2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA presentation: 2015 Flood Codes, Standards, and Building Science Tools

Transcription

1 2015 Flood Codes, Standards, and Building Science Tools John Ingargiola Building Science Branch FEMA HQ, FIMA Agenda 1. Introduction 2. Implementation of Post-Disaster Recommendations 3. Significant changes in ASCE Significant changes in 2015 I-Codes 5. Significant changes in ICC Coordinating Building Codes and Floodplain Management Regulations 7. Substantial Damage Estimator 8. Losses Avoided Methodology 9. Building Science Helpline & FEMA Resources 2 Presidential Disaster Declarations More than 1,300 declarations since 1990 Flooding is the most common hazard Affects all States and more than 25,000 communities 120 Number of Declared Disasters Page 1

2 Why Building Codes? Recognition that buildings built to code are better able to resist all natural hazards Mid-80s review of legacy codes Late 90s, formation of International Code Council FEMA Building Science has participated since the initial development of the International Codes FEMA Building Science also serves on the ASCE committee for ASCE 24 standard referenced by I- Codes 4 Codes and Floodplain Management NFIP Regulations (44 CFR Parts 59 & 60) Local Floodplain Management Regulations* or IBC Appendix G* Building Code Flood Resistant Buildings and Development ASCE 7 ASCE 24 * NFIP-consistent administrative provisions, community-specific adoption of FIS and maps, and technical requirements for development outside the scope of the building code (and higher standards, in some communities). 5 The 2015, 2012 and 2009 I-Code flood provisions meet or exceed the National Flood Insurance Program requirements for buildings and structures. 6 Page 2

3 22,000 communities participate in the NFIP As of mid-2013, approximately 70% enforce flood-resistant building codes 7 FEMA s Ongoing Involvement in Codes and Standards FEMA s role will be continuous, including: Proposing changes to maintain consistency with the NFIP and to incorporate best practices identified in post-disaster investigations Defending against changes that weaken the flood provisions to be inconsistent with the NFIP Contributing to requests for interpretations by ICC Supporting training of State and local officials 8 FIMA FY Strategic Plan Strategy 3.1.3: Promote Disaster-Resilient, Green Building Design and Construction Techniques The adoption and enforcement of disaster-resistant building codes is a core community action to promote effective mitigation. When communities ensure that new buildings and infrastructure are designed and constructed in accordance with national building codes and construction standards, they significantly increase local resilience now and in the future. With the advancements in building codes and guidance, there are also new opportunities to link disaster resiliency with green-building concepts. Working with building code association partners, FEMA Mitigation and Insurance will promote adoption and enforcement of disaster-resilient building codes, as well as the coordination and integration of disaster resilience and green building techniques to support local capacity to build truly mitigated and sustainable communities. 9 Page 3

4 Growing Recognition of Codes In 2013, Congress requested a study on the impact, effectiveness and feasibility of including building codes in the NFIP. Conclusion: including building codes in the NFIP would have an overall positive impact in reducing physical flood losses and other hazard losses 10 Growing Recognition of Codes Task Force of Federal and State Agencies Recommendation #25 States and localities should adopt and enforce the most current version of the IBC and IRC. 11 Mitigation Makes a Difference Well-elevated and embedded pile foundation original ground level Hurricane Katrina, Dauphin Island, AL 12 Page 4

5 Implementation of Post Disaster Investigation Recommendations Learning Lessons from Disasters Two important components of hazard mitigation: Assessing the vulnerability of buildings, and Increasing building resistance to damage caused by hazard events. The Mitigation Assessment Team (MAT) Program: FEMA draws on the combined resources of a Federal, State, local, and private sector partnership to assemble and quickly deploy teams of investigators to evaluate the performance of buildings in response to the effects of natural and manmade hazards. 14 MAT Program Background Conduct forensic engineering analyses to investigate building performance determine causes of failure and success after severe hazard events Evaluate performance of FEMA-funded mitigation projects Since 1992, post-storm investigations and 17 MAT reports (hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and manmade) 15 Page 5

6 MAT Program Provide recommendations that communities, states and organizations/agencies can follow to reduce future damage and protect lives and property Strive to increase damage resistance through improvements in construction codes and standards, designs, methods, and materials used for new construction and post-disaster repair and recovery Use observations in hazard mitigation and best practices guidance documents 16 MAT Program Process Observations, recommendations, and lessons learned from MATs Technology transfer Recovery Advisories Mitigation manuals and reports NFIP Technical Bulletins Code and Standard changes Wide distribution Available online Training courses 17 MAT Products Recovery Advisories and Fact Sheets issued quickly to address special issues observed in the field, intended to facilitate recovery MAT Reports full report on investigations, observations, conclusions and recommendations 18 Page 6

7 Recovery Advisories - Sandy Seven advisories, flood RA 1 - Improving Connections in Elevated Coastal Residential Buildings RA 2 - Reducing Flood Effects in Critical Facilities RA 3 - Restoring Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Systems In Non-Substantially Damaged Residential Buildings 19 Recovery Advisories - Sandy RA 4 - Reducing Interruptions to Mid- and High-Rise Buildings During Floods RA 5 - Designing for Flood Levels Above the BFE After Hurricane Sandy RA 6 - Protecting Building Fuel Systems from Flood Damage RA 7 - Reducing Flood Risk and Flood Insurance Premiums for Existing Residential Buildings in Zone A 20 Recovery Advisories Ike (Texas, 2008) Eight advisories, wind and flood 1. Attachment of Brick Veneer in High-Wind Regions 2. Design and Construction in Coastal A Zones 3. Designing for Flood Levels above the BFE 4. Enclosures and Breakaway Walls 5. Erosion, Scour, and Foundation Design 6. Minimizing Water Intrusion Through Roof Vents in High-Wind Regions 7. Metal Roof Systems in High-Wind Regions 8. Siding Installation in High-Wind Regions 21 Page 7

8 MAT Reports 22 Implementation of MAT Recommendations MAT reports contain conclusions and recommendations Many recommendations relate to increasing resistance through building code changes Many recommendations encourage States and communities to exceed the minimum requirements of the NFIP and the flood provisions in the I-Codes 23 Implementation of MAT Recommendations Additional elevation (freeboard) recommended in MAT reports since Iniki (1992) In ASCE 24 since first edition in 1998 IBC requires freeboard for all multifamily and commercial buildings in all flood zones IBC freeboard increases as function of structure/risk category New edition of ASCE 24 and 2015 I-Codes have increased freeboard 24 Page 8

9 Implementation of MAT Recommendations Incorporation of the Coastal A Zone concept Investigations identified wave-related damage in Zone A areas adjacent to Zone V In ASCE 24 since first edition in 1998 IBC, by reference to ASCE 24, requires buildings in CAZ to meet same requirements as Zone V Recognized in 2006 IRC Revised FEMA FIRMs now show Limit of Moderate Wave Action (inland extent of CAZ) 2015 IRC requires dwellings in Coastal A Zones to meet same requirements as Zone V 25 Implementation of MAT Recommendations MAT reports issued after major hurricanes supported State adoption of codes: Louisiana enacted statewide building code Mississippi coastal counties enforce IBC/IRC Florida Building Commission work group on flood provisions 26 Implementation of MAT Recommendations Contributed to ASCE 7 Wind Standard Wind-borne debris requirements (contributed to Florida legislature removing the Panhandle exemption in 2007) Glazing Protection Improve Asphalt Shingle, Tile Roofing, and Edge Flashing Shelter guidance: FEMA 331, FEMA 320 Funding for shelters through Hazard Mitigation Grant Program ICC 500 Shelter Standard (revision in process) 27 Page 9

10 Implementation of MAT Recommendations The 2011 MAT for tornadoes supported code change for 2015 IBC, which requires storm shelters in new schools and first responder facilities (police, fire, EMS) in 250 mph wind zone Implementation of MAT Recommendations Critical Facilities guidance documents: FEMA P-424 (schools), FEMA 543 (critical facilities), FEMA P-577 (hospitals) High Wind Training and Certification Programs for Materials: Tile Roof Institute, Vinyl Siding Institute Pre-engineered foundations for typical dwellings exposed to flood and wind: FEMA P Significant Changes in the 2014 Edition of ASCE 24 Page 10

11 ASCE Cited in 2015 I-Codes Many amendments in 2015 I- Codes flow from this edition ASCE cited by 2012, 2009 and 2006 I-Codes 31 ASCE 24 Specific limitations, minimum requirements, and expected performance for the design and construction of buildings and structures in flood hazard areas NOT a restatement of all of the NFIP regs it is limited to requirements pertaining to design of buildings and structures (see Highlights of ASCE 24 ) Exceeds NFIP in some respects and has more detailed design requirements (see FEMA paper) 32 Highlights of ASCE 24 Prepared by FEMA 2005 available online (2014 will be available after publication) Summarizes key requirements 33 Page 11

12 ASCE 24: Classification of Structures 2005: Equivalent to Structure/Risk Category in IBC/ASCE 7 Category I (agriculture facilities, temporary facilities, minor storage facilities Category II (all structures except Categories I, III and IV) Category III ( substantial hazard ) Category III ( essential facilities ) 2014: Requires separate assignment of Flood Design Class (similar, but not the same as Structure/Risk Category) To better discriminate occupancies that are residential 34 Coastal A Zone Coastal A Zone (CAZ), waves between 1.5 and 3 ft FEMA delineates Limit of Moderate Wave Action (LiMWA) on coastal maps based on studies since 2009 Not labeled as a separate zone (still shown as Zone AE ) 35 ASCE 24: CAZ like Zone V 2005: RDP expected to determine conditions that contribute to flood loads, including wave height; if CAZ, then Zone V requirements apply 2014: If delineated on FIRM or designated by community, the Coastal A Zone is regulated like Zone V (24-05 expected the RDP to determine wave conditions) Requires open foundations (pilings, columns, shear walls) Allows stem walls if designed to account for scour Requires enclosures to have breakaway walls AND requires flood openings 36 Page 12

13 ASCE 24-05: Elevations Increasing importance, increasing protection 37 ASCE 24-14: Critical Facilities (FDC 4) 2014: Recognizes importance of Flood Design Class 4 (critical facilities) 38 ASCE 24-05: Zone V & CAZ, orientation Increasing importance, increasing protection 39 Page 13

14 ASCE 24-14: Zone V & CAZ, orientation 2014: Eliminates orientation 40 ASCE 24-14: Flood Openings Engineered openings: Emphasis on performance Changes in coefficient of discharge to better account for the obstructing effects of louvers, faceplates, grills Nonengineered and engineered openings: Separates installation from design because all flood openings have the same installation requirements 41 ASCE 24-14: Zone V & CAZ Requires exterior door at the top of stairways enclosed with breakaway walls To minimize exposure to wave splash and runup and wind-driven rain Requires flood openings in breakaway walls To limit failure of walls during more frequent (shallower) flooding 42 Page 14

15 ASCE 24-14: Miscellaneous Construction Nonstructural concrete slabs consolidates requirements Garages and accessory storage structures clarifies requirements based on flood zone Tanks (underground and above-ground) clarifies requirements based on flood zone 43 Significant Changes in the Flood Provisions of the 2015 I-Codes Chapter 1 Administrative Previous editions of IBC & IEBC: No specific provisions for making Substantial Improvement / Substantial Damage determinations 2015 IBC & IEBC: Specify the building official makes SI/SD determinations 45 Page 15

16 Chapter 1 Administrative Previous editions of IRC: Building official makes findings and the Board of Appeals makes SI/SD determinations 2015 IRC: Specify the building official makes SI/SD determinations In Chapter 3, clarifies flood provisions apply to new dwellings and SI/SD Chapter 1 Amendments Previous editions of IRC: Board of Appeals handles variances 2015 IRC: Parallel the IBC by limiting the building official s authority to grant modifications to any provision related flood hazard areas, requiring a determination equivalent to the variance provisions IRC Amendments Previous editions of IRC: Permits use of ASCE 24 as alternative in Zone V 2015 IRC: Permits use of ASCE 24 as alternative in all flood zones 48 Page 16

17 2015 IRC Amendments Previous editions of IRC: Zone A: lowest floor at or above DFE Zone V: bottom of lowest horizontal structural member at or above DFE or BFE + 1 ft (function of orientation relative to the direction of wave approach) 2015 IRC: Minimum elevation in all flood zones is BFE + 1 ft, or DFE, whichever is higher (freeboard) 2015 IRC: Eliminate Zone V orientation 49 Freeboard: Lower risk, lower insurance IRC Amendments Previous editions of IRC: Coastal A Zone treated like Zone A except lowest floor required to be one foot higher 2015 IRC: Coastal A Zone if Limit of Moderate Wave Action delineated on FIRM or designated by communities, treated like Zone V Stem wall foundation allowed, if wave action and scour accounted for in design Coastal A Zone: During the base flood conditions, the potential for breaking wave height shall be greater than or equal to 1 ½ feet (457 mm). The inland limit of the CAZ is (a) the Limit of Moderate Wave Action if delineated on a FIRM, or (b) designated by the authority having jurisdiction. 51 Page 17

18 2015 IRC Amendments 2015 IRC: Requires exterior door at the top of stairways enclosed with breakaway walls (Zone V & CAZ) To minimize exposure to wave splash and runup and winddriven rain 2015 IRC: Requires flood openings in breakaway walls 2015 IRC: Requirements for tanks IBC Amendments Reference ASCE (first printing shows ASCE 24-13, errata to be issued) Add definitions for Coastal A Zone and Limit of Moderate Wave Action IBC Appendix G Amendments Administrative provisions and development other than buildings: Clarify that engineering analyses are to be prepared by RDPs Add inspection of development other than buildings Specify manufactured home foundations shall comply with IRC R322 (rather than IBC Section 1612). Replace detailed requirements with reference to ASCE 24 for tanks; decks and porches; non-structural concrete slabs 54 Page 18

19 2015 IEBC Amendments Existing buildings that are Substantially Improved or repaired after Substantial Damage: Previous editions: Required compliance with IBC Section IEBC: Requires compliance with flood provisions of IBC or IRC, as applicable to the occupancy IEBC Amendments Chapter 11 Additions : new item so that new foundations and replacement foundations shall comply with flood requirements (regardless of whether SI/SD) 56 Significant Changes in ICC/NSAA , Standard for the Design and Construction of Storm Shelters Page 19

20 ICC Completion due by December 2014 Incorporated by reference in 2015 IBC ICC 500: Flood Loads 2008: Design for buoyancy forces and hydrostatic loads 2014: Design for buoyancy forces and hydrostatic loads Flood loads determined in accordance with ASCE 7-10 Design flood elevation = minimum floor elevation from Section 401 ICC 500: Elevation of Community Shelters 2008 higher of the elevations determined by: *0.2% annual chance flood elevation (including wave effects); or BFE + 2; or Highest recorded flood elevation +2 (if unmapped); or Maximum inundation elevation associated with Category 5 hurricane in storm surge area *Exception: Does not apply to tornado-only shelters higher of the elevations determined by: *Same Same Same *Maximum inundation elevation associated with any modeled hurricane Category (including wave effects) Minimum elevation of lowest floor required by community Page 20

21 ICC 500: Elevation of Residential Shelters 2008 higher of the elevations determined by: Minimum elevation of lowest floor required by community; or Highest recorded flood elevation +1 (if unmapped) *Exception: Does not apply to tornado-only shelters higher of the elevations determined by: *Same Highest recorded flood elevation (if unmapped); or *Maximum inundation elevation associated with Category 5 hurricane (including wave effects); or where Cat. 5 elevations have not been established, elevation associated with highest established Hurricane Category; or Lowest floor elevation required by the community ICC 500: Flood Hazard Area Siting Criteria 2008: No requirements for community shelter siting 2014: Community shelters shall be located outside of Zone V and floodways Exception: Allowed in V Zones where permitted by Board of Appeals Reducing Flood Losses through the International Codes: Coordinating Building Codes and Floodplain Management Page 21

22 Satisfying NFIP Requirements To participate in the NFIP, communities must have enforceable floodplain management regulations that are consistent with the Part 60 requirements for land management and use. The NFIP definition of floodplain management regulations is broad: Flood plain management regulations means zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, health regulations, special purpose ordinances (such as a flood plain ordinance, grading ordinance and erosion control ordinance) and other applications of police power. The term describes such state or local regulations, in any combination thereof, which provide standards for the purpose of flood damage prevention and reduction. 64 Codes: Advantages & Considerations What are the advantages? What are some things to consider when administering flood provisions for buildings through the building codes? 65 Advantages Avoid differences; fewer conflicts All hazard-related building construction requirements are in one place Improved construction quality Codes have some higher standards and some more specific provisions than the NFIP Permits are issued for all buildings and structures Strengthened enforcement Effective, routine inspections Improved compliance for existing buildings 66 Page 22

23 Considerations Codes only apply to buildings and structures NFIP requires communities to regulate development Planning and zoning are valuable tools to guide development in ways that codes do not In most States, it s more difficult for communities to modify or adopt higher standards that affect buildings Certain structures may be exempt from the code (State-specific) or not required to get permits (e.g., certain sheds, fences, etc.) 67 Fitting it All Together NFIP Regulations (44 CFR Parts 59 & 60) Local Floodplain Building Code Management Regulations* or IBC Appendix G* Flood Resistant Buildings and Development ASCE 7 ASCE 24 * NFIP-consistent administrative provisions, community-specific adoption of FIS and maps, and technical requirements for development outside the scope of the building code (and higher standards, in some communities). 68 Coordinating the I-Codes and NFIP COMPLETE REVISION Importance of coordinating Description of differences between NFIP & I-Codes Series of questions to help determine how best to coordinate Description of higher standards and more specific requirements Model code-coordinated ordinances 69 Page 23

24 Coordinating the I-Codes and NFIP NEW CHAPTER that describes the most significant differences between the NFIP requirements and the provisions of the I- Codes and ASCE New RFL: Comparing NFIP & I-Codes Adoption of FIS and FIRMs Coastal A Zone Flood Loads and Flood Resistance Existing Buildings BFE and Design Flood Elevation Historic Structures SFHA and Flood Hazard Areas Additions Buildings/Structures, and Development Manufactured Homes Risk/Occupancy Category & Flood Design Registered Design Professional Class Required Building Elevations Building Official and Floodplain Administrator Equipment Elevations Inspections Residential and Non-Residential Buildings Record Keeping Definition of Basement SI/ SI Floodway Variances Use of Fill Crawlspace and Under-floor Space Dry Floodproofing Livable and Habitable 71 New RFL: Comparing NFIP & I-Codes Adoption of FIS and FIRMs Coastal A Zone Flood Loads and Flood Resistance Existing Buildings BFE and Design Flood Elevation Historic Structures SFHA and Flood Hazard Areas Additions Buildings/Structures, and Development Manufactured Homes Risk/Occupancy Category & Flood Design Registered Design Professional Class Required Building Elevations Building Official and Floodplain Administrator Equipment Elevations Inspections Residential and Non-Residential Buildings Record Keeping Definition of Basement SI/ SI Floodway Variances Use of Fill Crawlspace and Under-floor Space Dry Floodproofing Livable and Habitable 72 Page 24

25 BFE & DFE IBC, ASCE 7 and ASCE 24 define BFE and DFE In most communities DFE = BFE Reasons a community might have DFE BFE include local decision to use a different map to show ultimate development runoff (future conditions), storm of record, 0.2% annual chance (500-year) flood 73 Buildings/Structures & Development Codes govern buildings and structures Building: any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy Structure: that which is built or constructed NFIP communities regulate development Development: any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials. 74 Inspections NFIP: regulations do not specify inspections (FEMA 480 suggests inspections at several times during construction) IBC and IRC: upon placement of the lowest floor, including basement, and prior to further vertical construction elevation documentation submitted Submission of as-built elevation documentation prior to final inspection (2012) 75 Page 25

26 New RFL: Nuts & Bolts State rules administrated by a State agency? Which code covers existing buildings? How are conflicts/differences resolved? Is IBC Appendix G adopted? At which level are building code adopted? Which codes (and which editions) are adopted? Is Chapter 1 of the I-Codes adopted? Were flood provisions in the body of the Codes modified? Was Appendix G of the IBC modified by the State? Does the State permit local amndts? Is Chapter 1 of the I-Codes modified? How are FISs and FIRMs (and revisions) adopted? Does the State regulate certain activities How are manufactured homes or buildings? regulated? Is specific work exempt from building Does the State Code Council issue permits? interpretations? Are specific buildings exempt from the Code 76 New RFL: Nuts & Bolts State rules administrated by a State agency? Which code covers existing buildings? How are conflicts/differences resolved? Is IBC Appendix G adopted? At which level are building code adopted? Which codes (and which editions) are adopted? Is Chapter 1 of the I-Codes adopted? Were flood provisions in the body of the Codes modified? Was Appendix G of the IBC modified by the State? Does the State permit local amndts? Is Chapter 1 of the I-Codes modified? How are FISs and FIRMs (and revisions) adopted? Does the State regulate certain activities How are manufactured homes or buildings? regulated? Is specific work exempt from building Does the State Code Council issue permits? interpretations? Are specific buildings exempt from the Code 77 Resolving Conflicts If the community has both floodplain management regulations and enforces the I-Codes: The more restrictive prevails Understand which office is responsible for each requirement Go through coordination process to identify differences and gaps Decide how best to resolve those differences and eliminate the gaps (change code, change ordinance, rely on case-bycase application of more restrictive prevails ) 78 Page 26

27 Administrative Provisions How are administrative provisions of the codes handled? Many States modify or rewrite Some States allow communities to write their own Some States use a single chapter for all codes Duties and powers of the building official Granting modifications ( variances ) Content of construction documents and plans Inspections 79 State Code Amendments and Flood FEMA s consistency statement assumes no amendments that remove or weaken the flood provisions of the I-Codes Some States have modified the body of the codes IRC additional elevation (freeboard) IRC Require dwellings to be designed per ASCE Local Code Amendments and Flood Local amendments Some States permit, but only more restrictive Some States have authority to approve or disapprove; others do not Some States do not allow 81 Page 27

28 Adding Higher Standards see RFL AmendThe I-Codes Additional Height (Freeboard) Ordinance or IBC Appendix G Manufactured Home Limitations Prohibit Enclosures Below Elevated Flood Protection Setback Along Buildings Waterways Limit the Size of Enclosures Below Elevated Subdivision Limitations Buildings Require Nonconversion Agreements Treat Coastal A Zone Like Zone V Cumulative Substantial Improvement Repetitive Flood Damage (Substantial Damage) Limitation on Use of Fill Design Certification of All Foundations Protection of Critical and Essential Facilities Compensatory Storage Flood Hazard Map Other Than, or in Addition to, the FIRM It s in there! 82 Exceeding NFIP Minimums Similar to building codes, the NFIP requirements are minimums Many States and communities elect to adopt higher standards for improved flood resistance The NFIP Community Rating System acknowledges exceeding the minimums and communities may qualify for discounts on NFIP Flood insurance premiums 83 Exceeding I-Code Requirements Although the flood provisions in the I-Codes exceed NFIP minimums in some respects, some communities may want to further amend the codes FEMA s post-disaster investigations reinforce benefits of exceeding minimums 84 Page 28

29 Coordinating the I-Codes and NFIP Remember... NFIP 60.3(a)(3): Designed to prevent flotation, collapse, lateral movement during flooding, constructed to minimize flood damage.. IBC/IRC/IEBC: requirements to safeguard the public safety, health and general welfare, through structural strength... All the specific provisions tell the designer, builder, owner and code official how to achieve that performance expectation 85 Coordinating the I-Codes and NFIP Why coordinate codes and floodplain management regulations? Two regulatory instruments that govern the same thing: Wording differences meaningful? Differences in requirements does the more restrictive always prevail? Burden on the regulated public and local officials 86 Comprehensive and Coordinated Approach Use the building code for design and construction of buildings and structures Use a companion ordinance for administrative provisions: Adoption of effective maps (and map revisions) Floodway encroachment analyses SI/SD determinations Variances Use a companion ordinance for development activities that aren t regulated by the building code 87 Page 29

30 Model Code-Coordinated Ordinances Written to explicitly match up with the I-Codes All requirements for buildings and structures in the codes Some administrative provisions are in the ordinance Adoption of FIS/FIRMs Powers and duties of the FPA Applications Variances Requirements for development other than buildings Subdivision, site improvement MFH, RV Tanks, other building work, temporary structures 88 Model Code-Coordinated Ordinances Links are in there! 89 For Assistance Contact your NFIP State Coordinating Agency Contact your FEMA Region Office 90 Page 30

31 Substantial Damage Estimator Pre- and Post-Disaster Reduce Risk to Existing Structures Intent of the NFIP Substantial Improvement and Substantial Damage Provisions: 1. Break the cycle of damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. 2. Reduce future costs associated with property damage. 3. Opportunity to build stronger, safer, and smarter communities that are better able to reduce impacts from future flooding and disasters. 4. Communities that participate in the NFIP are required to determine whether damaged to structures in the Special Flood Hazard Areas meet the criteria for Substantial Damage. 92 Substantial Damage Defined Substantial Damage means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. Cost to Repair to Pre-Damage Condition 50% Pre-Damage Market Value of Building 93 Page 31

32 Substantial Damage vs. Other Inspections Preliminary Damage Assessments are made immediately after an event; precursor to requesting disaster declaration Safety Evaluations and Inspections are performed to identify unsafe buildings see ATC 45, Field Manual: Safety Evaluation of Buildings after Windstorms and Floods Those inspections ARE NOT equivalent to Substantial Damage determinations 94 Factors that May Result in SD Wave action High velocities Flooding above first floor Extended duration of flooding Damage of any origin Fire Earthquake High Wind and Tornado Other 95 Community Responsibilities 1. Communicate building code and floodplain management requirements for rebuilding to structure owners 2. Determine the cost to repair 3. Determine the market value of structures 4. Make SI/SD determinations 5. Communicate determinations to owners 6. Approve permits that are in compliance 6. Conduct inspections 7. Maintain compliance documentation 96 Page 32

33 Process for Determining SD 97 FEMA P-758: SI / SD Desk Reference Guidance for local officials responsible for making SI/SD determinations 40 years of NFIP guidance and interpretation A comprehensive resource 98 FEMA P-784 SDE Manual Helps local officials collect data, screen large numbers of damaged buildings Rapid, defensible estimates 99 Page 33

34 Benefit of Using the SDE Tool Facilitates uniform collection of data, especially if large numbers of structures damaged Allows staff with limited construction experience to develop reasonable estimates of structure value and damage Uses damage estimates for individual structure elements Includes assessment options for residential structures and common nonresidential structures 100 Pre-Disaster Preparations Define post-disaster permit procedures Verify administrative forms and systems are in place Establish methods of communication and outreach Develop strategy for increasing staffing capacity, including cross-training staff Identify requirements from the existing building code and floodplain management ordinance Determine if permit fees will be waived or reduced for post-disaster permits. Pre-identify sources of information for estimating market value and costs to repair. 101 Pre-Disaster Preparation Inventory of structures in Special Flood Hazard Areas Supporting data and field preparations Flood maps (FIRMs or local maps) Photos Tax data addresses, structure dimensions/square footage, number of stories Location of structures or tax parcels on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) GPS waypoint files (if available) 102 Page 34

35 Field Preparation (pre- or post-event) Files and Photos Prepare file for each address Include copy of property tax data Tax map with structure footprint Dimensions, foundation types, number of stories 103 Field Preparation Determine source of unit cost data for replacement costs Determine if construction qualify levels can be determined for specific areas in advance of inspections Excellent Good Average 104 Best Practices for Making Determinations Major activities: 1. Identify staff (interlocal agreements, professional associations) 2. Define inventory area 3. Conduct rapid safety evaluations 4. Prepare and train inspectors for field work 5. Perform field inspections, record data 6. Make SD determinations 105 Page 35

36 Rapid Safety Inspections Drive the damage areas to estimate the number of damaged structures Estimate the split between residential and nonresidential structures Conduct building condition survey to identify buildings that may be unsafe to enter Determine which structures require emergency repairs to prevent additional damage (e.g., roof repairs) 106 Prepare Inspectors Request FEMA training Review access protocol Review safety procedures Review methods for estimating % damage for each element Early errors early can multiply and become significant, affecting the qualify of the output 107 Training Highlights Conduct group inspections of one to three residential and non-residential structures to ensure that inspectors understand the process and how to assess damage Stress that exact dimensions are not necessary Emphasize the need to obtain all the required SDE data on the first inspection 108 Page 36

37 Terminology & Data Requirements SD terms and definitions Property vs. Assessment Structure attributes Initial construction quality Use of the No Physical Damage checkbox Minimum data required to save a record Non-residential structure uses Field vs. office data requirements Foundation types (define crawl space) Depreciation rating Use of default data (to save time and reduce data entry errors) Collection of additional, community-specific data not required by SDE 109 Field Work Verify address Mark structure location on the map Estimate flood depth above the first floor Provide an overall description of exterior damage and interior damage 110 Interior Inspection Conduct a room-byroom inspection Note damage to walls, ceiling, and floor Identify percent damage for all appropriate elements Take photographs of significant damage Source: Iowa DNR 111 Page 37

38 Exterior Inspection Note structural damage to superstructure and foundation Check exterior finishes and underlying sheathing Step away from structure to see roof and upper stories from all sides Take photographs of significant damage Take photographs of debris and high water marks 112 Estimating Building Dimensions Exact dimensions not required Consider structure shape as a rectangle or series of rectangles Ignore small changes in shape (bay windows, pulled-out entrances, fireplace pads, etc.) 113 Page 38

39 SDE Percent Damaged Report 115 Making SD Determinations SDE output should be reviewed by local official responsible for making determinations Data values screened for reasonableness Determinations documented SI/SD Desk Reference include sample notice to property owners that damage is or is not substantial damage 116 Losses Avoided Methodology Quantifying Benefits of Disaster Resistance Page 39

40 Why Develop a Methodology? Quantify Disaster Resistance Federal Flood Risk Reduction Standard BW-12 Risk Quantification FEMA & FIMA Strategic Plan Inspire Action Enhance awareness of building code benefits Inform local investment decisions Increase building code adoption & reduced disaster losses 118 Objective To quantify losses avoided through the adoption and enforcement of disaster-resistant building codes. 119 Approach Focus on seismic, hurricane and flood hazards Hazus as the modeling platform Nationally applicable standardized methodology that contains models for estimating potential physical, economic and social impacts of disasters. Expand and validate the methodology through pilot studies over several years: 1. Community-centric studies 2. Region IV States 3. Framework for a national-level effort 120 Page 40

41 FY11 HAZUS Pilot Studies Site selection considered community ratings, hazard exposure, size, data availability and quality Pilot study communities: Seismic hazard - Salt Lake County, UT Hurricane and flood hazards - Charleston County, SC 121 FY11 HAZUS Pilot Studies Challenges First attempt to model building code provisions in Hazus Identifying sufficiently detailed parcel-level data Requesting data from multiple jurisdictions Solutions Establish relationships with local officials Adapt existing Hazus damage functions Conduct sensitivity analyses to understand the power of gap-filling assumptions 122 Pilot Study: Lessons Learned Modeling only the top 5 building occupancies is practical and gives reasonable estimates Off-the-shelf national flood, wind, and seismic maps are readily adapted Key building attributes have to be assigned by expert or extrapolated (structure type, first floor elevation, foundation type, wind loss factors, etc.) This specialized study is not a typical Hazus study Should be performed by experts 123 Page 41

42 Pilot Study: Lessons Learned Losses Avoided Trend (post-2000 bldgs) M7.0 EQ (Salt Lake City): $ M Losses Avoided Residential ~60% of bldg. value exposed; 30% of Losses Avoided Commercial offices ~ 20% of bldg. value exposed; 40% of Losses Avoided 100-yr Flood/Wind (Charleston): $60-130M Losses Avoided Residential ~ 60% of bldg. value exposed; 70-80% of Losses Avoided Commercial offices ~ 12% of bldg. value exposed; 20-30% of Losses Avoided 124 FY12 RIV Demonstration Study Scope Communities vulnerable to flood, wind, and seismic hazards 4.5 million parcels in mapped Special Flood Hazard Area) Demonstrate the ability to model big data 125 FY12 RIV Demonstration Study Method Acquire data & adapt to HAZUS format 1. Building code adoption dates by jurisdiction 2. Parcel data (Dunn & Bradstreet vs CoreLogic) 3. Building data (structure & foundation type) 4. Hazard layers (flood depth grid, wind velocity, seismic PGA) Modify damage functions by construction type, for buildings constructed after 2000 adoption of I-Codes Model pre- and post-2000 conditions Compare losses, both direct & indirect, AAL * PGA = Peak ground acceleration; AAL = Average annualized loss 126 Page 42

43 RIV Code Adoption History 127 CoreLogic Database Challenges Cost and time to acquire Incomplete fields, especially construction structure type Solutions Partnered with other FEMA studies to share cost Used proxy parameters where possible & the reduced modeling count 128 CoreLogic Database Number of Parcels Total Parcels Supplied by CoreLogic 17,116,629 Number of Parcels in Region IV 4,461,956 Parcels with a Year Built or an Effective Year Built After ,892 Parcels with a Square Footage > 0 842,374 Indirectly Derived HAZUS Specific Occupancy 842,374 For Building Repl Value Directly Derived HAZUS Specific Occupancy 707,180 Calculation Subject to Building Code Hazard Provisions ~600,000 in progress 129 Page 43

44 Other Data Collection Challenges Flood depth grids not readily available Identifying building construction type Determining building code year adoption by local jurisdiction is very complex Solutions Use of regulatory products and collaboration with other studies Interviews with local structural engineers Review of CRS and BCEGS local enforcement data 130 Conclusion Benefits of Parcel Level Losses Avoided Study: Identifies key loss drivers of community hazard profiles and buildings Quantifies substantial return on investment of building codes Helps prioritize optimal mitigation opportunities Encourages innovation of code enhancements and parcel data Provides clear national perspective on building exposures and comparison of hazards 131 FEMA Building Code and Floodplain Management Resources Page 44

45 Click on Building Code Resources Flood Resistant Provisions of the I-Codes Highlights of ASCE 24 Provisions of the I-Codes and ASCE 24 Compared to the NFIP 133 FEMA Building Science Helpline Helpline: (866) Approximately 200 inquiries per year Common flood questions Flood openings Basements / below-grade areas Substantial Improvement and Substantial Damage Flood damage-resistant materials NFIP State Coordinating Agency also provide guidance FEMA Publications Page 45

46 NFIP Technical Bulletins Revised T1, T2, T4, T5 and T9 Each cites the I-Codes Notes insurance implications 136 Mitigation Division, Building Science Branch (866) Page 46