Osceola County Hazard Mitigation Plan - Part 1 Community Profile

Transcription

1 Osceola County Hazard Mitigation Plan Part 1 - Community Profile 1

2 Contents Planning Area... 5 Overview... 6 Historical Overview... 6 Local Units of Government... 6 Population Trends and Projections... 7 Seasonal Population Fluctuations Location Age Distribution Gender Distribution Racial Distribution Educational Level Primary Language Housing Land Use and Zoning Northeast Quadrant Northwest Quadrant Southwest Quadrant Southeast Quadrant Climate Soils Topography Water Features & Wetlands Local Government Public Safety Services Transportation Community Profile Sources & Development

3 Tables & Figures Tables 1.1 Osceola County Population Data by Jurisdiction Population Trends and Projections, Osceola County Age Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Gender Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Racial Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Educational Level Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Housing Tenure Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, a Existing Land Use, Osceola County b Existing Land Use, Northeast Quadrant c Existing Land Use, Northwest Quadrant d Existing Land Use, Southwest Quadrant e Existing Land Use, Southeast Quadrant Osceola County Climate Osceola County Local Government Osceola County Public Safety Services.54 Figures 1.1 Osceola County Communities Map Population Trends and Projections, Osceola County Michigan Base Map Michigan Reference Map Age Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Gender Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Racial Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Educational Level Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Housing Tenure Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, Existing Land Use, Osceola County a Existing Land Use, Northeast Quadrant b Existing Land Use, Highland Township c Existing Land Use, Marion Township (including Village of Marion) d Existing Land Use, Hartwick Township e Existing Land Use, Middle Branch Township f Existing Land Use Map, Northeast Quadrant g Future Land Use Map, Northeast Quadrant a Existing Land Use, Northwest Quadrant b Existing Land Use, Burdell Township (including Village of Tustin) c Existing Land Use, LeRoy Township (including Village of LeRoy)..32 3

4 Figures (continued) 1.12d Existing Land Use, Rose Lake Township e Existing Land Use, Sherman Township f Existing Land Use Map, Northwest Quadrant g Future Land Use Map, Northwest Quadrant a Existing Land Use, Southwest Quadrant b Existing Land Use, Lincoln Township c Existing Land Use, Richmond Township (including Reed City and part of Village of Hersey) d Existing Land Use, Cedar Township e Existing Land Use, Hersey Township (including part of Village of Hersey) f Existing Land Use Map, Southwest Quadrant g Future Land Use Map, Southwest Quadrant a Existing Land Use, Southeast Quadrant b Existing Land Use, Osceola Township (including part of City of Evart) c Existing Land Use, Evart Township (including part of City of Evart) d Existing Land Use, Orient Township e Existing Land Use, Sylvan Township f Existing Land Use Map, Southeast Quadrant g Future Land Use Map, Southeast Quadrant a Average Minimum and Maximum Temperature by Month b Average Precipitation by Month Osceola County Wetland Map Annual Average 24-Hour Traffic Volume, Osceola County Road Map..58 4

5 Planning Area Osceola County provides emergency management and development review services to the jurisdictions within its boundaries. Since these activities coordinate well with the goals of mitigation planning, a countywide plan approach was selected. The Osceola County Hazard Mitigation Plan has been developed to cover the geographical area of Osceola County, comprised of 22 individual communities, as established by the Memorandum of Agreement for a Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team. Figure 1.1 Osceola County Communities Map (Source: West Michigan Regional Planning Commission) Townships: Burdell Sherman Highland Marion LeRoy Rose Lake Hartwick Middle Branch Lincoln Cedar Osceola Sylvan Richmond Hersey Evart Orient Cities: Evart Villages: Tustin Marion Reed City LeRoy Hersey 5

6 Overview The community profile provides information about Osceola County and its jurisdictions regarding various aspects of its physical, social, and economic characteristics. It is designed to familiarize readers with an overview of the communities relevant features, or to draw attention to specific relevant features. In this Hazard Mitigation Plan, the community profile is intended to provide an overview of key county features that either need to be protected from harm, or potentially cause some sort of harm or deleterious effect on the area s quality of life. Historical Overview Organized in 1869, Osceola County is named after the respected Native American Seminole, Chief Osceola. Osceola County, like many Michigan communities, grew rapidly because of its abundant forests and a river system that provided a means to move lumber to market. The county s rapid growth is illustrated by the fact that the 1860 U.S. Census listed only 27 individuals in the area that was to become Osceola County, but that a mere fifteen years later, in 1875, there were about 6,000 individuals in the County. The tremendous growth can be attributed to the lumber industry, the railroads, and farming. Today, Osceola County remains composed largely of rural forest and farm lands and is traversed by US-131 and US-10. The county contains 566 square miles and is the 48th largest in the state. The county seat is Reed City. The county s economy depends on agriculture, forestry, and manufacturing. Osceola County offers many opportunities for hunting, fishing, and boating, and it boasts an impressive recreational trail system and contains a substantial state forest area. Local Units of Government Osceola County s communities consist of two cities, four villages, and 16 townships. In addition to the cities, villages, and townships, there are many unincorporated areas within Osceola County. These areas are covered by township government, but often have a separate sense of community. Table 1.1 lists all 22 of the local units of government with their population data and trends from the United States census. 6

7 Population Trends and Projections Table 1.1 shows Osceola County s population data by jurisdiction, illustrating the population distribution of the county. Osceola s population has grown quickly since 1970 but this was not always the case. From the 1910 through the 1970 Census, Osceola County grew at a relatively slow rate even declining in population three times. This trend was reversed with the 1980 census. Table 1.2 shows Osceola County s population and percentage changes during each census since 1910 as well as population projections until 2030.This information is illustrated in Figure 1.2. The county s population is dispersed over a large area, which often creates issues related to where to provide emergency services and facilities. 7

8 Table 1.1 Osceola County Population Data by Jurisdiction (Source: US Census Data) Area Population Trends Michigan 9,262,044 9,295,277 9,938,444 9,883,640 Osceola County 18,928 20,146 23,197 23,528 Cities Evart 1,945 1,744 1,738 1,903 Reed City 2,221 2,379 2,430 2,425 Villages Hersey LeRoy Marion Tustin Townships Burdell ,004 1,101 Cedar Evart 1,029 1,229 1,513 1,483 Hartwick Hersey 865 1,046 1,472 1,600 Highland 1,063 1,018 1,207 1,250 LeRoy Lincoln 1,173 1,228 1,629 1,500 Marion Middle Branch Orient Osceola ,118 1,076 Richmond 1,649 1,722 1,695 1,554 Rose Lake ,231 1,373 Sherman ,081 1,042 Sylvan ,033 1,099 8

9 Table 1.2 Population Trends and Projections, Osceola County (Source: US Census Data) Year Osceola 17,889 15,221 12,806 13,309 13,797 13,595 14,838 18,928 20,146 23,197 23,528 25,190 27,486 Population Osceola % Change Figure 1.2 Population Trends and Projections, Osceola County (Source: US Census Data, West Michigan Regional Planning Commission) 30,000 Osceola County 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,

10 Seasonal Population Fluctuations Another important population factor to consider is the periodic fluctuation in seasonal population levels and locations. Hazards that are present during tourist seasons should have their risks estimated with respect to the county s peak population. Hazards present primarily during the off-season should have their risks estimated using permanent population figures. It is believed the inflow of seasonal and recreational residents is greatest in the summer (particularly around the holidays of Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day) and during deer hunting season in the month of November. All areas of the county experience seasonal visitors, however it is believed that the inflow is greatest around the county s lakes and the northern half of the county. 10

11 Location Osceola County is located in the mid-west-central region of Michigan s Lower Peninsula. The county is north of Michigan s more developed areas, but is within an hour s drive of Michigan s larger cities such as Grand Rapids (directly south), Muskegon (southwest), and Midland (southeast). Osceola County is surrounded by Mecosta County on its south, Clare County to its east, Wexford and Missaukee counties on its north, and Lake County to the west. Osceola County is 60 miles east of Lake Michigan, 175 miles north of the Michigan/Indiana border, 145 miles southwest of the Straits of Mackinac, and 90 miles west of Saginaw Bay/ Lake Huron. A number of regional and larger cities are within traveling distance from the county including Grand Rapids (75 miles), Traverse City (60 miles), Lansing (120 miles), Detroit (200 miles), Chicago (260 miles), and Cleveland (350 miles). Figures 1.3 and 1.4 illustrate this information. 11

12 Figure 1.3 Michigan Base Map (Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 1972 limited update 1990) County boundaries and names, county seats, rivers 12

13 Figure 1.4 Michigan Reference Map (Source: The National Atlas of the United States of America. General Reference, U.S. Geological Survey 2001) Shaded relief map with state boundaries, forest cover, place names, major highways 13

14 Age Distribution Osceola County s age distribution differs from Michigan s in a number of ways. In 1990, the county s median age was 33.4, which was nearly one full year older than Michigan s median of In 1990, Osceola County had a higher percentage of people between 55 and 84, and a higher percentage of people between 5 and 17. Conversely, the county had a lower percentage of residents between 18 and 44. Other categories (under 5 and 45-54) were similar to Michigan. In 2000, the difference between the county and the state grew. Osceola County s median age of 37.6 was more than two years greater than Michigan s median age of In 2000, Osceola County had a higher percentage of people between 55 and 84, and a higher percentage of people between 5 and 17. Conversely, the county had a lower percentage of residents between 18 and 44. Other categories (under 5 and 45-54) were similar to Michigan. These county-state differences are the same as those found in the 1990 ratios. The primary changes that occurred in the county between 1990 and 2000 included the overall aging of the population, with the median age increasing from 33.4 to 37.6 years. The percentage of those in the 5-17, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, and 85+ age groups increased during the ten-year period, while all others decreased as a percentage. Several groups decreased numerically as well, which is significant since the overall population increased. The age groups that decreased include under 5, 18-24, and In 2010 the median age in Osceola County grew even older than 2000 at 41.8 years, more than four years older than in Also in 2010 Osceola County s median age maintained an average of about two years older than Michigan s 38.9 average age much like the county was two years older in The percentage of those in the 5-17, 18-24, age group decreased during the ten-year period. The percentage of those in the below five years old, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65-84, and 85+ age groups increased during the ten-year period. 14

15 Table 1.3 Age Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Age Groups Osceola County Michigan Number Percent Percent Under 5 1, , , , , , , , and Over Total 23, Median Age Figure 1.5 Age Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) 25 Percentage of Population Osceola County Michigan 0 Under and Over Age Group 15

16 Gender Distribution In 1990, Osceola County s male-female distribution was almost even, with males accounting for 49.5 percent of the population and females accounting for 50.5 percent. This is a full percentage point more males than in Michigan as-a-whole. The fact that there are more females (in both the county and in Michigan) is normal since women s life expectancy has increased in recent decades to be higher than men s. In 2000, Osceola County s male-female distribution had become closer to matching that of the state. The county s ratio did not change a great deal, but Michigan s male-female ratio narrowed. In 2010, the counties male-female distribution did not change much, but the ratio narrowed even more. Table 1.4 Gender Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Gender Osceola County Michigan Number Percent Percent Male 11, Female 11, Total 23, Figure 1.6 Gender Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Percentage of Population Male Female 48.5 Osceola 48 County Hazard Mitigation Plan - Part 1 Community Profile Osceola County Michigan 16

17 Racial Distribution The U.S. Census data provides insight into other social characteristics of our country, state, and of Osceola County s residents. Once again, for comparison purposes, statistics for the State of Michigan are also included. Osceola County is somewhat less diverse than the state as a whole. The racial distribution of Osceola County is different from Michigan s distribution. Table 1.5 shows the County s population distribution compared to that of Michigan. Table 1.5 Racial Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Race Osceola County Michigan Number Percent* Percent* White 22, Black American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut Asian or Pacific Islander Other Race Two or more Races Total 23, *Percentage may not equal 100 due to rounding Figure 1.7 Racial Distribution Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) 120 Percentage of Population Osceola County Michigan 0 White Black American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut Asian or Pacific Islander Other Race Two or more Races 17

18 Educational Level Educational attainment is important for several reasons, many of which connect with quality of life and employability issues. A review of data for individuals age 25 and over shows that Osceola County has a slightly lower percentage of high school graduates and a significantly lower percentage of college graduates when compared to the state as a whole, as illustrated in Table 1.6. Table 1.6 Educational Level Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Educational Level (Population 25 years and over) Osceola County Percent* Michigan Percent* Less than 9 th grade th - 12 th grade, no diploma High school graduate or equivalency Some college, no degree Associate s degree Bachelor s degree Graduate or professional degree *Percentage may not equal 100 due to rounding Figure 1.8 Educational Level Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Percentage of Population Osceola County Michigan 18

19 Primary Language Primary language is important in mitigation planning when considering mechanisms of warning and communications. The primary language spoken at home in Osceola County is less diverse than Michigan as a whole. A higher percentage of Osceola County households, 95.3%, speak only English at home compared to the State of Michigan, 91.0%. Housing Housing in Osceola County is an important consideration in hazard mitigation since it is where the population lives and makes up a large part of a community s wealth. The location and quality of housing can influence the amount of damage a community sustains in many types of emergencies. In 2010, Osceola County had 13,632 housing units. Of the total figure, 9,222 were occupied, which is a lower percentage than Michigan as a whole, 84.4%, due to the popularity of Osceola County for seasonal housing (i.e. cottages and cabins). These figures show some special needs related to hazard mitigation and housing. Since there are more seasonal residents and weekend visitors there are often different types of emergencies to respond to such as boating or other recreational accidents. The large number of vacant houses can also create problems if property issues go unchecked for long periods of time (i.e. broken pipes, gas leaks, etc.) Table 1.7 Housing Tenure Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Housing Tenure Osceola County Number Percent of Total Percent of Occupied Units Michigan Percent of Total Percent of Occupied Units Total Housing Units 13, Total Occupied 9, Housing Units Owner-Occupied 7, Units Renter-Occupied 1, Units Vacant Housing Units 4,

20 Figure 1.9 Housing Tenure Comparison, Osceola County and Michigan, 2010 (Source: US Census Data) Percentage of Total *Percentage of Occupied Osceola County Michgian 20

21 Land Use and Zoning Osceola County adopted a master land use plan in late Additionally, eight of the sixteen townships within the county have enacted zoning ordinances. These include Richmond, Osceola, Cedar, LeRoy, Hartwick, Highland, Sherman, and Burdell Townships. Zoning represents a legal means for communities to regulate private property to achieve orderly land use relationships. The zoning ordinance consists of an official zoning map and the zoning ordinance text. The official zoning map divides the communities into different zones or districts within which certain uses are permitted and others are not. The zoning ordinance text notes the uses which are permitted and establishes regulations to control various issues. Local control of land use, as provided for by zoning, is an accepted legal practice. The principles on which zoning is based include the need to: Balance the interests of all landowners and residents with the rights of individual landowners; Help provide a long term vision for the community; Protect the environment; Ensure development is adequately served by roads and utilities; Achieve the quality of life desired by residents; Provide fair and consistent review of development needs; and, Protect the public health, safety and welfare. 21

22 Osceola County is a rural county with almost three-quarters of its population located in the townships. The majority of its residential, retail, and industrial development has occurred in the county s southernmost half. No historic districts have been established or are currently proposed within the county. The county s existing land use is detailed in Table 1.8a and illustrated in Figure Tables 1.8b-e, Existing Land Use Distribution, identify general land use distribution as of Distribution is shown by quadrants and each of the townships within those quadrants (with cities and villages counted as within those township areas). Figures 1.11 through 1.14, a-e, illustrate existing land use distribution for the county as well as by quadrant and each township within the quadrant. Figures 1.11 through 1.14, f-g, illustrate existing and future land use maps, respectively. The Future Land Use Plan is not a parcel-by-parcel plan for the future, but shows the general goals of the county down to quarter sections, or sometimes quarter-quarter sections or smaller. Table 1.8a Existing Land Use, Osceola County Area Total Acres Total % Total Acres Agricultural Commercial Industrial Modular Multiple- Family Open Space Public Single Family Water (not included in total) 364, , , ,070 4,169 8,518 3,

23 Figure 1.10 Existing Land Use, Osceola County Osceola County Agricultural (41.50%) Commercial (0.20%) Industrial (0.60%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (54.30%) Public (1.10%) Single Family (2.30%) 23

24 Northeast Quadrant The Northeast Quadrant contains the townships of Highland, Hartwick, Marion, and Middle Branch, as well as the Village of Marion. The land use distribution is not equal across the four township areas (and the Village of Marion). Highland and Marion townships have higher proportions of agriculture. Hartwick and Middle Branch townships have higher proportions of open space. Middle Branch Township has a large percentage of the Single-Family land use distribution, while Marion has a high percentage of the Commercial and Public land uses. When compared to the other quadrants, the Northeast quadrant has the highest concentration of agriculture, but the lowest proportion of open space, single family, public, and industrial uses. Only one quadrant (Northwest) has a lower concentration of commercial uses. The quadrant has 384 acres of surface water, accounting for 0.4 percent of the area, which is the smallest amount of water of the county s four quadrants. Table 1.8b Existing Land Use, Northeast Quadrant Area Total Acres Agricultural Commercial Industrial Modular Multiple- Family Open Space Public Single Family Water (not included in total) Total 92,850 46, , , Acres Total % Highland 23,877 14, , Marion 23,639 14, , Hartwick 22,627 9, , Middle Branch 22,707 7, ,

25 Figure 1.11a Existing Land Use, Northeast Quadrant Northeast Quadrant Agricultural (49.70%) Commercial (0.10%) Industrial (0.10%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (48.20%) Public (0.30%) Single Family (1.60%) 25

26 Figure 1.11b Existing Land Use, Highland Township Highland Agricultural (62.31%) Commercial (0.14%) Industrial (0.14%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (36.79%) Public (0.07%) Single Family (0.56%) Figure 1.11c Existing Land Use, Marion Township (including Village of Marion) Marion Agricultural (62.30%) Commercial (0.00%) Industrial (0.11%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (35.09%) Public (1.05%) Single Family (1.47%) 26

27 Figure 1.11d Existing Land Use, Hartwick Township Hartwick Agricultural (41.58%) Commercial (0.05%) Industrial (0.28%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (57.62%) Public (0.03%) Single Family (0.45%) Figure 1.11e Existing Land Use, Middle Branch Township Middle Branch Agricultural (31.26%) Commercial (0.19%) Industrial (0.01%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (64.32%) Public (0.18%) Single Family (4.04%) 27

28 Figure 1.11f Existing Land Use Map, Northeast Quadrant 28

29 Figure 1.11g Future Land Use Map, Northeast Quadrant 29

30 Northwest Quadrant The Northwest Quadrant contains the townships of Burdell, LeRoy, Rose Lake, and Sherman. The quadrant also contains the villages of LeRoy and Tustin. The land distribution is not equal across the four township areas (and the villages). LeRoy and Sherman townships have a higher proportion of agricultural uses, while Burdell and Rose Lake townships have more open space. Rose Lake Township has a large proportion of the single family uses and LeRoy Township has a large percentage of public uses. When compared to the other quadrants, the Northwest quadrant is almost tied for the least amount of agriculture, but has the most open space. It is also nearly tied for the lowest amount of single-family land uses and it has the least commercial uses. The largest concentration of modular housing is located in the quadrant (in Burdell Township). The quadrant has 1,149 acres of surface water, accounting for 1.2 percent of the area, which is the second largest amount of water of the county s four quadrants. Table 1.8c Existing Land Use, Northwest Quadrant Area Total Acres Agricultural Commercial Industrial Modular Multiple- Family Open Space Public Single Family Water (not included in total) Total Acres 92,308 33, ,122 1,255 1,573 1,149 Total % Burdell 23,835 7, , LeRoy 22,411 9, , Rose Lake 22,312 6, , Sherman 23,750 10, ,

31 Figure 1.12a Existing Land Use, Northwest Quadrant Northwest Quadrant Agricultural (36.70%) Commercial (0.10%) Industrial (0.40%) Modular (0.10%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (59.70%) Public (1.40%) Single Family (1.70%) Figure 1.12b Existing Land Use, Burdell Township (Including Village of Tustin) Burdell Agricultural (30.30%) Commercial (0.09%) Industrial (0.22%) Modular (0.19%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (66.64%) Public (1.48%) Single Family (0.56%) 31

32 Figure 1.12c Existing Land Use, LeRoy Township (Including Village of LeRoy) LeRoy Agricultural (40.69%) Commercial (0.09%) Industrial (0.77%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (55.44%) Public (2.24%) Single Family (0.46%) Figure 1.12d Existing Land Use, Rose Lake Township Rose Lake Agricultural (29.37%) Commercial (0.00%) Industrial (0.35%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (65.95%) Public (0.07%) Single Family (3.50%) 32

33 Figure 1.12e Existing Land Use, Sherman Township Sherman Agricultural (46.27%) Commercial (0.11%) Industrial (0.24%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (50.95%) Public (1.62%) Single Family (0.51%) 33

34 Figure 1.12f Existing Land Use Map, Northwest Quadrant 34

35 Figure 1.12g Future Land Use Map, Northwest Quadrant 35

36 Southwest Quadrant The Southwest quadrant contains the townships of Lincoln, Richmond, Cedar, and Hersey. The quadrant also contains the Village of Hersey and the City of Reed City. The land distribution is not equal across the four township areas (and the village and city). Richmond Township has a higher proportion of agricultural uses, while Lincoln, Cedar and Hersey Townships have more open space (especially Cedar Township). Richmond and Hersey Townships have a large proportion of the single-family uses and Richmond and Lincoln Townships have a large percentage of public uses. Hersey and Richmond Townships have a larger portion of industrial than the other two townships and Richmond has the majority of commercial uses. When compared to the other quadrants, the Southwest quadrant falls in the middle related to open space and agriculture. The quadrant has the highest percentage of single-family, public, industrial, and commercial land uses of the county, due to the quadrant s inclusion of Hersey and Reed City (the county seat), and its location at the intersection of US-131 and US-10. The quadrant has 665 acres of surface water, accounting for 0.7 percent of the area, which is the second smallest amount of water of the county s four quadrants. Table 1.8d Existing Land Use, Southwest Quadrant Area Total Acres Agricultural Commercial Industrial Modular Multiple- Family Open Space Public Single Family Water (not included in total) Total Acres 89,817 37, , ,462 1,794 2, Total % Lincoln 22,628 9, , Richmond 22,415 13, , , Cedar 22,417 4, , Hersey 22,357 9, , ,

37 Figure 1.13a Existing Land Use, Southwest Quadrant Southwest Quadrant Agricultural (41.50%) Commercial (0.20%) Industrial (1.50%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (51.70%) Public (2.00%) Single Family (3.00%) Figure 1.13b Existing Land Use, Lincoln Township Lincoln Agricultural (43.32%) Commercial (0.09%) Industrial (0.84%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (51.53%) Public (2.66%) Single Family (1.55%) 37

38 Figure 1.13c Existing Land Use, Richmond Township (Including Reed City and part of Village of Hersey) Richmond Agricultural (59.60%) Commercial (0.87%) Industrial (1.27%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (29.74%) Public (3.82%) Single Family (4.71%) Figure 1.13d Existing Land Use, Cedar Township Cedar Agricultural (20.60%) Commercial (0.00%) Industrial (0.00%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (78.03%) Public (0.01%) Single Family (1.36%) 38

39 Figure 1.13e Existing Land Use, Hersey Township (Including part of Village of Hersey) Hersey Agricultural (42.51%) Commercial (0.02%) Industrial (3.79%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (47.61%) Public (1.48%) Single Family (4.59%) 39

40 Figure 1.13f Existing Land Use Map, Southwest Quadrant 40

41 Figure 1.13g Future Land Use Map, Southwest Quadrant 41

42 Southeast Quadrant The Southeast quadrant contains the townships of Osceola, Evart, Orient, and Sylvan. The quadrant also contains the City of Evart. The land distribution is not equal across the four township areas (and the city). Agriculture is distributed evenly across the quadrant, but Evart Township has a smaller percentage of open space than the other townships. Evart Township has a larger proportion of single-family and public uses. When compared to the other quadrants, the Southeast quadrant has the smallest percentage of agriculture, but has a larger proportion of open space than two of the other quadrants. The quadrant has almost as much single family space as the Southwest quadrant and also has the second highest percentage of commercial uses. The quadrant has 1,373 acres of surface water, accounting for 1.5 percent of the area, which is the largest amount of water of the county s four quadrants. Table 1.8e Existing Land Use, Southeast Quadrant Area Total Acres Agricultural Commercial Industrial Modular Multiple- Family Open Space Public Single Family Water (not included in total) Total Acres 89,930 34, , ,709 1,373 Total % ,709 1,373 Osceola 22,308 8, , Evart 22,559 9, , , Orient 22,621 8, , Sylvan 22,442 8, ,

43 Figure 1.14a Existing Land Use, Southeast Quadrant Southeast Quadrant Agricultural (38.00%) Commercial (0.30%) Industrial (0.30%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (57.60%) Public (0.90%) Single Family (27.09%) Figure 1.14b Existing Land Use, Osceola Township (Including part of City of Evart) Osceola Agricultural (37.52%) Commercial (0.36%) Industrial (0.60%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (56.56%) Public (2.37%) Single Family (2.60%) 43

44 Figure 1.14c Existing Land Use, Evart Township (Including part of City of Evart) Evart Agricultural (40.98%) Commercial (0.18%) Industrial (0.36%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (52.63%) Public (1.01%) Single Family (4.84%) Figure 1.14d Existing Land Use, Orient Township Orient Agricultural (36.47%) Commercial (0.40%) Industrial (0.17%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (61.13%) Public (0.17%) Single Family (1.65%) 44

45 Figure 1.14e Existing Land Use, Sylvan Township Sylvan Agricultural (36.92%) Commercial (0.11%) Industrial (0.03%) Modular (0.00%) Multiple-Family (0.00%) Open Space (59.91%) Public (0.08%) Single Family (2.96%) 45

46 Figure 1.14f Existing Land Use Map, Southeast Quadrant 46

47 Figure 1.14g Future Land Use Map, Southeast Quadrant 47

48 Climate Osceola County s weather, like all of Michigan, has a strong influence on its way of life, affecting agriculture, housing, recreation, transportation and other activities and infrastructure. Table 1.9 and Figures 1.15a and b provide information about the area s climate. In Osceola County, January is generally the coldest month (29.2 F average daily maximum temperature) and August tends to be the warmest month (80.8 F average daily maximum temperature). June has the highest average precipitation (3.58 inches) and February has the lowest average precipitation (1.56 inches) but also has the greatest average depth of snow. Prevailing winds are from the West, and although the county regularly receives hazardous weather patterns that travel over Lake Michigan, it is far enough away from the lake that the intervening land tempers some of these conditions a bit. Table 1.9 Osceola County Climate (Source: US Department of Agriculture) Temperature ( F) Precipitation (inches) Average Average Average Month Average Daily Daily Average Depth of Daily Maximum Minimum Snow January February March April May June July August September October November December Year

49 Figure 1.15a Average Minimum and Maximum Temperature by Month (Source: US Department of Agriculture) Average Daily Maximum Temperature ( F) Average Daily Minimum Temperature ( F) Figure 1.15b Average Precipitation by Month (Source: US Department of Agriculture) Average Precipitation (inches) Average Precipitation (inches) 49

50 Soils Ten primary soil associations exist within Osceola County. A soil association is an area of land that has a distinctive proportion of soil types. It normally consists of one or more major soils and at least one minor soil. Two different soil associations may contain the same soil types, but in different proportions. The soil survey of Osceola County shows that much of the land is suitable for crops. Soil associations #4 through #6 (Isabella-McBride-Montcalm, Nester-Kawkawlin-Sims, and Nester-Kalkaska-Menominee) are the most suitable for growing crops. These soils cover approximately 40% of the county s land area. Nester-Kawkawlin-Sims (Menominee) Association - well drained to very poorly drained loamy soils on level to undulating uplands Rubicon-Croswell-Au Gres Association - well drained to somewhat poorly drained sandy soils on level to undulating plains Lupton-Markey-Wheatley Association - poorly drained and very poorly drained muck and sand soils in stream valleys Topography Glacial activity as recently as 12,000 years ago made a major impact on Osceola County s topography. Most of Osceola County is a hilly moraine, formed between the Lake Michigan and Lake Huron lobes of the ice sheet that covered the county many years ago. The glaciated material that makes up this moraine was estimated to be 1,200 feet thick in the north-central part of the county. There also are two glacial till plains in the county. One is in the southwestern part of the county and the other is in the eastern and northeaster portion of the county. Two major outwash plains are a part of the topography. One is along the Muskegon River in the eastern and southeastern part of the county. The other is in the northwestern corner of the county and extends into Wexford County. Elevations range from around 1,000 feet above mean sea level to about 1,300 feet, with the highest areas located in the north-central part of the county. The county s highest elevation, located near Dighton in Sherman Township, is 1,690 feet above mean sea level and is also the highest elevation in Michigan s Lower Peninsula. The lowest elevation in Sherman Township (1,266 feet) is higher than most other townships highest points. The lowest elevation in Osceola County is 988 feet above mean sea level in Hersey Township, along the valley of the Muskegon River. 50

51 Water Features & Wetlands Figure 1.16 shows various water features in the county, including streams, lakes, and watersheds. Major features include the Muskegon River, which enters the county on the east side (Sylvan Township) and travels west through Evart to exit the county on its southern border (Hersey Township). The Hersey River flows south through Reed City and the Village of Hersey before flowing into the Muskegon River. Many other streams and creeks flow into the Muskegon River in Osceola County. The Muskegon River eventually flows through Big Rapids and into Lake Michigan at the City of Muskegon. In addition to the Muskegon River, the Hersey River, and the many streams and creeks that flow into the Muskegon River, there are several other smaller rivers and streams in Osceola County. The Middle Branch River is one of the larger rivers and flows through the county s northeast quadrant. In the county s northwest quadrant, several streams including North Branch, East Branch, Beaver Creek, and Sprague Creek, make up a portion of the Pine River Watershed. The Pine River is near the Osceola/ Lake County border. Osceola County, like most counties in Michigan, has several lakes. None of the lakes are very large compared to lakes in surrounding counties (Lake Mitchell, Lake Cadillac, Lake Missaukee, Houghton Lake, Higgins Lake, Portage Lake, Bear Lake, Hardy Dam Pond and others) but the many smaller lakes provide recreation opportunities and are popular for residential development. Some of the county s larger lakes include Rose Lake, Hogback Lake, Wells Lake, and Silver Lake (Rose Lake Township); Diamond Lake (Burdell Township); Sunrise Lake and Hicks Lake (Hartwick Township); Big Lake (Orient Township); Big Stone Lake, Tiff Lake, and Saddlebag Lake (Evart Township); Todd Lake (Lincoln Township); and Center Lake (Sherman Township). 51

52 Figure 1.16 Osceola County Wetland Map (Source: Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) 52

53 Local Government Government facilities may have a large impact on how emergencies are handled. They provide services to the public such as shelter in times of disasters. They also serve as a way to distribute information on how to handle emergencies and disasters. Table 1.10 Osceola County Local Government Osceola County Osceola County 301 West Upton Reed City, MI Cities Evart 200 South Main Street Evart, MI Hersey P.O. Box 82 Hersey, MI Le Roy 101 South Bevins Street Le Roy, MI Burdell 310 South Neilson Street Tustin, MI Osceola th Avenue Evart, MI Lincoln Mile Road Reed City, MI Evart 200 South Main Street Evart, MI Rose Lake West 16 Mile Road Le Roy, MI Middle Branch Mile Road Marion, MI Hersey 108 South Main Street Hersey, MI Sylvan 4866 Sylvan Road Evart, MI Villages Townships Reed City 227 East Lincoln Reed City, MI Marion 118 East Main Street Marion, MI Tustin 310 South Neilson Street Tustin, MI Le Roy 101 Bevins Street Le Roy, MI Cedar th Avenue Reed City, MI Richmond 4575 Park Street Reed City, MI Marion 204 East Main Marion, MI Hartwick Mile Road Evart, MI Sherman Mile Road Tustin, MI Orient th Avenue Sears, MI Highland th Avenue Marion, MI

54 Public Safety Services Table 1.11 Osceola County Public Safety Services Law Enforcement Michigan State Police Post #62 (231) South Chestnut Street Reed City, MI Evart City Police Department (231) N River Street Evart, MI Evart Volunteer Fire Department (231) PO Box 661 Evart, MI Hersey Township Fire Department (231) South Main Street Hersey, MI Le Roy - Rose Lake Fire Department (231) South Main Street Le Roy, MI Osceola County EMS 306 North Patterson/220 th Ave Reed City, MI Fire Services Lincoln Township Fire Department (231) Box 120 Reed City, MI Emergency Medical Emergency Management Osceola County Emergency Management (231) North Patterson/220 th Ave Reed City, MI Meceola Central Dispatch (231) Northland Dr. Paris, MI Osceola County Sheriff (231) West Upton Reed City, MI Reed City Police Department (231) E Lincoln Ave Reed City, MI Marion Community Fire Department (231) West Pine Road Marion, MI Reed City Fire Department (231) East Lincoln Street Reed City, MI Tustin Area Fire Department (231) South Nielson Street Tustin, MI Reed City Hospital, Osceola County th Avenue Reed City, MI

55 Transportation Several modes of transportation are available within Osceola County, but movement into, out of, and within the county is primarily by the use of private automobiles. Osceola County is served by a number of major transportation routes, including two interstate highways (US-10 and US-131) and three state highways (M-61, M-115, and M-66). US-131 serves as Western Michigan s primary north-south corridor and crosses the western portion of Osceola County in a north-south direction. Annual Average 24-Hour Traffic Volumes are illustrated in Figure Commercial traffic averages range from 1,500 to 1,700 vehicles per day. Access points in Osceola County currently exist at US-10 (Reed City), 11 Mile Road (Ashton), 14 Mile Road (LeRoy), and 20 Mile Road (Tustin). US-131 links Osceola County to Big Rapids, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, and other points to the south; and Cadillac to the north (as well as Traverse City, Petoskey, and the Straits of Mackinac). US-10 serves as one of the state s major east-west corridors and crosses the southern portion of Osceola County in an east-west orientation. The two-lane road is an unlimited access surface highway (unlimited in the sense of not having access limited to only the use of directional entrance/exit ramps). Average 24-hour traffic volumes range from 5,100 vehicles east of Evart to 8,300 vehicles east of Reed City. Commercial counts average 520 daily vehicles across the entire length of the county. US-10 widens to four lanes in areas around Reed City and Evart. US-10 links Osceola County to Baldwin and Ludington to the west, and Clare, Midland, and Bay City to the east. M-66 crosses the eastern portion of Osceola County in a north-south orientation. The two-lane road has unlimited access. Average 24-hour traffic volumes average 2,500 vehicles across the length of the county. Commercial traffic volumes average 170 vehicles across the entire county. M-66 links Osceola County to many smaller communities to the south, eventually crossing I-96 near Ionia and I-94 at Battle Creek. To the north are Lake City and Kalkaska. M-115 is a two-lane, full-access road that crosses Osceola County s northeast corner. Traffic counts range from 5,000 to 6,400 vehicles, with commercial 24-hour counts averaging 610 vehicles. M-115 links the county s northeast quadrant to Cadillac (to the north) and US-27 (to the southeast). There is also a connection with surface highway M-61 in the northeast of the county. Although only a few miles of this highway is located in Osceola County, it provides direct access from M-66 and M-115 to the city of Harrison, and the cities of Gladwin and Standish, beyond. 55

56 In addition to the state and federal routes described, the county and individual communities maintain a complete local system of streets and roads. The Osceola County Road Commission maintains local roads and bridges. Generally roads and bridges are maintained in good condition, although they include a combination of both paved and graveled surfaces. County roads are named in an organized manner beginning from the south, as you travel to the north, they are named by mile in increasing order. Beginning from the east, as you travel to the west, roads are named by avenue in one-mile increments in increasing order. Major local connectors include Class A roads from the Village of Hersey leading to both US-10 and 210th Avenue and 80th Avenue, which connect US-10 and M-115. Osceola County Road Commission 800 South Chestnut Street Reed City, Michigan Osceola County is the Michigan Department of Transportation s North Region Office, which serves Osceola and 23 other counties. Although one active railroad passes through the northeast corner of the county, there are no longer any active passenger rail services serving the area. Osceola County does not have any water ports. The closest such transportation nodes are located in the communities of Ludington and Manistee which are approximately 50 miles west of the county. The Evart Municipal Airport is the only airport located within Osceola County. The airport is primarily used for business and industry and does not have regularly scheduled passenger flights. Depending on your location within the county, the closest major airport may be found in Grand Rapids, Saginaw, or Traverse City. Mecosta-Osceola Area Transit Authority provides community transportation within those two counties. Specific routes and times are not used, but for a small fee individuals will be transported to any location within the two counties. In addition, the Indian Trails bus line located in Reed City provides bus service into and out of the county. 56

57 Figure 1.17 Annual Average 24-Hour Traffic Volume, 2012 (Source: Michigan Department of Transportation) 57

58 Figure 1.18 Osceola County Road Map (Source: Google Maps) 58

59 Community Profile Sources & Development The Hazard Mitigation Planning Team utilized a variety of plans and studies when producing the original drafts of this document. The Osceola County Future Land Use Plan, completed November 2002, was used extensively for information about the county s physical features, demographics, and other information. The Future Land Use Plan also included an extensive review of all of the individual land use plans within the county. Both plans also used the USDA Soil Survey, other community plans, and plans/information maintained by the Osceola County Emergency Management Department. The Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy maintained by the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission was used in conjunction with US Census data. Finally, since each community had opportunities to include information in the plan, each community contributed information based upon their own more locally specific experiences and sources of information. Staff from the Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division of the Michigan Department of State Police completed additional refinements to the plan, with the approval of the Osceola Emergency Management Department and Osceola County Mitigation Planning Team. That additional information, along with National Weather Service records (available online through the National Climatic Data Center), was used to update many sections of the document. This added information was provided to and distributed among planning team members and local jurisdiction representatives for review, before a final draft was made available for public review and input according to the Outreach & Involvement Strategy. 59