City of Grand Junction, CO Community Profiles

Community Profile.

The Town of Collbran is located in eastern Mesa County; see Figure 26. Collbran is in the Plateau Valley on the western slope of the Rocky Mountains between the 9,000-foot Battlement Mesa to the north and east and the 11,000-foot Grand Mesa to the south and west. The Town is approximately 35 miles northeast of the City of Grand Junction and is completely bordered by unincorporated Mesa County land.

Cattle ranchers settled in the area which is now Collbran and the Town itself was incorporated in 1908. The population of the Town of Collbran is 751 in 2018 based on State Demographer’s information (Demographer). The climate of Collbran is semiarid. The mesa areas surrounding Collbran are subject to moderately heavy precipitation. Elevation greatly influences the amount of precipitation. The annual precipitation at Collbran averages approximately 13 inches, and the higher elevations of the mesas receive from 20 to 40 inches. Occurrence of precipitation is fairly uniform in the Collbran area, and slightly less than one-half falls as snow from December to April. Most winter precipitation occurs in the higher elevations as snow, and a deep snowpack ordinarily begins in late October and snowmelt in late April. Snowmelt continues through early July. The mean annual temperature at Collbran is 46.4 degrees Fahrenheit. Cooler temperatures prevail in the higher elevations. (FEMA, Flood Insurance Study, Mesa County Colorado, 2009)

Hazard Identification and Profiles.

The HMPC identified the hazards that affect the community and summarized their geographic location, probability of future occurrence, potential magnitude or severity, and planning significance specific to the Town in Table 18.

Table 18: Collbran Hazards Profiles
Hazard Type	Geographic Location	Occurrences	Magnitude/ Severity	Hazard Level
Avalanche	Isolated	Occasional	Critical	M
Drought	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Earthquake	Medium	Occasional	Limited	M
Expansive Soils	Isolated	Occasional	Negligible	L
Extreme Heat	Large	Occasional	Negligible	M
Wildfire	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	H
Flood	Large	Likely	Limited	H
Hailstorm	Small	Occasional	Negligible	L
Land Subsidence	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L
Landslide/Rockfall	Small	Likely	Limited	M
Lightning	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	M
Tornado	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Windstorm	Small	Likely	Limited	M
Winter Storm	Large	Likely	Critical	H
Dam Failure	Large	Occasional	Critical	H
Hazardous Materials	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L

Vulnerability Assessment.

The intent of this section is to assess the Town of Collbran’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole. The vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of moderate or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area.

Community Asset Inventory.

Table 19 shows the total population, number of structures, and assessed value of improvements to parcels in the Town of Collbran. Land values have been purposely excluded because land remains following disasters, and subsequent market devaluations are frequently short-term and difficult to quantify. Additionally, State and federal disaster assistance programs generally do not address loss of land or its associated value.

Table 19: Town of Collbran’s Asset Inventory
Jurisdiction:	Town of Collbran
Hazard:	Wildfire
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	195	195	100%	$18,217,160	$18,217,160	100%	751	751	100%
Commercial	23	23	100%	$2,011,700	$2,011,700	100%
Agricultural	8	8	100%	$1,289,380	$1,289,380	100%
Industrial	1	1	100%	$55,840	$55,840	100%

Jurisdiction:	Town of Collbran
Hazard:	Flooding
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	195	23	11.8%	$18,217,160	$1,947,780	10.70%	751	314	41.8%
Commercial	23	0	0.00%	$2,011,700	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	8	0	0.00%	$1,289,380	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	1	0	0.00%	$55,840	$ –	0.00%

Jurisdiction:	Town of Collbran
Hazard:	Rockfalls and Slides
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	195	0	0.00%	$18,217,160	$ –	0.00%	751	0	0.00%
Commercial	23	0	0.00%	$2,011,700	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	8	0	0.00%	$1,289,380	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	1	0	0.00%	$55,840	$ –	0.00%

Jurisdiction:	Town of Collbran
Hazard:	Dam Failure
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	195	134	68.72%	$18,217,160	$11,966,890	65.69%
Commercial	23	19	95.00%	$2,011,700	$1,923,480	95.61%
Agricultural	8	3	17.65%	$1,289,380	$651,670	50.54%
Industrial	1	1	100%	$55,840	$55,840	100%

Capabilities Assessment.

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	No
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	Yes
Economic Development Plan	No
Elevation Certificates	No
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	Yes
Flood Insurance Study	Yes
Growth Management Ordinance	No
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	Yes
Site Plan Review Requirements	Yes
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	No
Zoning Ordinance	Yes

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	No
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	No
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	Yes
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	Yes
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	Yes
Floodplain Administrator	Yes
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	Yes
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	Yes
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	No
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	Yes
GIS Specialist and Capability	Partial
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	Yes
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	Yes
– Flood	Yes
– Wildfire	Yes
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	No
StormReady	No
Other

Changes in Development.

Changes in development are reflected by the number of building permits issued within a community. The number of building permits issued for the Town of Collbran is reflected in the following table.

	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Commercial Permits	0	0	0	0	0
Residential Permits	1	0	1	1	0

(Res. 61-20, 10-7-20; Res. 32-15, 7-1-15; Res. 05-10, 1-6-10)

§ 42.08.680 Town of Palisade.

Community Profile.

Figure 27: Town of Palisade

(Town of Palisade)

The Town of Palisade is located in north-central Mesa County and has a population of 2,741 (Demographer). Palisade is approximately 10 miles east of Grand Junction, and at the eastern end of a portion of Mesa County known as the Grand Valley; see Figure 27. Palisade lies at an elevation of approximately 4,700 feet near the base of the eastern toe of the Bookcliffs. East Orchard Mesa borders Grand Valley on the south in the study area, which is largely devoted to agricultural interests. Some of the first orchards in the valley were planted in the Palisade area because of easily accessible water, rich soil, and suitable climate.

Around 1884, some of the earlier inhabitants of the region constructed the Price Ditch, which has aided in perpetuating interest in and growth of the Town and adjacent agricultural areas. Palisade has gained prominence for its excellent fruit products and has continued to present as a major fruit growing center. Completion of the Highline Canal irrigation facility in 1915 assured an adequate water supply to the area and furthered economic stimulation in the region.

The climate of Palisade is arid and yearly precipitation averages approximately nine inches. Temperatures are often in the 90 degrees Fahrenheit range in the summer and below freezing in the winter. Occasionally, summertime temperatures may exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit and winter temperatures may drop as low as minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Natural vegetation in valley areas consists of cottonwood and willow, desert shrub, and an understory of hardy grasses. Mesas and lower mountain slopes between 5,000 and 8,000 feet support oak, big sagebrush, Douglas fir, pinon pine, and juniper. (FEMA, Flood Insurance Study, Mesa County Colorado, 2009)

Hazard Identification and Profiles.

Table 20: Town of Palisade’s Hazards Profiles
Hazard Type	Geographic Location	Occurrences	Magnitude/ Severity	Hazard Level
Avalanche	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Drought	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Earthquake	Medium	Occasional	Limited	M
Expansive Soils	Isolated	Occasional	Negligible	L
Extreme Heat	Large	Occasional	Negligible	M
Wildfire	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	H
Flood	Small	Likely	Limited	M
Hail Storm	Small	Occasional	Negligible	L
Land Subsidence	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L
Landslide/Rockfall	Isolated	Highly Likely	Critical	H
Lightning	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	M
Tornado	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Windstorm	Small	Likely	Limited	M
Winter Storm	Small	Likely	Limited	L
Dam Failure	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L
Hazardous Materials	Isolated	Likely	Negligible	L

Vulnerability Assessment.

The intent of this section is to assess the Town of Palisade’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole. The vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of moderate or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area.

Community Asset Inventory.

Table 21 shows the total population, number of structures, and assessed value of improvements to parcels in the Town of Palisade. Land values have been purposely excluded because land remains following disasters, and subsequent market devaluations are frequently short-term and difficult to quantify. Additionally, State and federal disaster assistance programs generally do not address loss of land or its associated value.

Table 21: Town of Palisade’s Asset Inventory
Jurisdiction:	Town of Palisade
Hazard:	Wildfire
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	1083	164	15.14%	$158,831,860	$18,113,800	11.4%	2,741	415	15.14%
Commercial	80	12	15%	$18,194,820	$890,230	4.89%
Agricultural	32	1	3.13%	$4,182,860	$569,500	13.62%
Industrial	4	4	100%	$804,050	$804,050	100%

Jurisdiction:	Town of Palisade
Hazard:	Flooding
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	1083	0	0.00%	$158,831,860	$ –	0.00%	2,741	0	0.00%
Commercial	80	0	0.00%	$18,194,820	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	32	0	0.00%	$4,182,860	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	7	0	0.00%	$804,050	$ –	0.00%

Jurisdiction:	Town of Palisade
Hazard:	Rockfalls and Slides
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	1083	49	4.52%	$158,831,860	$7,350,670	0.00%	2,741	49	1.79%
Commercial	80	5	6.25%	$18,194,820	$5,906,850	0.00%
Agricultural	32	15	46.88%	$4,182,860	$814,510	0.00%
Industrial	4	0	0.00%	$804,050	$ –	0.00%

Capabilities Assessment.

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	Yes
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	Yes
Economic Development Plan	Yes
Elevation Certificates	No
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	Yes
Flood Insurance Study	No
Growth Management Ordinance	No
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	Yes
Site Plan Review Requirements	Yes
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	Yes
Zoning Ordinance	Yes

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	Yes
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	Yes
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	Yes
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	Yes
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	Yes
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	Yes
Floodplain Administrator	Yes
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	Yes
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	Yes
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	Yes
– Resiliency Planner	Yes
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	Yes
GIS Specialist and Capability	Yes
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	Yes
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	No
– Flood	No
– Wildfire	No
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	Yes
StormReady	No
Other

Changes in Development.

Changes in development are reflected by the number of building permits issued within a community. The number of building permits issued for the Town of Palisade is reflected in the following table.

	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Commercial Permits	0	0	1	1	0
Residential Permits	5	3	11	7	11

(Res. 61-20, 10-7-20; Res. 32-15, 7-1-15; Res. 05-10, 1-6-10)

§ 42.08.690 City of Grand Junction.

Community Profile.

Figure 28: City of Grand Junction

Grand Junction is located on the western slope of the Rocky Mountains in central Mesa County in western Colorado. It is surrounded by the unincorporated areas of Mesa County as seen in Figure 28. It is situated approximately halfway between Salt Lake City, Utah, and Denver, Colorado, and is a regional center for transportation and trade for an area of over 60,000 square miles.

Grand Junction became the center of an extensive mining industry. It continues to be a transportation center for the farming, orchard growing, and livestock industries in the area, as well as a base for various industrial, commercial, and tourism activities. The current population is estimated to be 65,542 (Demographer). The Colorado River originates high in the Rocky Mountains, on the western slope of the Continental Divide. The headwaters, located in Rocky Mountain National Park, are at approximately 12,000 feet. The river flows southwesterly from its headwaters, approximately 200 miles upstream of Grand Junction. At Grand Junction, the river turns to the northwest and continues in that direction through Colorado. The drainage area at Grand Junction is approximately 17,100 square miles.

Grand Junction lies at an elevation of approximately 4,600 feet in the southern part of the Grand Valley, a wide, gently sloping valley defined by high, rock cliffs. To the north, the valley gradually slopes upward for several miles to the base of the Bookcliffs, which rise abruptly to more than 8,000 feet. To the south, Grand Junction is flanked by the Uncompahgre Plateau.

Indian Wash originates at the foot of the Bookcliffs at an elevation of approximately 5,800 feet and flows approximately 5.5 miles southwesterly to an area just northeast of Grand Junction Regional Airport, where the U.S. Soil Conservation Service IW-1 flood detention structure is located. From there it flows generally southerly through the City of Grand Junction to its confluence with the Colorado River.

The climate of Grand Junction is classified as arid to semiarid. The mountainous regions around Grand Junction are subject to moderately heavy precipitation. Elevation greatly influences precipitation amounts. The annual precipitation of Grand Junction averages approximately 8.4 inches; the higher mesas receive from 10 to 20 inches. Occurrence of precipitation is extremely variable with a large part of the total concentrated in several months. Late summer convection type cloudburst storms of small aerial extent and early fall general rain over large areas normally cause August, September, and October to be the wettest months of the year. Most winter precipitation occurs as snow and, in the higher elevations, a deep snowpack generally accumulates. Average snowfall ranges from approximately 19 inches at Grand Junction to approximately 300 inches in the higher mountainous regions. Snowfall is generally dominated by a few large storms. Snowpack ordinarily begins in late October and snowmelt in late April; snowmelt continues through early July.

The temperature extremes at Grand Junction are shown by mean maximums ranging from approximately 38 degrees Fahrenheit in January to approximately 94 degrees Fahrenheit in July, and by mean minimums ranging from approximately 15 degrees Fahrenheit in January to 62 degrees Fahrenheit in July. Record low and high temperatures are minus 34 degrees Fahrenheit and 64 degrees Fahrenheit for January and 38 degrees Fahrenheit and 111 degrees Fahrenheit for July, respectively.

The Colorado River, Indian Wash, and Horizon Drive Channel floodplains are moderately developed with commercial and residential structures. (Flood Insurance Study, Mesa County Colorado, 2009)

Hazard Identification and Profiles.

Table 22: City of Grand Junction’s Hazards Profiles
Hazard Type	Geographic Location	Occurrences	Magnitude/ Severity	Hazard Level
Avalanche	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Drought	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Earthquake	Medium	Occasional	Limited	M
Expansive Soils	Isolated	Occasional	Negligible	L
Extreme Heat	Large	Occasional	Negligible	M
Wildfire	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	H
Flood	Large	Likely	Limited	H
Hail Storm	Small	Occasional	Negligible	L
Land Subsidence	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L
Landslide/Rockfall	Isolated	Unlikely	Limited	L
Lightning	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	M
Tornado	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Windstorm	Medium	Likely	Limited	M
Winter Storm	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Dam Failure	Medium	Unlikely	Critical	M
Hazardous Materials	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L

Vulnerability Assessment.

The intent of this section is to assess the City of Grand Junction’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole. The vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked as high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area and estimates potential losses. These hazards include: wildfire, floods, and rockslides.

Community Asset Inventory.

Table 23 shows the total population, number of structures, and assessed value of improvements to parcels in the City of Grand Junction. Land values have been purposely excluded because land remains following disasters, and subsequent market devaluations are frequently short-term and difficult to quantify. Additionally, State and federal disaster assistance programs generally do not address loss of land or its associated value.

Table 23: City of Grand Junction’s Asset Inventory
Jurisdiction:	City of Grand Junction
Hazard:	Wildfire
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	25,630	4,433	17.30%	$4,643,888,590	$998,903,080	21.51%	65,542	11,188	17.07%
Commercial	2,578	449	17.42%	$949,567,250	$107,542,460	11.33%
Agricultural	245	71	28.98%	$16,694,080	$3,394,450	20.33%
Industrial	595	161	27.06%	$202,268,170	$68,115,230	33.68%

Jurisdiction:	City of Grand Junction
Hazard:	Flooding
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	25,630	316	1.23%	$4,643,888,590	$42,207,010	0.91%	65,542	1,351	2.06%
Commercial	2,578	50	1.94%	$949,567,250	$26,894,800	2.83%
Agricultural	245	3	1.22%	$16,694,080	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	595	21	3.53%	$202,268,170	$11,529,290	5.70%

Jurisdiction:	City of Grand Junction
Hazard:	Rockfalls and Slides
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	25,630	3,237	12.63%	$4,643,888,590	$866,226,580	18.65%	65,542	7,785	11.88%
Commercial	2,578	56	2.17%	$949,567,250	$16,978,700	1.79%
Agricultural	245	6	2.45%	$16,694,080	$2,163,440	12.96%
Industrial	595	0	0.00%	$202,268,170	$ –	0.00%

Capabilities Assessment.

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	Yes
Economic Development Plan	Yes
Elevation Certificates	Yes
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	Yes
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	Yes
Flood Insurance Study	Yes
Growth Management Ordinance	Yes
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	Yes
NFIP	Yes
Site Plan Review Requirements	Yes
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	Yes
Zoning Ordinance	Yes

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	Yes
– Utilities Fees	Yes
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	Yes
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	Yes
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	Yes
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	Yes
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	Yes
– Community Development Block Grants	Yes
– Other

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	Yes
Floodplain Administrator	Yes
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	Yes
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	Yes
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	Yes
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	Yes
Building Official	Yes
GIS Specialist and Capability	Yes
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	Yes
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	Yes
– Flood	Yes
– Wildfire	Yes
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	No
StormReady	No
Other

Changes in Development.

Changes in development are reflected by the number of building permits issued within a community. The number of building permits issued for the City of Grand Junction is reflected in the following table.

	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Commercial Permits	15	16	21	32	33
Residential Permits	270	325	521	525	532

(Res. 61-20, 10-7-20; Res. 32-15, 7-1-15; Res. 05-10, 1-6-10)

§ 42.08.700 City of Fruita.

Community Profile.

Figure 29: City of Fruita

(Source: Mesa County GIS)

The City of Fruita is in northwestern Mesa County. Fruita lies approximately 20 miles east of the Colorado-Utah State boundary and approximately 11 miles west of Grand Junction; see Figure 29. Fruita is surrounded by unincorporated areas of Mesa County. The total land area contained within Fruita is approximately 2.25 square miles. The population of Fruita is estimated to be 13,398. (Demographer)

Fruita has been agriculturally oriented and farming has since become more diversified, with such crops as grains for livestock feed and various fruits and vegetables. Cattle and sheep ranching began as large-scale operations and continue as part of the economic base of the community. There are extensive irrigation facilities in the area to support these activities. Both the Little Salt Wash, Big Salt Wash, and the Colorado River floodplains are developed in Fruita.

Little Salt Wash originates in the Bookcliffs approximately 11 miles north of town, where its headwaters are at approximately 5,100 feet. It flows through the northern corporate limits of Fruita, then forms the western corporate limits of the City as it flows southwesterly to its confluence with the Colorado River. Little Salt Wash and Big Salt Wash flow into the Colorado River approximately 0.5 mile and one mile downstream of Fruita, respectively. The drainage area at Fruita is approximately 33 square miles.

Fruita lies at an elevation of approximately 4,500 feet in the southern part of the Grand Valley. To the north, the valley gradually ascends for several miles to the base of the Bookcliffs. Approximately two miles south of town, the steep sandstone and shale formations of the Colorado National Monument (or the Uncompahgre Uplift) begin. Fruita is part of the Canyon lands, a subdivision of a larger physiographic region known as the Colorado Plateaus.

The climate of Fruita is classified as arid to semiarid. The mountainous regions around Fruita are subject to moderately heavy precipitation. Elevation greatly influences the precipitation amounts. Annual precipitation at Fruita averages approximately nine inches. The higher mesas (headwaters and primary drainage areas of Little Salt Wash and Big Salt Wash) receive from 10 to 20 inches. Convection-type cloudburst storms of small aerial extent and general rainfall over large areas normally make August, September, and October the wettest months of the year. Most wintertime precipitation occurs as snow, and a deep snowpack normally accumulates at the higher elevations. Average snowfall is approximately 19 inches at Fruita.

The temperature extremes at Fruita are evidenced by mean maximums ranging from approximately 38 degrees Fahrenheit in January to approximately 94 degrees Fahrenheit in July, and by mean minimums ranging from approximately 15 degrees Fahrenheit in January to 62 degrees Fahrenheit in July. Record low and high temperatures are minus 34 degrees Fahrenheit and 64 degrees Fahrenheit for January and 38 degrees Fahrenheit and 111 degrees Fahrenheit for July respectively. (Flood Insurance Study, Mesa County Colorado, 2009)

Hazard Identification and Profiles.

Table 24: City of Fruita’s Hazards Profiles
Hazard Type	Geographic Location	Occurrences	Magnitude/ Severity	Hazard Level
Avalanche	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Drought	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Earthquake	Medium	Occasional	Limited	M
Expansive Soils	Isolated	Occasional	Negligible	L
Extreme Heat	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Wildfire	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	H
Flood	Large	Likely	Limited	H
Hail Storm	Small	Occasional	Negligible	L
Land Subsidence	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L
Landslide/Rockfall	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Lightning	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	M
Tornado	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Windstorm	Medium	Likely	Limited	M
Winter Storm	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Dam Failure	Medium	Occasional	Critical	M
Hazardous Materials	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L

Vulnerability Assessment.

The intent of this section is to assess the City of Fruita’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole. The vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of moderate or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area.

Community Asset Inventory.

Table 25 shows the total population, number of structures, and assessed value of improvements to parcels in the City of Fruita. Land values have been purposely excluded because land remains following disasters, and subsequent market devaluations are frequently short-term and difficult to quantify. Additionally, State and federal disaster assistance programs generally do not address loss of land or its associated value.

Table 25: City of Fruita’s Asset Inventory
Jurisdiction:	City of Fruita
Hazard:	Wildfire
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	5,406	1,534	23.38%	$960,865,850	$299,171,760	31.14%	13,398	2,991	22.32%
Commercial	208	9	4.33%	$56,974,680	$2,270,280	3.98%
Agricultural	124	61	49.19%	$9,410,310	$6,167,5000	65.54%
Industrial	38	18	47.37%	$18,392,820	$15,925,150	86.58%

Jurisdiction:	City of Fruita
Hazard:	Flooding
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	5,406	52	0.96%	$960,865,850	$6,046,640	0.63%	13,398	1,116	8.33%
Commercial	208	0	0.00%	$56,974,680	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	124	5	4.03%	$9,410,310	$132,800	1.41%
Industrial	38	0	0.00%	$18,392,820	$ –	0.00%

Jurisdiction:	City of Fruita
Hazard:	Rockfalls and Slides
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	5,406	0	0.00%	$960,865,850	$ –	0.00%	13,398	0	0.00%
Commercial	208	0	0.00%	$56,974,680	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	124	0	0.00%	$9,410,310	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	38	0	0.00%	$18,392,820	$ –	0.00%

Capabilities Assessment.

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	Yes
Economic Development Plan	Yes
Elevation Certificates	Yes
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	Yes
Flood Insurance Study	Yes
Growth Management Ordinance	Yes
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	Yes
Site Plan Review Requirements	Yes
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	Yes
Zoning Ordinance	Yes

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	Yes
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	No
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	Yes
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	Yes
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	Yes
Floodplain Administrator	Yes
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	Yes
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	Yes
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	Yes
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	Yes
Building Official	No
GIS Specialist and Capability	Yes
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	Yes
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	Yes
– Flood	Yes
– Wildfire	Yes
– Tornado	Yes
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	Yes
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	No
StormReady	No
Other

Changes in Development.

Changes in development are reflected by the number of building permits issued within a community. The number of building permits issued for the City of Fruita is reflected in the following table.

	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Commercial Permits	2	3	1	4	4
Residential Permits	39	64	49	109	71

(Res. 61-20, 10-7-20; Res. 32-15, 7-1-15; Res. 05-10, 1-6-10)

§ 42.08.705 Town of DeBeque.

Community Profile.

Figure 30: Town of DeBeque

(Source: Mesa County GIS)

The Town of DeBeque sits along the north side of the Colorado River upstream from DeBeque Canyon in a small ranching valley northeast and upstream from Grand Junction; see Figure 30. The Town is located across the river from Interstate 70, on a small hill overlooking the river, at an elevation of approximately 5,000 feet. The southwest edge of the Roan Cliffs overlooks the town from the northeast. Much of the surrounding area is controlled by the Bureau of Land Management.

The major underlying geological formation is the Wasatch Formation, a system of intermixed shales and sandstones which form the hills to the northwest. Overlying the Wasatch Formation and forming the bulk of the Roan Plateau to the northwest is the Green River Formation. This formation reportedly contains major deposits of oil shale.

The town consists of a small grid (approximately 0.3 square miles), including several historic buildings, commercial, and residential. DeBeque was historically a location where wild horses, abundant in the surrounding hills, were rounded up and sold. The population of DeBeque is estimated to be 502. (Demographer)

Hazard Identification and Profiles.

Table 26: Town of DeBeque’s Hazards Profiles
Hazard Type	Geographic Location	Occurrences	Magnitude/ Severity	Hazard Level
Avalanche	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Drought	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Earthquake	Medium	Occasional	Limited	M
Expansive Soils	Medium	Occasional	Limited	L
Extreme Heat	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Wildfire	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	H
Flood	Large	Likely	Limited	H
Hail Storm	Small	Occasional	Negligible	L
Land Subsidence	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L
Landslide/Rockfall	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Lightning	Medium	Highly Likely	Limited	M
Tornado	Isolated	Unlikely	Negligible	L
Windstorm	Medium	Likely	Limited	M
Winter Storm	Large	Occasional	Limited	M
Dam Failure	Medium	Occasional	Critical	M
Hazardous Materials	Isolated	Occasional	Limited	L

Vulnerability Assessment.

The intent of this section is to assess the Town of DeBeque’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole. The vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of moderate or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area.

This section analyzes existing structures and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of high significance that vary from the risks facing the entire planning area and estimates potential losses. These hazards include: wildfire and floods. Wildfire and flood are perceived as high risk in the community because of oil and gas resources in the area and the impact wildfire and flood have on these resources.

Community Asset Inventory.

Table 27 shows the total population, number of structures, and assessed value of improvements to parcels in the Town of DeBeque. Land values have been purposely excluded because land remains following disasters, and subsequent market devaluations are frequently short-term and difficult to quantify. Additionally, State and federal disaster assistance programs generally do not address loss of land or its associated value.

Table 27: Town of DeBeque’s Asset Inventory
Jurisdiction:	Town of DeBeque
Hazard:	Wildfire
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	268	0	0.00%	$18,141,040	$ –	0.00%	502	98	19.52%
Commercial	29	0	0.00%	$6,018,410	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	24	4	16.67%	$244,680	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	2	1	50.00%	$264,260	$29,720	11.25%

Jurisdiction:	Town of DeBeque
Hazard:	Flooding
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	268	8	2.99%	$18,141,040	$ –	0.00%	502	0	0.00%
Commercial	29	1	3.45%	$6,018,410	$1,253,100	20.82%
Agricultural	24	0	0.00%	$244,680	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	2	0	0.00%	$264,260	$ –	0.00%

Jurisdiction:	Town of DeBeque
Hazard:	Rockfalls and Slides
Type of Structure	Number of Structures			Value of Structures			Number of People
Type of Structure	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	$ in Comm.	$ in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area	# in Comm.	# in Hazard Area	% in Hazard Area
Residential	268	0	0.00%	$18,141,040	$ –	0.00%	502	0	0.00%
Commercial	29	0	0.00%	$6,018,410	$ –	0.00%
Agricultural	24	0	0.00%	$244,680	$ –	0.00%
Industrial	2	0	0.00%	$264,260	$ –	0.00%

Capabilities Assessment.

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	Yes
Economic Development Plan	Yes
Elevation Certificates	Yes
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	Yes
Flood Insurance Study	No
Growth Management Ordinance	Yes
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	Yes
Site Plan Review Requirements	Yes
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	No
Zoning Ordinance	Yes

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	Yes
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	Yes
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	Yes
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	No
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	No
Floodplain Administrator	No
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	Yes
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	No
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	No
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	No
GIS Specialist and Capability	No
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	No
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	No
– Flood	No
– Wildfire	No
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	No
StormReady	No
Other

Changes in Development.

Changes in development are reflected by the number of building permits issued within a community. The number of building permits issued for the Town of DeBeque is reflected in the following table.

	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Commercial Permits	0	1	1	0	1
Residential Permits	2	2	0	2	1

(Res. 61-20, 10-7-20; Res. 32-15, 7-1-15)

§ 42.08.710 Fire protection districts.

District Profile.

The material presented in this section applies to five fire protection districts in Mesa County, which are described below. Each of the districts participated individually in this planning process. Figure 31 shows all fire districts in Mesa County.

Figure 31: Fire Protection Districts in Mesa County

Plateau Valley Fire Protection District.

The Plateau Valley Fire Protection District (PVFPD) covers an area of 803 square miles as shown in Figure 32, with a residential population of approximately 4,000 people. The district operates out of three fire stations with approximately 30 volunteers.

Figure 32: Plateau Valley FPD Boundary

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	No
Building Codes Year	N/A
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	No
Economic Development Plan	No
Elevation Certificates	No
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	No
Flood Insurance Study	No
Growth Management Ordinance	No
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	Yes
NFIP	No
Site Plan Review Requirements	Yes
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	No
Zoning Ordinance	No

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	No
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	No
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	No
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other (Wildfire Mitigation Grant)	Yes

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	No
Floodplain Administrator	No
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	No
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	No
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	No
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	No
GIS Specialist and Capability	No
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	No
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	No
– Flood	No
– Wildfire	No
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	Yes
Firewise	Yes
StormReady	No
Other

The Plateau Valley Fire Protection District has facilities in the wildland-urban interface and the floodplain.

Lower Valley Fire Protection District.

The Lower Valley Fire Protection District (LVFPD) and the City of Fruita organized a fire district in 1973. The district split from the City and in 1980 became its own separate district. Both volunteer and paid positions make up the district and provide fire protection as well as emergency medical services.

Population of the district is approximately 20,000. LVFPD operates out of two fire stations: Station 31 is located in Fruita and houses three ambulances, two engines, two brush trucks, one water tender, one river boat and two ATVs. Station 32 is five miles to the west in Loma and houses one water tender, one ladder, one rescue and the antique fire truck.

Coverage of the district amounts to approximately 225 square miles ranging from the City limits of Grand Junction on the east side and the Utah State border on the west side as shown in Figure 33. This area covers the Colorado National Monument to the south and continuing north to Douglas Pass in Garfield County. The District has a variety of terrain ranging from desert to heavy timber and rural residential to a small downtown commercial district. (Home: Lower Valley Fire Protection District, 2009)

Figure 33: Lower Valley Fire Protection District

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	No
Economic Development Plan	No
Elevation Certificates	No
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	No
Flood Insurance Study	No
Growth Management Ordinance	No
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	No
Site Plan Review Requirements	No
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	No
Zoning Ordinance	No

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	Yes
– Utilities Fees	No
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	No
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	No
– Community Development Block Grants	Yes
– Other (Wildfire Mitigation Grant)	Yes

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	No
Floodplain Administrator	No
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	No
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	No
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	No
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	No
GIS Specialist and Capability	No
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	No
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	No
– Flood	No
– Wildfire	No
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	Yes
StormReady	No
Other

Lower Valley Fire Protection District has facilities in close proximity to rail line and the Interstate making their facilities vulnerable to hazardous materials incidents. While their facilities are not directly impacted by flooding, access routes to their facilities are.

Grand Junction Fire Department and Grand Junction Rural Fire Protection District.

The Grand Junction Fire Department is an emergency organization that provides education, enforcement and emergency services to over 84,000 residents living within the City of Grand Junction and the Grand Junction Rural Fire Protection District. The Grand Junction Rural Fire Protection District is a taxing district surrounding the City limits which contracts with the City of Grand Junction to provide these services. Grand Junction Fire Department serves a total of 77 square miles with five stations and 120 full-time personnel as shown in Figure 34.

Figure 34: Grand Junction Fire Department and Grand Junction Rural Fire Protection District

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	Yes
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	Yes
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	Yes
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	Yes
Economic Development Plan	No
Elevation Certificates	No
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	No
Flood Insurance Study	No
Growth Management Ordinance	No
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	No
Site Plan Review Requirements	No
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	No
Zoning Ordinance	No

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	No
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	No
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	No
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other (Wildfire Mitigation Grant)	Yes

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	Yes
Floodplain Administrator	No
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	No
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	No
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	No
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	No
GIS Specialist and Capability	No
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	No
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	No
– Flood	No
– Wildfire	No
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	No
StormReady	No
Other

The District has facilities located in the wildland urban interface and within the flood zone.

DeBeque Fire Protection District.

The DeBeque Fire Protection District covers an area of 800 square miles shown in Figure 35, with a residential population of approximately 1,298 people, which includes district population residing in Garfield County. The district operates out of a single fire station with seven full-time and six part-time paid staff.

Figure 35: DeBeque Fire Protection District

Local Mitigation Capabilities Tracker for Local and State Plan Updates
Planning and Regulatory	Yes/No
Building Codes	Yes
Building Codes Year	No
BCEGS Rating	No
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan	No
Community Rating System (CRS)	No
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)	No
Comprehensive, Master, or General Plan	No
Economic Development Plan	No
Elevation Certificates	No
Erosion/Sediment Control Program	No
Floodplain Management Plan or Ordinance	No
Flood Insurance Study	No
Growth Management Ordinance	No
Non-Flood Hazard-Specific Ordinance or Plan (e.g., Steep Slope, Wildfire, Snow Load)	No
NFIP	No
Site Plan Review Requirements	No
Stormwater Program, Plan, or Ordinance	No
Zoning Ordinance	No

Financial	Yes/No
Has community used any of the following to fund mitigation activities:
– Levy for Specific Purposes with Voter Approval	No
– Utilities Fees	No
– System Development/Impact Development Fee	No
– General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt	No
– Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas	No
– Stormwater Service Fees	No
– Capital Improvement Project Funding	No
– Community Development Block Grants	No
– Other (Wildfire Mitigation Grant)	Yes

Administrative and Technical	Yes/No
Emergency Manager	No
Floodplain Administrator	No
Community Planning:
– Planner/Engineer (Land Devel)	No
– Planner/Engineer/Scientist (Natural Hazards)	No
– Engineer/Professional (Construction)	No
– Resiliency Planner	No
– Transportation Planner	No
Building Official	No
GIS Specialist and Capability	No
Grant Manager, Writer, or Specialist	No
Warning Systems/Services:
– General	No
– Flood	No
– Wildfire	No
– Tornado	No
– Geological Hazards (West Salt Creek Landslide)	No
Other

Education and Outreach	Yes/No
Local Citizen Groups That Communicate Hazard Risks	No
Firewise	Yes
StormReady	No
Other

The District has facilities adjacent to the interstate that are vulnerable to hazardous materials incidents.