 50 percent of the
county’s population could be alerted within 30 minutes; responders and key
executive officials could be alerted within 5 minutes.
• The Emergency Management Agency’s director and key personnel have completed
substantial training in all facets of emergency management. Emergency response
personnel, EOC operations staff, and volunteer agencies have received training and
education within the last five years.
Jefferson County is located in a Modified Mercalli Zone VII area. Missouri statutes require
school districts in a Modified Mercalli Zone VII or above at a magnitude 7.6 earthquake to
provide for public view each year, an earthquake preparedness and safety information,
such as earthquake procedures and a disaster plan; and conduct earthquake drills twice
each year. Missouri statutes RSMo 260.451, 160.453, 160.455, and 160.457 provide that
“the governing body of each school district shall request assistance from the State
Emergency Management Agency and any local emergency management agency located
within its district boundaries to develop and establish the earthquake emergency procedure
system.”
The questionnaire asked responders to summarize their regulations effectiveness in
reducing potential losses from hazards and the effectiveness of their measures to increase
public awareness of measures to reduce potential losses from hazards. The questions were
answered on a scale of “O” to “4”, with “0” being not effective and “4” being very
effective. In answer to the question: How effective would you rate the regulations
employed by your local government to reduce potential losses from hazards, one
municipality answered “1”, three answered “2”, and one answered “3”. In response to the
question: How effective would you rate the measures employed by your local government
to increase public awareness of measures that can be used to reduce potential losses to
existing development in areas subject to hazards, two municipalities answered “2”, and
three answered “3”.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
County County Capabilities Capabilities (Organization, (Organization, Staffing, Staffing, Training)
Training)
The capabilities of emergency management, fire protection, law enforcement, and
emergency medical services are detailed at the end of Section I.
The EOC is located in the Jefferson County Courthouse in Hillsboro. The facility is well
equipped for sustained operations over an extended period of time. A primary alternate
EOC is located at the 911 Center in Hillsboro. Other alternate sights are identified. The
EOC has survivable communications for operating forces, the Emergency Alert System,
commercial and public broadcast stations, the State Emergency Management Agency,
cities within the county, and neighboring jurisdictions. Communication and warning
systems are tested on a regular basis. Five municipalities responding to the questionnaire
have sirens, tested on a monthly basis. A substantial amount of the county’s
unincorporated area is not within hearing range of sirens.
Countywide, substantial emergency response equipment is available to respond to events.
Within the county, there are a total of nineteen fire protection districts or fire departments
and seven ambulance districts. In addition to the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department,
there are ten municipal police departments. Substantial vehicle and heavy equipment is
available through municipal and county public works departments. American Red Cross
has a service center in the county. One hospital is located in the county, and most St.
Louis metropolitan area medical facilities are located within a one-hour drive from any
location in Jefferson County.
The county has conducted at least one full-scale EOP exercise within the last four years
including testing and evaluating alert notification, coordination and control, and
communications.
Responsibilities Responsibilities and and Authorities Authorities
Authorities
Jefferson County government and their municipal governments responding to the
questionnaire indicated the following:
• County does not have legal basis for authority to order an evacuation.
Municipalities: Six have legal basis.
• County has legal basis for redirecting funds for emergency use.
Municipalities: Five have legal basis; one answered not applicable.
• County does not have legal basis for ordering a curfew.
Municipalities: Five have legal basis.
• County does not have legal basis for commandeering facilities, equipment,
and materials.
Municipalities: Five have legal basis; one does not.
• County does not have legal basis to authorize lines of succession to carry out
emergency activities.
3

4
Jefferson County – Section 3
Municipalities: Six have legal basis; two do not know.
• County has system to safeguard records to conduct emergency operations
Municipalities: Five have system to safeguard; one does not.
• County has system to safeguard vital records to reconstitute local
government.
Municipalities: Six have system to safeguard.
• County has not developed an all-hazard vulnerability analysis to access
potential consequences of disasters.
Municipalities: Five have done analysis; one has not.
• County has a multi-hazard emergency operations plan.
Municipalities: Six have a multi-hazard plan.
• County has mutual aid compacts with other jurisdictions
Municipalities: Six have mutual aid compacts.
• County EOP addresses the protection of people with special needs.
Municipalities: Four address the protection; two do not.
Intergovernmental Intergovernmental and and and Interagency Interagency Coordination
Coordination
The County Emergency Management Agency interacts with the municipalities and single
purpose governments on a regular basis to maintain communication and coordination of
policy related to emergency management.
Vulnerability Vulnerability Assessment Assessment of of County County Policies Policies Policies and and Development Development Trends
Trends
Commitments Commitments to to a a Comprehensive Comprehensive Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Program
Program
Jefferson County has a well-established Emergency Management Agency. It regularly
updates the EOP, addressing mitigation measures for hazards, both natural and manmade,
incorporating any changes to the plan necessitated by changes in transportation
infrastructure and land use.
Laws, Laws, Laws, Reg Regulations Reg Regulations
ulations and Policies Policies Related Related to to Development Development Development in in in Hazard Hazard-Prone Hazard Hazard Prone Prone Areas Areas
The floodplain management ordinances of the county and municipalities are based on
policies to protect health and welfare of people and minimize damage to public
infrastructure and physical structures. They also restrict avoidable increases in flood height
or velocity and protect individuals from buying land unsuited for the intended use due to a
flood hazard.
County County Laws, Laws, Regulations Regulations and and Policies Policies Related Related to to Hazard Hazard Mitigation Mitigation in in General Genera
Zoning and floodplain ordinances, coupled with the enforcement of building codes and
the approval process for subdivisions and new or reconstructive development assures that

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
hazards are addressed in the proposal and planning stages of the development process.
Stormwater regulations that the county will soon be adopting and those of seven
responding municipalities are designed to minimize the harmful physical and economic
effects of erosion, sedimentation, and flooding from stormwater runoff. This is
accomplished through the requirement of measures to mitigate erosion, both during and
after construction; the detention and controlled discharge of the differential runoff from
the development; coupled with a well-designed stormwater conveyance system.
Missouri statute RSMo 319.203 requires that cities and counties in the Level VII earthquake
zone pass “an ordinance of order” regarding earthquake preparedness and building
requirements demonstrating compliance with 319.207 for certain types of structures. This
statute applies to Jefferson County.
How Local Local Local Risk Assessments are Incorporated and and and Prioritized into into Local Local Planning
Planning
Of the hazard risks the county has exposure to, riverine and flash flooding hazard risks are
foremost in frequency and potential magnitude in loss of people and property.
Enforcement of zoning, floodplain, stormwater ordinances, and placement of public
infrastructure provide the most effective tools to minimize known risks.
The county and municipalities recognize the danger and economic impact of severe winter
storms. Clearing of snow and ice from roadways is a main priority during these events.
The Missouri Department of Transportation has responsibility for the interstate and state
designated highways within the county. The County Highway Department and
municipalities clear their respective roadways, prioritizing known hazardous stretches of
roadways, school bus stops, and intersections in efforts to reduce accidents and maintain
the movement of people and goods.
Current Current Criteria Criteria Used to Prioritize Mitigation Funding
Mitigation funding is based upon the combination of expected damage, the assumed
frequency of damage, and the likelihood of death or injury to people.
Integration Integration of of Hazard Hazard Mitigation Mitigation with with the the City/County City/County Department’s Department’
s Plans
A city or county EOP and its floodplain, zoning, subdivision, and building code ordinances
developed and enforced in an integrated fashion insure that avoidable disasters are
prevented, and the vulnerability of people and property to the effects of disasters is
reduced.
5

6
How How the the County County County Determines Determines Determines Cost Cost-Effectiveness Cost Effectiveness of Mitigation Programs
Jefferson County – Section 3
Cost-effectiveness is considered on a case-by-case basis; dependent upon the scope of
damages, estimated savings in future hazard events, the type of mitigation project, and the
probable hazard to human life in future events. A FEMA cost/benefit analysis is required
for FEMA funded projects.
Mitigation Mitigation Funding Funding Options Options (including (including current current and and potential potential sources sources of of federal, federal, state, state, state, local,
local,
private private private funds)
funds)
The county and municipalities have utilized federal or state funds when disaster
declarations have been made in the case of heavy widespread damages. Sources have
included FEMA, SEMA, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and Department of
Economic Development. In addition to local government general revenue funds, the
County and many of the municipalities have either a dedicated transportation and/or
capital improvements sales/use tax that can be used to fund mitigation projects. These
projects are generally reactive or reconstructive in nature. In some cases, private property
owners cost share in these projects. Private funds are expended when necessary mitigation
measures are incorporated into a development plan.
How How Governments Governments Meet Meet Requirements Requirements for for Hazard Hazard Mitigation Mitigation Funding Funding Programs
Governmental jurisdictions meet the requirements for hazard mitigation funding programs
if the project conforms to Missouri’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, provides a beneficial impact
on the disaster area, meeting environmental requirements, solves the problem
independently, and is cost-effective. Adoption of the Resolution of Intent to Participate in
All-Hazard Mitigation will insure that a county or municipality is eligible for hazard
mitigation funding programs.
Recomme Recommendations Recomme Recomme ndations for Improvement
Recommended improvements include working with watershed groups and engineering
consultants to assess and maintain watersheds, marking flood prone areas, working with
the wastewater and stormwater management districts to control runoff issues and address
growth issues, address soil erosion in parks, improve stormwater ordinances, and conduct
mitigation property buyouts. Additional recommendations pertaining to education and
training include upgrade and install warning and communications systems (through
assistance from business sponsors), create Emergency Management Center (for
communities of Festus, Pevely, Herculaneum, Crystal City), coordination between
communities and planners/cooperative technical agreements, education for public safety
(earthquake proof historic buildings), prioritize assistance to smaller communities (training),
and use of municipal league as nexus for coordination. Further recommendations consist
of collaboration of communities and local emergency services with Highway departments
regarding construction of roads and bridges pertaining to stability/earthquake hazard proof

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
structures, performing retrofits of one or two emergency rooms to withstand earthquake,
assist with the full implementation of the MDNR dam safety program, and installation of
back-up power systems for critical facilities and/or burying critical power lines.
The Missouri Seismic Safety Commission (under Missouri statutes RSMo 44.227, 44.229,
44.231, 44.233, 44.235, and 44.277) has developed a Strategic Plan for earthquake safety
in Missouri. This plan contains recommendations for earthquake mitigation. Use of the
Strategic Plan by the County would facilitate mitigation planning.
Missouri has an organization called Structural Assessment and Visual Evaluation (SAVE)
coalition. The Coalition's objective is to assist the Missouri State Emergency Management
Agency (SEMA) in the execution of its responsibilities with respect to the use of qualified
volunteers in the emergency assessment of buildings following catastrophic events.
S.A.V.E. volunteers consist of architects, professional engineers, and other qualified
professionals that assist SEMA in assessing buildings and vertical structures following
catastrophic events. The S.A.V.E. Coalition also includes the American Institute of
Architects/Missouri (AIA/MO), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the
Consulting Engineers Council of MO (CECMO), and the Missouri Society of Professional
Engineers (MSPE).
County County and and and Municipal Municipal Policies Policies and and and Development Development Trends
Trends
At present, the county is more densely developed in the northern third of the county; along
Interstate 55, located along its eastern boundary; and the State Highway 21 and State
Highway 30 corridors. Jefferson County’s population was 198,099 in 2000, increasing by
15.6 percent in the last decade. It is predicted that the county will see an increase of 11
percent by 2010, and about 28 percent by 2025, with a population of about 253,000. Of
the county population of 198,099 in year 2000, almost 74 percent lived outside
incorporated areas.
Jefferson County has a current master plan, zoning, subdivision regulations, and a building
code. Of the municipalities in the county, seven answered that they have master plans and
six did not answer. Seven have zoning, subdivision, stormwater, and building codes; six
did not answer.
Jefferson County’s capability assessment is summarized at the end of this section.
Funding Funding Sources
Sources
There are several sources of funding for both pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation
policies and projects. While all mitigation techniques will likely save money by avoiding
losses, the cost of implementing mitigation efforts can be substantial and well beyond the
local government’s capacity to fund the mitigation activity. There are existing federal and
state funding programs that can be utilized for funding assistance. The following is a list
7

8
Jefferson County – Section 3
of some sources of funding presently available. This list is not comprehensive, as new
programs can be developed or existing programs can be eliminated or modified.
State State State Mitigation Mitigation Resources:
Resources:
http://sema.dps.mo.gov/Mitigation.htm
http://sema.dps.mo.gov/Mitigation.htm
Federal Federal Sources
Sources
TITLE: TITLE: PRE PRE-DISASTER PRE
DISASTER MITIGATION PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: FEDERAL FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pdm/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pdm/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pdm/index
The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program provides funds to states, territories, Indian
tribal governments, communities, and universities for hazard mitigation planning and the
implementation of mitigation projects prior to a disaster event.
Funding these plans and projects reduces overall risks to the population and structures,
while also reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster declarations. PDM grants are
to be awarded on a competitive basis and without reference to state allocations, quotas, or
other formula-based allocation of funds.
The FY 2009 grant application was due FEMA by Dec. 19 th , 2008, by midnight.
TITLE: TITLE: FLOOD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: FEDERAL FEDERAL EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY
AGENCY
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/fma/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/fma/index
FEMA’S Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA) provides funding to assist states and
communities in implementing measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other structures insurable under the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FMA was created as part of the National Flood
Insurance Reform Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 4101) with the goal of reducing or eliminating
claims under the NFIP. FMA is a pre-disaster grant program, and is made available to
states on an annual basis. This funding is exclusively available for mitigation planning and
implementation of mitigation measures. There are three such grants: planning grants,
project grants, and technical assistance grants. Planning grants include assessing risk and
developing a mitigation plan to reduce risks. Project grants include the purchase,
relocation, or destruction of NFIP insured buildings to reduce flood losses. Technical
assistance grants help communities develop and implement projects.
• Planning Planning Grants Grants to prepare Flood Mitigation Plans. Only NFIP-participating
communities with approved Flood Mitigation Plans can apply for FMA Project grants
• Project Project Grants Grants to implement measures to reduce flood losses, such as elevation,
acquisition, or relocation of NFIP-insured structures. States are encouraged to
prioritize FMA funds for applications that include repetitive loss properties; these

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
include structures with 2 or more losses each with a claim of at least $1,000 within
any ten-year period since 1978.
• Technical Technical Assistance Assistance Gr Grants Gr ants for the State to help administer the FMA program and
activities. Up to ten percent (10%) of Project grants may be awarded to states.
TITLE: TITLE: HAZARD HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: FEDERAL FEDERAL EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY
AGENCY
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/hmgp/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/hmgp/index
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) was created in November 1988 through
Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. The
HMGP assists states and local communities in implementing long-term mitigation measures
following a Presidential disaster declaration.
Criteria: Project must conform with State’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, provide a beneficial
impact on the disaster area, meet environmental requirements, solve a problem
independently, and be cost-effective.
TITLE: TITLE: REPETITIVE FLOOD CLAIMS CLAIMS PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: AGENCY: FEDERAL FEDERAL EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY AGENCY
AGENCY
http://www.fema.
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/rfc/index
http://www.fema. gov/government/grant/rfc/index
The Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC) grant program was authorized by the Bunning-Bereuter-
Blumenauer Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004 (P.L. 108–264), which amended the
National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001, et al).
Up to $10 million is available annually for FEMA to provide RFC funds to assist States and
communities reduce flood damages to insured properties that have had one or more claims
to the National Flood Insurance Program
Eligible Eligible Mitigation Mitigation Activ Activities Activ Activities
ities: ities
• Acquisition of properties, and either demolition or relocation of flood-prone
structures, where the property is deed restricted for open space uses in perpetuity.
• Elevations (Elevating structures from floodplains).
• Dry Floodproofing of non-residential structures
• Minor localized flood control projects (funding limited to $1M per project).
Federal Federal Federal / / Non Non-Federal Non Federal Cost Share:
FEMA may contribute up to 100 percent of the total amount approved under the RFC
grant award to implement approved activities, if the Applicant has demonstrated that the
proposed activities can not be funded under the Flood Mitigation program due to lack of
9

10
Jefferson County – Section 3
State or local capacity, which includes either inability to manage the subgrant or lack of
25% match.
The FY 2009 grant application was due FEMA by Dec. 19 th , 2008, by midnight.
TITLE: TITLE: SEVERE REPETITIVE FLOOD CLAIMS PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: AGENCY: FEDERAL FEDERAL FEDERAL EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY AGENCY
AGENCY
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/srl/i
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/srl/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/srl/i ndex
The Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) grant program was authorized by the Bunning-Bereuter-
Blumenauer Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004, which amended the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968 to provide funding to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to severe repetitive loss (SRL) structures insured under the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP).
The definition of severe repetitive loss as applied to this program was established in
section 1361A of the National Flood Insurance Act, as amended (NFIA), 42 U.S.C. 4102a.
An SRL property is defined as a residential property that is covered under an NFIP flood
insurance policy and:
(a) That has at least four NFIP claim payments (including building and contents)
over $5,000 each, and the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeds
$20,000; or
(b) For which at least two separate claims payments (building payments only) have
been made with the cumulative amount of the building portion of such claims
exceeding the market value of the building.
For both (a) and (b) above, at least two of the referenced claims must have occurred within
any ten-year period, and must be greater than 10 days apart.
Eligible Eligible flood flood mitigation mitigation mitigation projec project projec t activities:
• Acquisition and demolition or relocation of at risk structures and conversion of the
property to open space;
• Elevation of existing structures to at least the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) or an
Advisory Base Flood Elevation (ABFE) or higher. For the SRL program only,
mitigation reconstruction is permitted only when traditional elevation cannot be
implemented;
• Minor physical localized flood reduction projects; and
• Dry floodproofing (historic properties only).
Federal Federal / / Non Non-Federal Non Federal Federal cost share: 75 / 25 %; up to 90 % Federal cost-share funding for
projects approved in States, Territories, and Federally-recognized Indian tribes with FEMAapproved
Standard or Enhanced Mitigation Plans or Indian tribal plans that include a
strategy for mitigating existing and future SRL properties.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
TITLE: TITLE: SBA DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: U. U. S. S. SMALL SMALL SMALL BUSINESS BUSINESS BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
http://www.sba.gov/services/disasterassistance/index.html
http://www.sba.gov/services/disasterassistance/index.html
The purpose of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Loan Program is to make low-interest, fixed rate
loans to eligible small businesses for the purpose of implementing mitigation measures to
protect business property from damage that may be caused by future disasters. The
program is a pilot program, which supports FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program.
SBA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program is available to businesses whose proposed mitigation
measure conforms to the priorities and goals of the mitigation plan for the community, as
defined by FEMA, in which the business is located. Because the program has been
approved only for limited funding, approved loan requests will be funded on a first-come,
first-served basis up to the limit of the program funds and may not exceed 20% of the total
amount of disaster damage.
TITLE: TITLE: COMMUNITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS
AGENCY: AGENCY: U. U. S. S. DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF OF HOUSING HOUSING AND AND AND URBAN URBAN URBAN DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT
http://www.hud.gov/grants/index.cfm
http://www.hud.gov/grants/index.cfm
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides grants to local
governments for community and economic development projects that primarily benefit
low-and moderate-income people. The CDBG program also provides grants for postdisaster
hazard mitigation and recovery following a Presidential disaster declaration.
CBDG eligible communities (generally communities with under 50,000 population and
counties under 200,000 population) are located within a Presidential disaster declaration
area.
TITLE:
TITLE: DISASTER MITIGATION PLANNING PLANNING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
ASSISTANCE
AGENCY: AGENCY: DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF OF COMMERCE, COMMERCE, ECONOMIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
http://oamweb.osec.doc.gov/aboutOAM_organization_GMD.ht
http://oamweb.osec.doc.gov/aboutOAM_organization_GMD.html
http://oamweb.osec.doc.gov/aboutOAM_organization_GMD.ht ml
These grants are primarily designed for economic development initiatives, but are
applicable to hazard mitigation when the focus is on creating disaster resistant jobs and
workplaces. Also, these monies are applicable because often projects related to developing
infrastructure are also making the community more disaster resistant.
TITLE: TITLE: WATERSHED MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROGRAM PROGRAM GRANT
GRANT
AGENCY: AGENCY: M M ISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (Section 319) 319)
www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/wpcnpsmp.htm
www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/wpcnpsmp.htm
www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/wpcnpsmp.htm
• Completed Watershed Management Plans must contain the critical watershed
elements.
• The watershed or water body must be on the Targeted Nonpoint Source 303(d) List
• Funds are available to public institutions of higher education, units of government
and nonprofit organizations with 501(c)(3) status.
11

12
Jefferson County – Section 3
• The grant award maximum is $15,000.
• Projects may be up to two years in length.
• Non-federal match required in a ratio of 60 percent 319 funds to 40 percent nonfederal
funds. Matching support may include “in-kind” contributions. (Soil and
Water Conservation Districts are not required to document match on agricultural
projects.)
• Completed watershed management plans must be designed to achieve the load
reductions called for in any completed Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). If no
TMDL has been completed, the plan must be designed to reduce pollutant loads to
meet water quality standards.
Application Application Criteria
Criteria
1. The project must meet the requirements of this Request for Proposals.
2. The project must demonstrate a high likelihood of success based on quality of the
proposal, previous successes, appropriateness of goals, support of important
partners, an area of manageable size, appropriate practices, adequate funding,
competent management, etc.
3. Projects should encompass a complete watershed or sub-watershed of manageable
size and address all significant nonpoint pollutant sources.
4. Involve interagency coordination and cooperation. Locally led projects are preferred.
Letters of support should be included with the application.
5. Cost-effectiveness of the project will be a significant factor. Projects that include
higher percentages of funds for administrative, overhead or indirect costs will be
considered a lower priority. Indirect rates cannot exceed 13 percent.
TITLE: TITLE: CONSERVATION EFFECTS ASSESSMENT PROJECT
AGENCY: AGENCY: DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE, Natural Natural Resources
Resources
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/fund
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/fundview.cfm?fonum=1160
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/fund
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/fundview.cfm?fonum=1160
view.cfm?fonum=1160
The Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program -
Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) is to develop research and extension
projects aimed at improving the watershed health of grazing land watersheds. The goal of
this program area is to build a knowledge base that can be used to evaluate the impacts of
conservation projects and programs on grazing land watershed health, improve the
management of grazing lands to achieve environmental goals and inform policy decisions.
Grant monies range from 0-$650,000.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
State State Sources
Sources
TITLE: TITLE: WATER AND SEWER GRANT PROGRAMS
AGENCY: MISSOURI DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT
FROM FROM COMMUNITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT BLOCK BLOCK GRANT GRANT PROGRAM
PROGRAM
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/
The Department of Economic Development offers grants to enhance infrastructure such as
water and sewer lines. These grants might be particularly helpful in protecting against
drought by connecting disparate water sources and thereby providing multiple water
sources to isolated communities. These monies might also be helpful in providing
adequate protection of sewage treatment plants from the risk of flood or separation of
storm water from combined sewer lines.
TITLE: TITLE: TITLE: EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT/MITIGATION MANAGEMENT/MITIGATION TRAINING TRAINING
TRAINING
AGENCY: AGENCY: AGENCY: STATE STATE STATE EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY
AGENCY
http://www.sema.dps.mo.gov/
http://www.sema.dps.mo.gov/
The State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA) offers grants for training jurisdictions in
hazard mitigation, preparedness, and planning. These funds are used for training
appropriate staff in identifying projects best suited for mitigation.
TITLE: TITLE: PRE PRE-DISASTER PRE
DISASTER DISASTER MITIG MITIGATION MITIG
ATION PROJECT IMPACT
AGENCY: AGENCY: AGENCY: STATE STATE EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY
AGENCY
http://sema.dps.mo.gov/PDMC2007FEMAGuidanceOverview.pdf
http://sema.dps.mo.gov/PDMC2007FEMAGuidanceOverview.pdf
SEMA funds are provided to assist communities with technical assistance in the
development of a sustained pre-disaster mitigation program. Funds can be used for
planning mitigation initiatives and for providing technical “know-how” in the construction
of mitigation projects.
TITLE: TITLE: PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
AGENCY: GENCY: GENCY: STATE STATE STATE EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY AGENCY
AGENCY
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pa/index.shtm
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pa/index.shtm
These SEMA grants are designed to provide funds to repair damaged infrastructure and
public facilities. Funds can also be used to reinstate government services impacted by a
hazard event. Also, this program can fund the repair of damaged components of a
structure.
The Federal share of assistance is not less than 75% of the eligible cost for emergency
measures and permanent restoration. The grantee (usually the State) determines how the
non-Federal share (up to 25%) is split with the sub grantees (eligible applicants).
13

14
TITLE: TITLE: DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE INITIATIVE
AGENCY: AGENCY: MISSOURI MISSOURI DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF OF ECO ECONOMIC ECO NOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT
http://www.hud.gov/info/disasters.cfm
http://www.hud.gov/info/disasters.cfm
http://www.hud.gov/info/disasters.cfm
Jefferson County – Section 3
The Missouri Department of Economic Development (DED) provides this grant program to
bridge funding gaps in recovery assistance after a disaster. These funds can also be used to
fund gaps in a mitigation development program.
TITLE: TITLE: SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM
AGENCY: AGENCY: MISSOURI MISSOURI DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF OF NATURAL NATURAL RESOURCES
RESOURCES
http://www.dnr.mo.go
http://www.dnr.mo.gov/financial.htm
http://www.dnr.mo.go
http://www.dnr.mo.go v/financial.htm
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR), through the Soil and Water
Conservation Program, offer grants, cost share programs, and low interest loans to
agencies and property owners to plan and implement best practices to reduce soil erosion
and improve water quality. Practices that facilitate slower release of water upstream
mitigate downstream flood hazards. The programs are generally applicable to rural and
agricultural environments.
OTHER OTHER SOURCES SOURCES SOURCES IN IN THE THE THE FUNDING FUNDING OF OF MITIG MITIGATION MITIG ATION PROJECTS
Local Local Local Sources Sources
Sources
Municipal and county governments can provide funds for projects through their general
revenue fund and through a dedicated capital improvement and/or transportation, sales,
and use taxes. Special taxing districts, such as a Neighborhood Improvement District (NID),
can be formed if practical, to assess property owners for a portion of the cost of
improvements.
Non Non-governmental
Non governmental
Other potential sources of revenue for implementing local mitigation projects are monetary
contributions from nonprofit organizations such as the American Red Cross, community
relief funds, churches, charitable trusts, and land trusts.
Conclusion
Conclusion
There are many sources of funding available for hazard mitigation projects. Those
identified here, while they are significant, do not comprise all potential sources. It should
be noted that new programs can become available, and existing programs can be modified
or dropped. Many funds available are leveraged with “local” matching funds at various
contribution percentages. In order to take advantage of state and federal funding,
community diligence in keeping abreast of changes in funding opportunities will be
necessary for implementing hazard mitigation projects.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY CAPABILITY CAPABILITY CAPABILITY AS ASSESSMENT AS SESSMENT WORKSHEET
15

16
Policies Policies and and
and
Programs
Programs
(ex. (ex. Zoning
Zoning
Ordinance) Ordinance)
Ordinance)
Floodplain
management
Multi-hazard
emergency plan
Stormwater
regulations
Building
regulations
Document Document
Document
Reference
Reference
(ex.
(ex.
Comprehensive
Comprehensive
Plan Plan Plan & & & page page
page
number)
number)
County Floodplain
Management
Ordinance
County Emergency
Operations Plan
County Stormwater
and Subdivision
Regulations
County
BOCA
2003
Flood insurance Joined NFIP
Mississippi River
Levee issues
5/16/83
#290808
CAPABILITY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
Effective-
Effective
ness ness for for
for
Mitigation
Mitigation
(ex. (ex. low,
low,
medium, medium,
medium,
high)
high)
High
Jefferson County – Section 3
Rationale Rationale for for for Effectiveness
Effectiveness
(ex. (ex. low low because because allows
allows
development development in in floodplain) floodplain)
floodplain)
New construction and improvements are
not allowed without extensive mitigation
requirements. Any encroachments such as
fill, new construction, or other
developments within in the floodway must
not create any increase in flood levels
within the community during a base flood
discharge.
Requires 2 feet freeboard.
Medium Consider more formal mutual aid
agreements, improve the Emergency
Operations Center, warning systems in rural
areas, emergency response equipment,
training for volunteer agencies and the
private sector, and public preparedness
education.
Medium Stormwater runoff, sediment and erosion
management provides effective measures to
deal with increasing development trends.
Medium The county has building inspectors that
ensure construction is built to code.
High The county administers and participates
fully in the NFIP.
Levee districts Medium Coordination with county jurisdictions
through US Corps of Engineers.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 1
SECTION SECTION 4
4
Introduction Introduction to to Mitigation
Mitigation
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments is subject to many types of hazards:
flooding, tornado/severe windstorm, winter storm, earthquake/landslide, dam failure,
drought, heat wave, and an occasional wildfire. All-hazard mitigation planning is the
process associated with devising strategies needed to mitigate the damages associated
with these natural disasters.
Definition Definition of of Mitigation
Mitigation
Mitigation is defined as “sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to
people and property from hazards and their effects.” It describes the ongoing efforts at
the Federal, State, local and individual levels to lessen the impact of disasters upon families,
homes, jurisdictions and the economy.
Mitigation includes avoiding the development of hazard prone sections of the jurisdiction,
and making existing development in hazard-prone areas safer. Certain areas in some
jurisdictions are susceptible to damage from hazards. As such, steps are taken to make
these areas less vulnerable through flood buyouts.
Jurisdictions can steer growth to less risky areas, through non-structural measures such as
avoiding construction in flood-prone areas. Keeping buildings and people out of harm’s
way is the essence of mitigation. Incorporating mitigation into decisions relating to a
jurisdiction’s growth can result in a safer, more resilient jurisdiction, and one that is more
attractive to families and businesses.
Categories Categories Categories of of Mitigation
Mitigation
Mitigation categories are grouped into six categories.
• Prevention Prevention - Prevention measures are intended to keep a hazard risk problem from
getting worse; it ensures future development does not increase losses. Some
examples include: planning and zoning, open space preservation, land development
regulations, and storm water management.
• Property Property Protection Protection - These measures are used to modify buildings and other
surroundings subject to hazard risk or their surroundings, rather than prevent the
hazard from occurring. These measures protect people and property at risk. Some
examples include: acquisition/public procurement and management of lands that
are vulnerable to damage from hazards; relocation/permanent evacuation of hazard
prone areas to safer areas; rebuilding and modifying structures to reduce damage

2
Jefferson County – Section 4
by future hazard events; floodproofing or protection of floodprone buildings, using
various methods.
• Natural Natural Natural Resource Resource Resource Protection Protection Protection - These measures are intended to reduce the intensity
of hazard effects and to improve the quality of the environment and wildlife. Parks,
recreation, conservation agencies and similar organizations implement these
activities. Some examples of this mitigation measure include: erosion and sediment
control, and wetlands protection.
• Emergency Emergency Services Services Services - Emergency services measures protect people before and after a
hazard event. Most counties and many cities have emergency management offices
to coordinate warning, responses and recovery during disasters. Emergency services
include warning, capacity of response, critical facilities protection and health and
safety maintenance.
• Structural Structural Projects Projects Projects - These measures directly protect people and property at risk.
They are called structural because they involve construction of manmade structures
to control hazards. Structural projects for flood control include reservoirs,
levees/floodwalls, diversions, channel modifications, and storm sewers.
• Public Public Information
Information Information - Public information activities inform and remind citizens about
hazardous areas and measures needed to avoid damage and injury. This
information is directed to present and future property owners, present and future
business owners, and visitors. Some examples of public information activities
include providing hazard maps and other information; outreach hazard mitigation
programs through newspapers, radio/TV/videotape, mass mailings, notices/displays,
property owner handbook, presentations; real estate disclosure, public library,
technical assistance, and school age and adult education classes.
Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Versus Versus Prepa Preparedness
Prepa Prepa redness
Mitigation differs from preparedness in that it is designed to address long term activities
that reduce or eliminate a hazard and/or a hazard’s damages, such as development and
implementation of a hazard mitigation plan, promoting/developing tornado saferooms,
promoting/developing business continuity plans, rerouting transportation of HAZMAT
materials, development/enforcement of building/fire seismic and flood codes and
promoting flood buyouts or retrofit projects. Preparedness activities occur at the predisaster
stage and addresses activities that develop response and recovery activities. These
activities include an inventory of local resources, development/implementation of training
citizens, design/conduct and evaluate responder exercises; development of resource lists
and procurement resources; development of unified incident command agreements and
development of mutual aid agreements.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 3
Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Versus Versus Response Response and and Recovery
Recovery
Mitigation differs from response and recovery in that mitigation is designed to address
long-term activities that reduce or eliminate a hazard and/or a hazard’s damages.
Response and recovery activities occur at the disaster onset and during the post disaster
time frames. Response activities include immediate actions that save lives, protect property
and stabilize the situation and include alerting, securing and aiding the public, mobilizing
emergency personnel and equipment, implementing plans and protective actions,
assessment of the disaster, activating the incident command system and response and
react to the disaster’s effects. Recovery activities occur after the disaster has occurred.
They ensure that all systems return to normal. Such activities include implementation of
damage assessment procedures, remove debris, develop after action reports, develop
disaster assistance grants and rebuild better.
Mitigation Mitigation Plan Plan Benefits Benefits
Benefits
Hazard mitigation planning offers many benefits. These include: saving lives and property,
meeting the needs/policies of each specific jurisdiction, educates jurisdiction officials, public
and partners, reduces vulnerability to future hazards, guide and speed post disaster
recovery, enhance funding opportunities (HMGP, flood mitigation plan credit for FMA and
CRS programs, NOAA/NWS StormReady credit, NRCS/DNR/COE/CDBG grants), promotes
public participation, helps place mitigation project in the budget cycle, helps keep projects
and spending on track, focuses jurisdiction disaster mitigation efforts, guides post disaster
recovery, employs pro-active approach to minimize adverse effects of disasters, evaluates
hazards and risks, and determines mitigation needs and capabilities, solutions, activities
and projects.
Jefferson County County Hazard Mitigation Goals, Goals, Objectives, Objectives, Strategies Strategies and and Coordination
Coordination
This section contains strategies that promote achievement of hazard mitigation, impact
reduction and other hazard mitigation jurisdiction goals. This section will address
mitigation strategies for hazards including flooding, tornado/severe windstorm, winter
storm, earthquake/landslide, dam failure, drought, heat wave and wildfire.
Jefferson County’s mitigation goals were derived from conferences with emergency
managers, jurisdiction stakeholders as well as the key planning documents (i.e. Emergency
Operations Plan, Official Master Plan, floodplain and building ordinances).
The mitigation goals include the following:
• Prevent the loss of life, minimize illness and injury
• Preserve property, infrastructure, business, maintain jurisdiction integrity
• Develop sustainable long-range growth strategy

4
Jefferson County – Section 4
This section is organized with general goals that are to be met by accomplishing the
accompanying objectives, actions and subsequent strategies. An action matrix has been
included for Jefferson County. It provides a reference for the jurisdiction during the
implementation process. It identifies each goal, objective and strategy, identifies the
hazards addressed by each strategy, type of strategy, target completion date, responsible
party/organization for implementation, potential funding source, prioritization, as well as
monitoring and evaluation indicators. Specific information on potential funding sources is
in found in Section 3 of Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The goals, objectives, actions and strategies identified here were developed through a
multi-step process.
• Hazard identification and analysis (identification of the hazards most prevalent of
the area and following the area).
• Area vulnerability assessment (identification the areas of the jurisdiction most
vulnerable to the previously identified hazards).
• Jurisdiction capability assessment questionnaire (assessment identified the steps the
jurisdiction had taken toward reducing their vulnerability to hazards by reviewing
the jurisdiction’s legal, institutional, political, technical and fiscal capability. This
step identified the jurisdiction’s capability to implement future mitigation measures.)
Community Emergency Management Directors and Locations are listed below:
TABLE TABLE J51A J51A J51A LIST LIST OF OF EM EMD EM D AUTHORITIES
Community Salutation Title First Name Last Name Address1 Phone
Jefferson EMD Ms. Susan Green P.O. Box 100 (636) 797-
5381
Festus EMD Mr. Donald D. DeClue 711 West
Main
(639) 937-
6646
Kimmswick EMD Mr. Jerome Selsor P.O. Box 27 (636) 464-
7407
Arnold EMD Mr. Robert Shockey 2101 Jeffco
Blvd.
(636) 296-
3204
Pevely EMD Lt. Terry Thomas P.O. Box 304 (636) 475-
5301
Herculaneum EMD Chief Christopher J. Pigg 1 Parkwood
Ct.
Crystal City EMD Mr. Karry Friedmeyer 130
Mississippi
Ave.
(636) 475-
4447
(636) 931-
2905

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 5
Surveys
Surveys
Public input was sought during the planning process. Missouri has a requirement for an
open meeting process called the Sunshine Law. Section 610.011 of the Sunshine Law
states: "It is the public policy of this state that meetings, records, votes, actions, and
deliberations of public governmental bodies be open to the public unless otherwise
provided by law."
Meetings, discussions and mitigation recommendations have been
documented. The Hazard Mitigation Plan process called for 30-day public comment period
to solicit comments for this plan. Public input was gathered through three workshops held
in St. Louis, Franklin, Jefferson, and St. Louis County. There were also surveys sent to each
municipality and school district in the area with around a 50% return rate. East West
Gateway Council of Governments will file the surveys and be available upon request.
Municipalities and School Districts who did not respond were sent the letter with two
follow up calls to retrieve the information.
TABLE TABLE J51B J51B LOCAL
LOCAL
Old
Old
JURISDICTIONS
JURISDICTIONS JURISDICTIONS Survey Survey Received
Received Resolution
Resolution
City of Ballwin Yes Yes
Yes
City of Bellefontaine Neighbors Yes Yes
Yes
City of Black Jack Yes Yes
Yes
City of Breckenridge Hills Yes Yes
Yes
City of Chesterfield Yes Yes
Yes
City of Clarkson Valley Yes Yes
Yes
City of Clayton Yes Yes
Yes
City of Cool Valley Yes Yes
Yes
City of Country Club Hills Yes
Yes
City of Crestwood Yes Yes
Yes
City of Creve Coeur Yes Yes
Yes
City of Des Peres Yes Yes
Yes
City of DeSoto Yes Yes
Yes
City of Ellisville Yes
Yes
City of Eureka Yes
Yes
City of Glendale Yes
Yes
City of Hazelwood Yes Yes
Yes
City of Herculaneum Yes Yes
Yes
City of Ladue Yes
Yes
City of Lakeshire Yes
Yes
City of Moline Acres Yes
Yes
City of New Melle Yes
Yes
City of Olivette Yes Yes
Yes
City of Olympian Village Yes
Yes
City of Pagedale Yes Yes
Yes
City of Pevely Yes Yes Yes
Yes
City of Richmond Heights Yes
Yes
City of St. Charles Yes Yes
Yes
City of St. Clair Yes
Yes

6
TABLE TABLE J51B J51B LOCAL
LOCAL
Old
Old
JURISDICTIONS JURISDICTIONS Survey Survey Received
Received Resolution
Resolution
City of St. Louis Yes Yes Yes
Yes
City of St. Peters Yes
Yes
City of Sullivan Yes Yes
Yes
City of Sunset Hills Yes Yes Yes
Yes
City of University City Yes Yes
Yes
City of Vinita Park Yes Yes Yes
Yes
City of Warson Woods Yes Yes
Yes
City of Washington Yes Yes
Yes
City of Webster Groves Yes Yes
Yes
City of Weldon Spring Yes Yes
Yes
Village of Champ Yes
Yes
Village of Hanley Hills Yes Yes
Yes
Village of Parkdale Yes
Yes
Village of Riverview Ye Yes Ye
Yes
Village of Twin Oaks Yes Yes
Yes
City of Lake Saint Louis Yes Yes
Yes
City of Bella Villa Yes Yes
Yes
City of Berkeley Yes
Yes
Village of Wilbur Park Yes
Yes
City of Cottleville Yes
Yes
City of Florissant Yes Yes
Yes
City of Jennings Yes Yes Yes
Yes
City of Kirkwood Yes
Yes
City of Manchester Yes Yes
Yes
City of Maplewood Yes Yes
Yes
City of Maryland Heights Yes
Yes
City of New Haven Yes
Yes
City of Oakland Yes Yes
Yes
City of Overland Yes
Yes
City of Portage Des Sioux Yes
Yes
City of St. George Yes
Yes
City of Union Yes Yes
Yes
City of Velda City Yes
Yes
City of Wentzville Yes Yes
Yes
City of Wildwood Yes Yes
Yes
TABLE TABLE J51C J51C SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICTS Survey Survey Received
Received
Bayless School District Yes
Yes
Brentwood School District Yes Yes
Yes
DeSoto 73 School Dist. Yes
Yes
Dunklin R-V School Dist. Yes
Yes
Fort Zumwalt R-II School Dist. Yes
Yes
Francis Howell R-III Yes
Yes
Hillsboro R-3 School District Yes
Yes
Jefferson County – Section 4

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 7
Survey Survey Results
Results
TABLE TABLE J51C J51C SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICTS Survey Survey Received
Received
Jefferson County R-VII School Yes
Yes
Ladue School Dist. Yes
Yes
Mehlville R-IX School Dist. Yes
Yes
Northwest R-I School Dist. Yes
Yes
Parkway School District Yes
Yes
Rockwood R-VI School District Yes
Yes
Special School District of St. Louis Co Yes
Yes
St. Charles R-VI School Dist. Yes
Yes
St. Clair R-XIII School Yes
Yes
Strain-Japan R-16 School Dist. Yes
Yes
Sullivan School District Yes
Yes
University City School Dist. Yes
Yes
Washington School District Yes
Yes
*School Districts not included in 2004 All Hazard Mititgation Resolution Signoff
Each county and one by school jurisdiction broke down the survey results.
St. Louis County had the highest return rate of surveys at 46.9% or 45 of 96 municipalities.
Most of the municipalities who were involved in Hazard Mitigation projects pertained to
flooding or in adopting Emergency Management Programs. Most of the projects
implemented since 2004 were mostly in response to CERT training and Emergency
response service and not to mitigation project itself. Only 22% of county municipalities
have ever applied for mitigation funding with only 6.7% successful in receiving funding.
The county seems to not have concerns with the original mitigation plan and is adequate in
educating the public on most natural disasters.
St. Charles County had a low survey response rate of 33.3% as in comparison with St. Louis
County. There were only 6 survey responses from the 18 municipalities, which may skew
the percentages with such a low return rate. Every municipality was given a survey via mail
and two phone calls to respond. 83.3% of municipalities in St. Charles County responded
to not being involved in Mitigation Projects at the time. Only 16.7% responded to
implementing projects since 2004 with two responses in floodplain management and levee
construction near 370. Municipalities in St. Charles County have applied for mitigation
funding in the past yet unsuccessful in every case (according to the surveys). None of the
municipalities have concerns in mitigation and most believe their public output concerning
mitigation preparedness is sufficient. In relation to repetitive loss properties in the St.
Charles County these survey responses seem skewed. Some of the flood prone
municipalities and/or unincorporated did not respond to the survey which may give
reasoning in not having mitigation plan update concerns.

8
Jefferson County – Section 4
Franklin County had the lowest response rate at 25% or 2 surveys out of the 12
municipalities. The one response yes to migration projects involved brush clearance from
Busch Creek to prevent future flooding. One municipality wanted to apply for funding
from the government for generators and feels this is vital need in mitigating the effects of
power outages due to ice, wind, and flooding. Mitigation funding does not cover
generators, which denied the request before put forth. Except for the generator request,
all three municipalities did not see mitigation funding as concern. None of the
municipalities have concerns in mitigation and most believe their public output concerning
mitigation preparedness is sufficient.
Jefferson County had a better response rate at 46.2% or 6 out of 13 municipalities.
Jefferson County and Herculaneum both responded to hazard mitigation projects at of
2008 for a spring flood damaging a section of a high school and some residential
properties. Mitigation funding was applied for in the housing buyout yet is still pending
and private insurance covered damages at the high school. Two of the six responses were
concerned with mitigation funding and with the care of special needs persons yet believed
public education and emergency preparedness was satisfactory.
The School Districts, new to the All Hazard Mitigation Update, had a 35.3% response rate
with 18 of 51 responding. Nearly ever school responded to having a basic emergency
safety plan in the case of a natural and/or terrorist event. Only one spoke of building a
section of the school in a floodplain. Most have implemented emergency plans but have
not taken advantage of funding given for specific mitigation funding pertaining to this
update. Though one of the schools have applied and received funding for the removal of
mercury from their facility. School districts had the highest percentage at 44% of concern
with the mitigation update. In being new to the update most do not have the knowledge
of grants and funding options one would have for federal funding. The school districts feel
they take care of their students yet half do have concerns in educating the public
concerning mitigation procedures in the case of natural or man made disasters.
Survey responses are located below with an asterisk explaining the number of surveys
received in comparison with the percentages.
TABLE TABLE J51D J51D
SURVEY
St. St. St. Louis Louis Louis County County
County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
SURVEY RESULTS
RESULTS
Projects
Implement-ed
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
No No-N/A No
N/A 71.1% 48.9% 77.8% 86.7% 60.0% 28.9% 26.7%
Yes Yes
28.9% 51.1% 22.2% 6.7% 40.0% 68.9% 71.1%
Pending Pending
6.7%
*45 survey responses out of 96 municipalities (46.9%)

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 9
St. St. Charles Charles County County
County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
Projects
Implemented
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
No No-N/A No
N/A 83.3% 83.3% 83.3% 83.3% 100.0% 66.7% 33.3%
Yes Yes
16.7% 16.7% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 33.3% 66.7%
Pending Pending
16.7%
*6 survey responses out of 18 municipalities (33.3%)
Franklin Franklin County
County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
Projects
Implemented
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
No No-N/A No
N/A 66.7% 66.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 33.3% 33.3%
Yes Yes
33.3% 33.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 66.7% 66.7%
Pending Pending Pending
0.0%
*3 survey responses out of 12 municipalities (25%)
Jefferson Jefferson County
County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
Projects
Implemented
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
No No-N/A No
N/A 50.0% 50.0% 66.7% 83.3% 66.7% 50.0% 33.3%
Yes Yes
50.0% 50.0% 33.3% 0.0% 33.3% 50.0% 66.7%
TABLE TABLE J51E J51E 2009 2009 All All Hazard Hazard Mitigation Mitigation Plan Plan Update Update Local Local Government Government Survey Surve
Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Involved Involved in
in Projects Projects Implemented
Implemented
Applied Applied for for Mitigation
Mitigation
Funding Funding Fed, Fed, State,
State,
Municipality
Municipality
City of Arnold
City of Byrnes Mill
Hazard Hazard Mit. Mit. Projects
Projects Since Since 2004
2004
Local
Local
Village of Cedar Hill Lakes
City of Crystal City
City of DeSoto No. No. No.
City of Olympian Village
City of Festus
No. No. No.
City of Herculaneum Storm water at Barclay Emergency warning Sewer/Manhole/Flood
street that is flooding sirens have been Plain Mitigation
and damaging the ordered. Waiting for
high school locker delivery and
room and track.
Emergency notification
system
installation.
Village of Parkdale No. No. No.

10
City of Hillsboro
Jefferson County Yes. Resulting from
2008 spring flood we
are working in
residential home buyout
programs.
Property Buy-outs
under Mitigation
Program.
Scotsdale
City of Pevely Yes. Adopting more
stringent building
codes to meet
earthquake and high
wind standards.
Adding more
emergency sirens.
Jefferson County – Section 4
Fed/State Programs for
buy-outs.
TABLE TABLE JJ51F
J J51F
51F 2009 2009 All All Hazard Hazard Mitigation Mitigation Plan Update Local Local Local Government Government Survey
Jurisdiction's Jurisdiction's Jurisdiction's EOP EOP
EOP Educ. Educ. Educ. Public
Public
Successful Successful Funding Funding
Funding Mitigation Mitigation Concerns Concerns or
or Protect Protect People People w/ w/
w/ Concerning Concerning Mit. Mit. &
&
Municipality
Municipality
City of Arnold
City of Byrnes Mill
Village of Cedar Hill Lakes
City of Crystal City
Request
Request
Update Update Plan
Plan
Needs
Needs
Preparedness
Preparedness
City of DeSoto N/A. No. Yes. Through newspaper,
newsletter, activity
participation
City of Olympian Village No. No. No. No.
City of Festus
City of Herculaneum No. Storm Water Project-
At the high school
adding an additional
18" storm drain, a
double curb catch
basin and repairing
previous detention
ponds.
No.
Yes. media and quarterly
news letter
Village of Parkdale No. No. No. No.
City of Hillsboro
Jefferson County For 2008 funding
request still pending. I
do not know about
previous years.
Yes. Yes. Training for core
services, education for
public- workshops and
media releases.
Scotsdale
City of Pevely No. No. No. Through newspaper,
newsletter, activity
participation.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 11
Evaluation
Evaluation
Several mitigation actions were proposed and discussed by all of the participants at the
mitigation workshops for inclusion into the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The following table
provides an analysis of the County’s proposed mitigation actions. Each action was
reviewed according to the STAPLEE criteria. STAPLEE criteria include: Social, Technical,
Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic and Environmental considerations. The asterisks
in the columns on the right indicate the action would have a positive effect.
TABLE TABLE J52 J52 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY PROPOSED PROPOSED MITIGATION MITIGATION ACTION
ACTION
EVALUATION
EVALUATION
Proposed Proposed Action Action
S T A P L E E
Objective Objective 1.1: 1.1: Raise Raise public public awareness.
awareness.
Encourage development of public outreach programs * * * * * *
Encourage organizations to develop hazard measures for
employees/visitors
* * * * * * *
Encourage development of emergency management
curriculum in schools.
* * * * * * *
Encourage agencies to identify, develop outreach program
for special needs population and hazard mitigation
measures
* * * * * * *
Encourage education and construction of saferooms in
mobile home parks
* * * * * * *
Objective Objective 11.2:
1 .2: Establish Establish Establish warning warning systems systems for for all all hazards.
hazards.
Encourage jurisdictions, LEPC, EMA to determine, report
warning system data gaps for all hazards.
* * * * * * *
Encourage development of evacuation plan for all disasters * * * * *
Encourage placement of flood warning signs * * * * * * *
Encourage special needs population to obtain NOAA radios, *
saferooms
* * * * * *
Objective Objective 1.3: 1.3: Decrease Decrease occurrence occurrence and and impacts impacts of of flooding.
flooding.
Encourage participation in NFIP, CRS * * * * * * *
Encourage residents, jurisdictions, developers to protect
rivers and corridors
* * * * * * *
Encourage residents, etc. to design, build stormwater
systems that replicate water movement
* * * * *
Encourage residents, stakeholders to participate in
* * * * * *
watershed plans to prevent flooding.
Encourage jurisdictions to identify, purchase remaining
repetitive flood buyout properties.
* * * * *
Revise flood fighting plans as needed. * * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions to strengthen floodplain
regulations.
Objective Objective 2.1: 2.1: Reduce Reduce or or prevent prevent impacts impacts from from hazards hazards on
on
private private private properties.
properties.
* * * * * * *
Encourage education of residents on property protection
from hazards (checklists, preparedness kits).
* * * * * *
Jurisdiction planning departments encouraged to use
hazard maps with developers, home buyers, construction
and engineers.
* * * * * * *

12
Jefferson County – Section 4
TABLE TABLE J52 J52 JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY PROPOSED PROPOSED MITIGATION MITIGATION ACTION
ACTION
EVALUATION
EVALUATION
Proposed Proposed Action Action
S T A P L E E
Encourage utilities, communications, developers to
construct underground lines
Objective Objective 2.2: 2.2: Reduced Reduced or or prevent prevent impacts impacts from from hazards hazards on on
public public properties.
properties.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions to adopt, enforce most current * * * * * *
codes, ordinances for all hazards.
Encourage those responsible for special needs population to
take FEMA structural safety classes for building integrity
* * * * * *
Encourage emergency response agencies and districts to
relocate facilities away from geographically redundant
areas.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions to adopt open burning control
ordinances.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdiction agencies to coordinate
communications plans.
* * * *
Encourage jurisdictions, state, federal agencies to review,
prioritize emergency routes, retrofit infrastructure used for
hazard events
* * * * * * *
Encourage upgrade of lifeline facilities to meet most current
building seismic codes
Objective Objective 3.1: 3.1: Develop Develop collaborative collaborative hazard hazard mitigation
mitigation
efforts efforts across across jurisdictional jurisdictional boundaries.
boundaries.
boundaries.
* * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions to implement Hazard Mitigation
Plan
* * * * * * *
Encourage partnering with local, county, region, state
governments
* * * *
Encourage coordination between levee districts to protect
those living up and downstream.
* * * * * * *
Highly recommend pertinent jurisdictions conduct proper
record keeping for all documents related to disasters.
Objective Objective 3.2: 3.2: Reduce Reduce impacts impacts and and promote promote protection protection of
natural natural natural resources.
resources.
* * * * *
Encourage development of jurisdiction land use plans,
zoning, regulations to protect downstream residents from
dam failure.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdiction educate residents on proper disposal
of yard, commercial and household waste.
* * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions, residents to maintain streams,
corridors.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions assist MDNR in full implementation
of dam safety program.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions to develop greenways for flood
protection that parallels streams, rivers.
* * * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions to become familiar and comply with
drought, water restrictions.
* * * * * *
Encourage jurisdictions, stakeholders to work together to
protect watersheds, encourage stormwater practices for
flood protection
* * * * * * *

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 13
Workshop participants discussed suggestions, added suggestions and deleted some for
various actions by using the STAPLEE evaluation. The following actions were eliminated for
various reasons as shown on the following list:
• A comment was made pertaining to coordination between local stakeholders and
various state agencies on design and construction of roadways that were being
rebuilt from severe flooding. The local stakeholders felt that the state agencies were
not taking their suggestions and expertise into advisement.
• A comment was made regarding the need for specialty equipment for response and
recovery activities. This was discarded as not being directly relevant to hazard
mitigation planning.
The final mitigation recommendations include the six categories of mitigation: prevention,
property protection, natural resource protection, emergency services, structural projects
and public information. Recommendations include, but are not limited to those listed
below.
GOAL GOAL #1: #1: Prevent Prevent the the loss loss of of life; life; minimize minimize minimize illness illness and and injury injury injury on on a a local, local, countywide countywide and
and
regional regional basis.
basis.
Objectives:
Objectives:
1. Raise public awareness concerning hazards, including measures that can be taken to
promote mitigation and increase disaster preparedness, response and recovery
capabilities.
Actions Actions
Actions
a. Develop public outreach programs that ensure all members of the jurisdiction
have access to information on hazards, consequences, and steps to be taken
to reduce risk at home and work.
b. Businesses, governments and special districts to develop and distribute
pertinent hazard mitigation measures for employees and visitors
c. Develop emergency management curriculum in public and private schools,
colleges and universities to develop hazard mitigation measures (for
incorporation into emergency plans) for schools; post plans on school
internet site.
d. Appropriate jurisdiction agencies to identify all special needs populations in
the jurisdiction, and develop a special outreach program for those at risk,
and coordinate hazard mitigation plans (including backup power,
evacuation, and warning plans for all hazards).
e. Educate and construction of saferooms in all mobile
home parks.

14
Jefferson County – Section 4
2. Establish warning systems for all disasters for businesses, schools, special districts
and special needs populations and governments.
Actions
Actions
a. Jurisdictions to work with local emergency planning committee and
emergency management agency to determine and report on warning system
gaps for all hazards, including dam failures, tornadoes and flash floods;
make recommendations and act on them.
b. Develop evacuation plan for all disasters.
c. Place flash flood warning signs.
d. Special needs population to develop hazard measures to include distribution
of NOAA weather radios; encourage placement of saferooms (in strategic
locations).
3. Decrease occurrence and impact of flooding.
Actions
Actions
a. Appropriate jurisdictions to participate in National Flood Insurance Program,
CRS, Hazard Mitigation Plan.
b. Residents, jurisdictions and developers to protect and maintain natural river
and stream channels and corridors.
c. Residents, jurisdictions and developers to utilize, design and/or build systems
to detain stormwater in ways to promote infiltration and replicate natural
movement of water.
d. Local governments and stakeholders to participate in watershed planning
that protect streams against flooding.
e. Jurisdictions to identify remaining repetitive flood loss properties for buyout
purposes; prioritize and implement buyouts.
f. Review and revise flood-fighting plans as appropriate.
g. Jurisdictions to strengthen floodplain regulations.
GOAL GOAL # # 2: 2: Preserve Preserve Preserve and and maintain maintain property, property, infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure, businesses, businesses, and and jurisdiction
jurisdiction
vitality vitality on on on local, local, countywide countywide and and regional regional regional basis. basis.
basis.
Objecti Objectives: Objecti ves:
1. Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on private properties
Actions
Actions
a. Educate residents, businesses and jurisdictions on hazards by circulating
brochures, checklist and preparedness kits to prepare structures for disasters
(such as tiedowns, gas shutoff valves and other utilities).

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 15
b. Jurisdiction planning departments to work with home builders associations,
realtors’ associations, developers; encourage use of hazard maps by public
for purchasing, construction, improvement of properties.
c. Utilities and communications businesses and developers to
consider installation of underground electric and communications lines.
2. Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on public properties.
Actions
Actions
a. Jurisdictions adopting and enforcing most current
codes, ordinances, policies for all hazards, especially floods, earthquakes and
tornadoes.
b. Those who are responsible for special needs populations to take
FEMA structural safety training classes for building integrity.
c. Emergency response agencies and districts to locate facilities
away from all geographically redundant hazard areas
d. Jurisdictions to adopt open burning control ordinances
e. Utilize municipal leagues as nexus for coordination
f. Appropriate jurisdiction agencies to coordinate communications plan for
hazard events.
g. Appropriate jurisdictions, state and federal agencies to review, prioritize
emergency route and retrofit infrastructure (roads, bridges, buildings,
emergency medical facilities) that will be utilized for disasters.
h. Upgrade lifeline facilities to meet current building code seismic standards
GOAL GOAL #3: #3: Encourage Encourage growth growth that that is is compatible compatible with with hazard hazard mitigation mitigation strategies
strategies
identified identified in in this this plan plan on on on a a local, local, countywide countywide and and regional regional basis.
basis.
Objectives:
Objectives:
1. Develop collaborative hazard mitigation efforts across jurisdictional boundaries.
Actions Actions
Actions
a. Jurisdictions and local emergency management agencies to implement the
All-Hazard Mitigation programs.
b. Partner with local, county and region-wide governments and encourage
legislation to collaborate and promote best management practices in local,
regional and state planning.
c. Coordinate levee districts in order to protect upstream and downstream
interests.
d. Highly recommend participating jurisdictions maintain proper recordkeeping
of pertinent documents related to disasters.

16
2. Reduce impacts and promote protection to natural resources.
Actions Actions
Actions
Jefferson County – Section 4
a. Develop land use plans, zoning and regulations to protect downstream
residents from impacts of storm water as well as levee and dam failure.
b. Jurisdictions to educate residents on proper disposal of yard, commercial and
household waste (not in sewer system or streams).
c. Jurisdictions, residents to clean up creeks and streams.
d. Jurisdictions to assist MDNR in full implementation of dam safety program.
e. Jurisdictions to develop greenways for flood protection that parallel streams,
rivers
f. Jurisdictions to become familiar and comply with drought/water
restrictions
g. Jurisdictions and local stakeholders to work together to protect watersheds
and encourage sound stormwater practices for flood protection.
Strategic Strategic Implementation
Implementation
Implementation
The State of Missouri SEMA requires that the Hazard Mitigation Plan contain a description
of the jurisdiction’s mitigation strategy for reducing disaster damages and implementing
mitigation activities.
Adoption of the plan demonstrates Jefferson County’s commitment to working toward
fulfilling the mitigation goals and objectives outlines in the plan. This also legitimizes the
plan and authorizes the various responsible agencies to incorporate mitigation as a part of
their job duties. Adoption fulfills requirements of several Federal programs (CRS, FMS) that
require local governments to adopt mitigation strategy. Adoption mechanisms provide a
better opportunity for the mitigation planning activities to be ingrained into regular
government operations. Jefferson County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan will be implemented by
various departments and agencies within Jefferson County. The implementation process
will include coordination among the County departments and coordinated with other
relevant agencies or districts though Jefferson County’s Emergency Management Agency.
Jefferson County will set up a system to monitor progress and evaluate the effectiveness of
implemented actions with revisions as needed. Every five years, the county will review the
plan and include any needed updates. The updated plan will be submitted for
SEMA/FEMA approval. Copies of the signed adoption resolutions are included in the
Regional Overview. The plan will be reviewed for any updates following any major
disasters that occur within the county.

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 17
Cities Cities with with Higher Higher Exposure Exposure to to County County Hazards
Hazards
The cities of Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, DeSoto, Festus, Herculaneum,
Kimmswick, Pevely, Crystal City, and Scotsdale are the incorporated areas within Jefferson
County that are found to have a significantly higher exposure to those hazards affecting
the County. The County’s goals, objectives, and actions encompass those needed to deal
with the issues found in these cities; especially targeting repetitive flood loss properties for
buyout. It is recommended that Jefferson County work with these cities to incorporate
county actions into these jurisdictions specific hazard mitigation concerns.
Analysis Analysis and and Prioritization Prioritization of of Mitigation Mitigation Actions Actions
Actions
Jefferson County’s mitigation actions promote and/or support the development of local
hazard mitigation plans, projects and activities. Examples of actions include instituting
watershed plans, encouraging adoption of the most current codes and ordinances,
development of flood fighting plans, prioritizing flood buyout properties.
The following matrix provides an analysis and prioritization of the county’s hazard
mitigation goals, objectives and actions. The matrix distinguishes between the identified
hazards and the county’s mitigation actions. It is recommended that the County will place
an emphasis on cost-benefit analysis for further mitigation project prioritization purposes
when the budget analyses are conducted. The matrix also identifies those agencies
responsible for implementation along with the respective funding sources. It is
recommended that actions be coordinated, where applicable with Missouri’s mitigation
actions.
Criteria for prioritization are:
Historically, Jefferson County has been most affected by flooding hazards followed in
severity by tornado/thunderstorm, severe winter storm, heat wave, and drought. The risk
of earthquake, dam failure and wildfire must be addressed, even though the County has
not yet experienced these hazards.
Some actions may be high priorities, but will require a lengthy planning process. These
types of actions will be designated as a “high priority” with a future target date for
completion.
Certain hazards can impact incorporated areas more than the County as a whole. The
incorporated areas that could be specifically affected are identified as follows:
1= Arnold
2=Byrnes Mill
3=Cedar Hill Lakes
4=Crystal City
5=DeSoto

18
6=Festus 11=Hillsboro
7=Herculaneum 12=Olympian Village
8=Kimmswick 13=Parksdale
9=Pevely 14= All communities
10=Scotsdale
Jefferson County – Section 4
Jefferson County involvement is assumed for all of the items on the following Action
Matrix.
Monitoring, Monitoring, Monitoring, Evaluating Evaluating Evaluating and and and Updating Updating Updating th the th the
e Plan Plan
Plan
The narrative below describes the process to follow for monitoring, evaluating,
maintaining, updating and obtaining SEMA/FEMA’s approval of the Hazard Mitigation Plan
every five years and on an as needed basis.
In the course of their duties, emergency managers, in collaboration with their respective
Emergency Management Committee should meet annually and on an informal and routine
basis to focus on monitoring and evaluating as well as updating the Hazard Mitigation
Plan. In addition, a regional meeting could also be organized by Emergency Managers on
an annual basis to provide cross-jurisdictional information sharing federal and state
updates and opportunities for project development, implementation, and funding with
jurisdictions and stakeholders. It is recommended that the Emergency Management
Committee include County Commissioners, municipal officials, fire, law enforcement,
emergency medical and public health officials for various objectives of this plan. It is
recommended that the County public notice these meetings and encourage the public to
participate.
It is recommended that the committee review each goal and objective to determine the
relevance to local, regional, statewide and federal disaster situations and to ensure that
they are addressing current and expected conditions. The committee should review the risk
assessment portion of the plan to determine if this information should be updated. The
parties responsible for the various implementation actions should report on the status of
their projects and will include which implementation processes worked well, difficulties
encountered, coordination efforts and which strategies should be revised.
The Emergency Management Committee should take three months to update the plan
before submitting it to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer. If no changes are necessary,
the State Hazard Mitigation Officer should be given a justification for this determination.
Copies of the plan should be catalogued and kept on hand at the main Jefferson County
library branch. In addition, a copy of the plan will be available on the East-West Gateway
Council of Governments website (www.ewgateway.org), the Office of Emergency
Management and at the Jefferson County Clerk’s Office. The existence and location of
these copies should be publicized by the daily local newspaper, and listed on the county
website. Contained in the plan is the address and telephone number of the Office of

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 19
Emergency Management responsible for keeping track of public comments on the plan.
Copies of the plan and proposed changes will be posted on the county website. The site
will contain an email address and telephone number to which people can direct their
comments. A link to this site will be provided on the East-West Gateway Council of
Governments website.

20
WORKSHEET
WORKSHEET
Jefferson County – Section 4
JEFFERSON JEFFERSON COUNTY COUNTY FIVE FIVE-YEAR FIVE YEAR ACTION MATRIX WORKSHEET

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 21
Community Community
Action
Action
Type Type Type of of
of
Strategy
Strategy
Jefferson Jefferson County's County's Proposed Proposed Five Five-Year Five Year Action Matrix
New,
New, Estimated
Estimated
Revision/Ongoing
Revision/Ongoing Ta Target Ta rget Date
Probable Probable Lead
Lead
Organizer
Organizer
Goal Goal #1: #1: Prevent Prevent loss loss of of life, life, minimize minimize illness, illness, injury injury on on local, local,
countywide and regional basis.
1.1 1.1 Raise Raise Raise public public awareness.
awareness.
14
14
14
14
14
Develop public
outreach program
Encourage
development of
hazard measures for
visitors, employees
Develop emergency
management
curriculum in
schools
Agencies to identify
and develop
jurisdiction outreach
plan for special
needs population
Public
Information New & Ongoing
Public
Information New & Ongoing
Public
Information New & Ongoing
Public
Information New
Educate, need,
construct saferooms
in mobile home Public
parks
Information New
1.2 1.2 Establish Establish warning warning systems systems for for all all hazards.
hazards.
14
Jurisdictions to
work with LEPC,
EMA to determine
and report on
warning system
data gaps including
dam failure,
Emergency
Services New
2009 &
Continuing
County
Information/
Planning Officer
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
2009 &
Continuing Schools
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Continuing
County
Information/
Planning Officer
American Red
Cross
2009 &
Annually County EMA
Potential
Potential
Funding
Funding
Sources Sources Priority Priority Evaluation
Evaluation
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds High
internal
funds Low
fed &
state govt.
program
funds/
private
funding High
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds High
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding High
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds High
Identified Identified Natural Natural Hazards
Hazards
Tornado
Tornado
Flood
Flood
Winter Winter
Drought
Drought
Heat Heat Wave Wave
Earthquake
Earthquake
Dam Dam Failure Failure
Wildfire
Wildfire
Program
completed and
distributed x x x x x x x x
Program
completed and
distributed x x x x x x
Curriculum
completed and
implemented x x x x x x x
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented x x x x x x x
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented x
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented x x x x x x x x

22
14
tornadoes, flash
floods
Encourage
development of
evacuation plan for
all natural disasters
Encourage
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, placement of flood
10,11,12,13 warning signs
Special needs
population obtain
NOAA weather
radios, saferooms
(in strategic
14 locations)
1.3 1.3 Decrease Decrease occurrence occurrence occurrence and and impacts impacts of of flooding.
flooding.
Emergency
Services New & Ongoing
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
Emergency
Services Ongoing Continuing County EMA
Emergency
Services New & Ongoing
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, Participate in NFIP,
10,11,12,13 CRS Prevention Ongoing
14
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,12,13
Encourage
residents,
jurisdictions,
developers to
protect, maintain
rivers, corridors Prevention
Residents,
jurisdictions,
developers to use,
design, build
New and
ongoing
systems to detain
stormwater that
replicates natural Structural New & Ongoing
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Continuing
County
Floodplain
manager
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
University
Engineering
Department
govt.
program
funds Medium
Jefferson County – Section 4
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented x x x x x x x x
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds Medium Signs placed x x
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding High
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented x x x x
internal
funds High Status Improved x x
internal
funds Medium Status Improved x x
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding High
Design
Plans/Construction
of Structures x x

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 23
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,12,13
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,12,13
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,12,13
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,12,13
water movement
Jurisdictions,
stakeholders to
participate in
watershed planning
to protect against
floods Prevention New & Ongoing
Jurisdictions to
identify, purchase
remaining repetitive
flood loss buyout
properties
Revise floodfighting
plans as
needed
Jurisdictions to
strengthen
floodplain
Property
Protection Ongoing
Emergency
Services Ongoing
regulations to
reduce impacts
from flooding Prevention Ongoing
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Annually
2009 &
Continuing
Goal Goal #2: #2: Preserve Preserve and and maintain maintain property, property, infrastructure, infrastructure, businesses, businesses, jurisdiction jurisdiction vitality.
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
Floodplain
manager
County
Floodplain
manager
County
Commission
2.1 2.1 2.1 Reduce Reduce Reduce or or prevent prevent impacts impacts impacts from from hazards hazards on on private private properties.
properties.
Educate residents
on property
protection from
hazards (checklists, Public
14 preparedness kits) Information Ongoing Ongoing County EMA
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding High
govt.
program
funds High
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds High
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds High
Attendance
Records x x
Repetitive Loss
Properties
Mitigated x x
Updated Plans
Revised and
Adopted x x
Revised
Regulations in
Place x x
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds High Status Improved x x x x x x x x

24
14
14
Jurisdiction
planning
department to use
hazard maps with
developers, home
buyers,
construction,
engineers
Utilities,
communications,
developers to
installation of
Prevention New
underground lines Prevention New
2.2 2.2 Reduce Reduce or or prevent prevent impacts impacts from from hazards hazards on on public public properties.
properties.
Jurisdictions to
adopt, enforce most
current codes,
ordinances for all
14 hazards
Those responsible
for special needs
population to take
FEMA structural
Prevention New
safety classes for
New and
14 building integrity
Emergency response
agencies and
districts to locate
facilities away from
Prevention ongoing
geographically Property
14 redundant areas
Jurisdictions to
adopt open burning
Protection New
14 control ordinances
Jurisdictions to
coordinate
communications
Prevention Ongoing
14 plans Prevention Ongoing
14
Jurisdictions, state,
federal agencies to
review, prioritize
emergency routes, Prevention New & Ongoing
2009 &
County
Planning/Building
Continuing Department
2009 &
County
Planning/Building
Continuing Department
2009 &
Continuing
County
Commission
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
2009 &
Continuing
County
Commission
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
internal
funds High
internal
funds Low
internal
funds High
fed &
state govt.
program
funds High
Jefferson County – Section 4
Completed and
publicized
Inquiries and
Design
Plans/Construction
of Underground
Infrastructure
x x x x x
Revised
Regulations in
Place x x x x x x x x
Attendance
Records x
fed, state,
local govt.
program
At Risk Facilities
funds High Relocated
Revised
x x x x
internal
Regulations in
funds
fed &
state govt.
program
Low Place x
funds Medium Status Improved x x x x x x x x
fed &
state govt.
program
funds Medium
Completed and
Implemented x

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 25
14
retrofit
infrastructure
Upgrade of lifeline
facilities to meet
seismic codes Prevention New
2009 &
Continuing County EMA
fed &
state govt.
program
funds Medium
Encourage Encourage growth growth that that is is compatible compatible compatible with with hazard hazard hazard mitigation mitigation strategies strategies identified identified in in this this plan plan on on local, local, countywide countywide and and regional regional basis. basis.
basis.
3.1 3.1 Develop Develop collaborative collaborative multi multi-interest multi multi interest interest committee to develop and achieve achieve multi multi-jurisdictional
multi
jurisdictional goals. goals.
goals.
Jurisdictions to
implement hazard
2009 and
internal
14 mitigation plan
Partner with local,
county, regionwide,
state
governments;
encourage
legislation to
promote, establish
Prevention New annually County EMA funds High
state planning
2009 &
internal
14 department
State planning
department to
coordinate levee
districts to protect
those living
Prevention New Continuing Legislature funds High
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, upstream and
2009 & State Planning internal
10,11,12,13 downstream
Recommend
pertinent
jurisdictions
conduct proper
recordkeeping for
all documents
Prevention New Continuing Department funds High
related to natural Public
2009 &
internal
14 disasters
Information New Continuing County funds Low
3.2 3.2 Reduce Reduce impacts impacts and and promote promote protection protection of of natural natural resources.
resources.
Construction
Complete x
Plan Completed
and Implemented x x x x x x x x
Establishment of
State Planning
Department x x x x x x x x
Levee Districts
inventoried x x
Documents
Archived x x x x x x x x

26
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,12,13
14
14
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,
10,11,2,13
14
14
14
Develop
jurisdictions' land
use plans, zoning,
regulations to
protect downstream
residents from
impacts of dam
failure
Jurisdictions to
educate residents
on proper disposal
of yard,
commercial,
household waste
Jurisdictions,
residents to
maintain creeks,
streams
Natural
resource
protection New
2009 &
Continuing
Natural
resource
protection Ongoing Ongoing
Natural
resource
protection Ongoing Ongoing
County
Planning/Zoning
Officer
County
Department of
Environment
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
Jurisdictions to
assist MDNR in full Natural
County
implementation of resource
2009 & Planning/Zoning
dam safety program protection
Jurisdictions to
develop greenways
New Continuing Officer
for flood protection Natural
Watershed
that parallel streams resource
Advisory
and rivers
Jurisdictions to
become familiar
protection New & Ongoing Ongoing Committee
and comply with Natural
drought, water resource
2009 &
restrictions
Jurisdictions,
stakeholders to
work together
together to protect
watersheds and
protection New Continuing NRCS
encourage
Natural
Watershed
stormwater resource
2009 & Advisory
practices for flood protection New & Ongoing Continuing Committee
internal
funds High
Jefferson County – Section 4
Regulations in
place x x
internal
funds Low Status Improved x x
internal
funds Low Status Improved x x
Potential
Funding
Sources High
Status
Improved/Risk
Reduced x x
internal
Design
Plans/Construction
funds Medium of Greenways x x
fed &
state govt.
program
funds Low Status Improved x x
internal
funds High
Establishment of
Sustainable
Watershed
committees x x

A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 27
protection
1 Arnold 2 Byrnes Mill 3 Cedar Hill Lakes 4 Crystal City 5 DeSoto 6 Festus 7 Herculaneum 8 Kimmswick 9 Pevely 10 Scotsdale 11
Hillsboro 12 Olympian Village 13 Parkdale 14 All Communities