Evaluation of Using Alternative First Floor Elevation Sources for Flood Risk Mitigation

Similar documents
CRITICALFACILITIESASSESSMENT IN SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT STRATEGIES FOR ALL HAZARDS RESILIENCE

Mapping and the 2013 Colorado Floods. Mapping before, during, and after

Evaluation of How O&M Costs Vary for Alternative Flood Control Strategies

Floodplain Management Strategies in Forsyth County Georgia Association of Floodplain Management 7 th Annual Technical Conference March 2012

Evaluation of Strobe Lights in Red Lens of Traffic Signals

Fan Laws. Keith Miller. Samuel Tepp Associates. Paul Cenci, P. E.-Principal Brian England-Principal. Samuel Tepp Associates 1/6/10

research highlight Canadian Housing Fire Statistics Findings

Understanding total measurement uncertainty in power meters and detectors

CEE:3371 Principles of Hydraulics and Hydrology Project #2 Flow Measurement with a Weir

state of the art methane leak detection CHARM and GasCam 2011 October 13 th Dr. Axel Scherello

City of East Point Comprehensive Floodplain Management Program

Incident Summary (Reference # II )

Methane to Markets Oil and Natural Gas Technology Transfer Workshop

ANALYSIS OF RESIDENTIAL ROOM TEMPERATURE AND OCCUPANT S THERMAL COMPLAINT IN WINTER FIELD SURVEY

Development of the San Ace Airflow Tester - A Measuring Device for System Impedance and Operating Airflow of Equipment

INDOOR CLIMATE IN HEATING CONDITION OF A LARGE GYMNASIUM WITH UNDER-FLOOR SUPPLY/RETURN SYSTEM

An Assessment of Radiator Performance

CROWD-SOURCED REMOTE ASSESSMENTS OF REGIONAL-SCALE POST-DISASTER DAMAGE

A survey of allotment waiting lists in England

Stulz CyberMOD EC Fan Retrofit Kit Switch & Save

Floodplain Management Plan 2016 Progress Report

Monitoring of Radiation Exposure Adjacent to a Linear Accelerator Treatment Bunker with a Highlight Window

BNWAT28: Water consumption in new and existing homes

Adding More Fan Power Can Be a Good Thing

NAI Principles In Gwinnett County

Each course is worth 1 American Institute of Architects CEU/HSW.

GIS Training of Undergraduates: Campus Stormwater Mapping. Joanne Logan, University of Tennessee. Gordie Bennett, University of Tennessee

Urban Shape and Energy Performance: Evaluation of The Typical Urban Structures of Prague

MEMORANDUM. September 10, 2018

1. Project Description

Predicting Narrow-band and Wideband Speech Quality with WB-PESQ and TOSQA

Sensor Systems Network Design and QA/QC Brian Stacey

Hydrology And Floodplain Analysis 5th Edition Solution

Statue of Liberty: A Risk Analysis

TESTS OF ADSIL COATING

7th Avenue Creek Master Plan Development Project. City of St. Charles, IL. IAFSM CONFERENCE March 14, 2018 MARKET

WHITE PAPER. ANSI/AHRI Standard for Fan and Coil Evaporators - Benefits and Costs

Preserving Soils How can fertile soil be protected?

Integrating Nephelometer - Visibility and Particulate Monitoring. Summary

Assessing Directly Connected Impervious Areas in Residential Subdivisions in Western Sydney, NSW

No Adverse Impact. A Proposed National Standard. Association of State Floodplain Managers Annual Conference Kansas City, MO.

Form DOT F (8-72) Technical Report Documentation Page 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

Artificial Trees and Fire Performance

SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG IJCE ) Volume 4 Issue 10 October 2017

APPENDIX 9: Archaeological Assessment by Ken Phillips

Link loss measurement uncertainties: OTDR vs. light source power meter By EXFO s Systems Engineering and Research Team

Fleet Maintenance and Modernization Symposium 2016

Public Services Department

COMPARING AIR COOLER RATINGS PART 1: Not All Rating Methods are Created Equal

Important Considerations When Selecting a Fan for Forced Air Cooling. By: Jeff Smoot, CUI Inc

New Auburn Village Center Study Auburn, Maine

The Situation. Modeling Storage Occupancies Under Sloped Ceilings. Concerns (Elevation View) The Concerns 4/29/ NFPA Conference & Expo

The Apogee Scientific. Advanced Leak Detection Technology

CLOTHES WASHING AS HOUSEHOLD END-USE: COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT APPLIANCE MODELS IN VIEW OF EXPECTED WATER SAVINGS

Hydrologic Assessment of using Low Impact Development to Mitigate the Impacts of Climate Change. Chris Jensen, AScT Master of Science Thesis

Street Flooding Mitigation Plan KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission. Presented to AMPO National Conference October 18, 2017

Executive Summary. Number of Low Number of High Number of Faults , Number of OK

A/E REVIEW CHECKLIST SITE & LANDSCAPE

Village of Forest Park. July 27, Sewer Separation Evaluation

Multiphase-Simulation of Membrane Humidifiers for PEM Fuel Cells

Predicting soil depth using a survival analysis model Quentin Styc and Philippe Lagacherie

Dedicated Closed Circuit Hydrostatic Fan Drive Control

Figure 1: Overview of CO 2 evaporator types

City of Elmhurst. City of Elmhurst. Storm Sewer System Workshop November 22, 2010

STUDY #3 IN A SERIES OF REPORTS ON RADON IN BC HOMES. Castlegar: COMMUNITY-WIDE RADON TESTING RESULTS AS PART OF ITS. PROGRAm

There is an ongoing regulatory concern that

Proposed Development Strategy Blairmains, Blairlogie

City of Elmhurst. Comprehensive Flood Plan. City of Elmhurst. City Council Meeting September 15, 2014

ACHIEVING ENERGY-EFFICIENT DATA CENTER COOLING: DOES REDUCING FAN SPEED ALWAYS RESULT IN ENERGY SAVINGS?

Nevada Floodplain Management Program

Building Coverage Ratio at the Eastern Corridor of Jalan Ir. H. Djuanda Bandung

City of Norfolk Coastal Flood Mitigation Program. March 13, 2013

Life Cycle Considerations for Microprocessor Relays

Tuning Wear Rate and Surface Roughness of CMP Pads via Precise Control of Pad Conditioner Features

September 20, 2016 Soils Investigation for Agricultural Designation Windemere Place, Missoula County, Montana

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. SUMMARY: Flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or

2010/2011 GOOD ENERGY REBATE PROGRAM

MEMORANDUM. DATE: June 14, TO: Sponsors of the Massachusetts ENERGY STAR Appliances Program

Urban Water Security Research Alliance Technical Report No. 91. SEQ Residential Water End Use Study: Validation Trial of CSIRO End Use Sensor

Polarized Light Scattering of Smoke Sources and Cooking Aerosols

Smoke Alarm Response Time:

SYNERGY IN LEAK DETECTION: COMBINING LEAK DETECTION TECHNOLOGIES THAT USE DIFFERENT PHYSICAL PRINCIPLES

Incident Summary (Reference # ) (DRAFT)

Potential Outdoor Water Savings of Los Angeles Abstract Introduction

ASHRAE Headquarters Building: GSHP vs. VRF systems

Interim Report for the Period thru February 15, 2018 Submitted to Department of Business and Professional Regulations Office of Codes and Standards

THE ROLE OF SUCTION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF CLAY FILL RONALD F. REED, P.E. 1 KUNDAN K. PANDEY, P.E. 2

New Construction Builders Challenge: Sealed Attic and High Efficiency HVAC in Central Florida: A Year in Review

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Direct Reading Monitors

PCE PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE ANALYSIS REPORT FOR WESTWOOD MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT 772 NORTH FOREST ROAD TOWN OF AMHERST, ERIE COUNTY, NEW YORK

Keele Finch Plus Downsview Airport Operational Needs Assessment Executive Summary

Sensor Fusion: The Elements are Converging

Developing a Fire Test Strategy for Storage Protection Under Sloped Ceilings

Severn River Sub-Watershed: BMP 09-Retrofit

Remote Detection of Leaks in Gas Pipelines with an Airborne Raman Lidar. Strategic Insights, Volume VII, Issue 1 (February 2008)

5.8 PUBLIC SERVICES FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES

THERMAL TESTING OF A 3D PRINTED NON-UNIFORM HEATSINK AGAINST STATE-OF- THE-ART FINNED GEOMETRY

INCREASED EFFICIENCY IN VETIVER PROPAGATION WITH THE USE OF GROWTH PROMOTERS. Abstract. Introduction

HOT IN HERE: OFFICE OCCUPANT THERMAL COMFORT IN LAWRENCE HALL

Living Underwater: Hazard Mitigation Challenges from Sea Level Rise and Tidal Flooding

Transcription:

Evaluation of Using Alternative First Floor Elevation Sources for Flood Risk Mitigation Jerry W. Sparks, P.E., CFM Michael K. Buckley, P.E. ASFPM Conference June 23, 2016

A Look Back Crowds panic as floods hit ASFPM 2015

3 Acknowledgement

Question What would be the impact on flood risk mitigation activities of using alternatives to Elevation Certificate surveys for First Floor Elevations?

Use Cases Examined 1. Flood Insurance Policy Premium Rating 2. Risk Assessment 3. Mitigation Evaluation (BCA for Building Elevation Projects)

Alternative FFE Data Sources Evaluated Policy /Permit data (assume surveyed) Registered Land Surveyor/License Professional Engineer $150-$1000+/building Airborne LiDAR Intersect DEM and Building Footprint to determine LAG and HAG Assume/estimate offset from HAG to first floor $0.15-$0.35/building Mobile LiDAR Truck-based LiDAR measured FFE and LAG (visible from street) $20-$40/building Laser Inclinometer GPS-derived FFE $18-$40/structure

Google Earth FFE Estimates Google Earth Street View grossly overestimates or underestimates FFEsfor the study areas. Example: 5313 CHALET PLACE, VA Beach City Permit FFE 6.9 Google Earth Street View FFE ~27 This may improve over time 7

Case Study Areas 1. Manasquan, NJ 2. Virginia Beach, VA 8

Study Area Manasquan, NJ 352 structures Assessed value: $300K to $1.6MM Project Objective: BW12 impact on a study area 9

Study Area Virginia Beach, VA 117 structures City Permit FFE and LAG Data Airborne LiDAR LASER Inclinometer 10

Overview of Datasets Used To Derive FFE Estimates for this Evaluation FFEs derived from: Manasquan, NJ Virginia Beach, VA Flood InsurancePolicy Data (control) Permit Data (control) Airborne LiDAR Laser Inclinometer Mobile LiDAR 11

12 FFE Estimates Comparisons

Airborne LiDAR-derived LAG vs Policy LAG - Manasquan 14.0 Policy Lag/DEM Lag Scatter Plot 12.0 DEM -Lag (ft) 10.0 8.0 y = 0.8464x -0.5913 R² = 0.76 6.0 4.0 2.0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Policy -Lag (ft) Y = X Line Linear (Trend Line) 13

Manasquan FFE Comparison 30.00 ALTERNATE METHOD FFE 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 Differences from Policy FFE RMSE Airborne LiDAR-derived (HAG + Offset) = 2.86 Laser Inclinometer = 0.42 Mobile LiDAR = 3.96 5.00 Sample = 103 structures Airborne LiDAR offset = 1.86' 0.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 POLICY FFE POLICY LOW_FLOOR HAG + Offset Laser Inclinometer Moble LiDAR

VA Beach FFE Comparison 30 Alternative Sources vs Permit Data 25 Differences from Policy FFE RMSE Airborne LiDAR-derived (HAG + Offset) = 2.26 Laser Inclinometer = 2.89 ALTERNATE METHOD FFE 20 15 10 5 Sample = 128 structures Airborne LiDAR offset = 1.19' 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 PERMIT FFE CITY PERMIT FFE LASER INCLIN HAG + Offset 15

Challenges with FFE Sources Elements of Uncertainty: Policies: who entered them? Do they resemble elevation certificates? Elevation Certificates: what s the accuracy? Mobile LiDAR: you are limited to a view from the street Laser Inclinometer: you are limited to field judgment 16

17 Challenges with FFE Sources

Flood Insurance Premium Estimates Comparison 18

Primary Inputs For Calculating NFIP Insurance Premiums Flood Zone Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Building Type Date of Construction Occupancy/Use First (Lowest) Floor Elevation (FFE) Amount of Coverage/Deductible

Uncertainties in the Rating Process Depth damage relationship Cross subsidies Rounding of FFE Calculation of the BFE 20

Manasquan Insurance Analysis 40000 PREMIUMS ESTIMATED USING AIRBORNE LIDAR DERIVED FFE (HAG + OFFSET) VS POLICY DATA FFE 35000 30000 Number Compared = 85 % Difference in Total Premiums Across Sample= +4% RMSE = 12% R² = 0.9786 Airborne LiDAR Derived FFE 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 Policy FFE HAG + OFFSET POLICIES Linear (HAG + OFFSET) 21

Manasquan Insurance Analysis LASER INCLINOMETER PREMIUMS 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 PREMIUMS ESTIMATED USING LASER INCLINOMETER FFE VS POLICY DATA FFE Number Compared = 94 % Difference in Total Premiums Across Sample = +0.5% RMSE = 12% R² = 0.9792 5000 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 POLICY PREMIUMS LASER INCLINOMETER POLICIES Linear (LASER INCLINOMETER) 22

Manasquan Insurance Analysis 40000 35000 PREMIUMS ESTIMATED USING MOBILE LIDAR FFE VS POLICY DATA FFE Number Compared = 94 % Difference in Premiums = +3% RMSE = 9% 30000 R² = 0.9873 MOBILE LIDARPREMIUM 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 POLICY PREMIUM MOBILE LIDAR POLICIES Linear (MOBILE LIDAR) 23

Virginia Beach Insurance Analysis PREMIUMS ESTIMATED USING AIRBORNE LIDAR-DERIVED FFE (HAG+OFFSET) VS PERMIT DATA FFE 9000 8000 7000 Number Compared = 117 % Difference in Total Premiums = +10% RMSE = 42% HAG + OFFSET PREMIUM 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 PERMIT PREMIUM CITY PERMITS HAG + OFFSET 24

Virginia Beach Insurance Analysis PREMIUMS ESTIMATED USING LASER INCLINOMETER FFE VS PERMIT DATA FFE 10000 9000 8000 Number Compared = 117 % Difference in Total Premiums = +2% RMSE = 42% LASER INCLINOMETER FFE PREMIUM 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 PERMIT FFE PREMIUM CITY PERMITS LASER 25

Insurance Analysis Results Summary AlternativeFFE Source Airborne LiDARderived FFEs Laser Inclinometer FFEs Manasquan,NJ (difference compared to Policy FFE data) VirginiaBeach, VA (difference compared to permit FFE data) Total Premium +4% +10% RMSE 12% 42% Total Premium +0.5% +2% RMSE 12% 42% Mobile LiDAR FFEs Total Premium +3% - RMSE 9% - 26

Conclusions & Recommendations Utilization of alternate FFE sources result in slightly to moderately higher total premiums across sample than from EC surveys SJ1 Risk Analysis and BCA tests were inconclusive but seemed to result in much higher sensitivity to FFE differences Recommend further investigation: Evaluate larger sample area(s), including inland/riverine areas More extensive, rigorous testing of Risk Assessment and BCA 27

Slide 27 SJ1 Reword Sparks, Jerry, 6/22/2016

Questions?