2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA presentation: 2015 Flood ... · 2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA...

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

2015 Flood Codes, Standards, and Building

Science Tools

John IngargiolaBuilding Science Branch

FEMA HQ, FIMA

AgendaAgenda

1. Introduction

2. Implementation of Post-Disaster Recommendations

3. Significant changes in ASCE 24-14

4. Significant changes in 2015 I-Codes

5. Significant changes in ICC 500

6. Coordinating Building Codes and Floodplain Management Regulations

7. Substantial Damage Estimator

8. Losses Avoided Methodology

9. Building Science Helpline & FEMA Resources

2

Presidential Disaster DeclarationsPresidential Disaster Declarations

� More than 1,300 declarations since 1990

� Flooding is the most common hazard

� Affects all States and more than 25,000 communities

3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Nu

mb

er

of

Decla

red

Dis

aste

rs


Why Building Codes?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 ManagementCodes and Floodplain Management

Flood Resistant

Buildings and Development

NFIP Regulations (44 CFR Parts 59 & 60)

ASCE 7

ASCE 24

Building CodeLocal Floodplain Management

Regulations*

or

IBC Appendix G*

* 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


7

22,000 communities participate in the NFIP

As of mid-2013, approximately 70% enforce flood-resistant building codes

FEMA’s Ongoing Involvement in Codes and StandardsFEMA’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 FY2012-14 Strategic Plan FIMA FY2012-14 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


Growing Recognition of CodesGrowing 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 CodesGrowing 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 DifferenceMitigation Makes a Difference

Well-elevated and embedded pile

foundation

original ground level

Hurricane Katrina, Dauphin Island, AL

12


Implementation of Post—Disaster Investigation Recommendations

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

Learning Lessons from DisastersLearning Lessons from Disasters

MAT Program BackgroundMAT 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


MAT ProgramMAT 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 ProcessMAT Program Process

Observations, recommendations, and

lessons learned from MATs

Recovery Advisories

Mitigation manuals and reports

NFIP Technical Bulletins

Wide distribution

Available online

Training courses

Code and Standard changes

Technology transfer

17

MAT ProductsMAT 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


Recovery Advisories - SandyRecovery 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 - SandyRecovery 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

http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/30966

Recovery Advisories – Ike (Texas, 2008)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

http://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/15100

21


MAT ReportsMAT Reports

22

http://www.fema.gov/fema-mitigation-

assessment-team-reports

Implementation of MAT RecommendationsImplementation 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


� 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



� 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

26


� 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


� 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


28


� 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

28


� 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-550

29

Significant Changes in the 2014 Edition of ASCE 24


� Cited in 2015 I-Codes

� Many amendments in 2015 I-Codes flow from this edition

31

ASCE 24-14ASCE 24-14

ASCE 24-05 cited by 2012, 2009 and 2006 I-Codes

ASCE 24ASCE 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”“Highlights of ASCE 24”

� Prepared by FEMA

� 2005 available online (2014 will be available after publication)

� Summarizes key requirements

33


ASCE 24: Classification of StructuresASCE 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 ZoneCoastal 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 VASCE 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


ASCE 24-05: ElevationsASCE 24-05: Elevations

37

Increasing importance, increasing protection

ASCE 24-14: Critical Facilities (FDC 4)ASCE 24-14: Critical Facilities (FDC 4)

38

� 2014: Recognizes importance of Flood Design Class

4 (critical facilities)

ASCE 24-05: Zone V & CAZ, orientationASCE 24-05: Zone V & CAZ, orientation

39

Increasing importance, increasing protection


ASCE 24-14: Zone V & CAZ, orientationASCE 24-14: Zone V & CAZ, orientation

40

� 2014: Eliminates orientation

� 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: Flood OpeningsASCE 24-14: Flood Openings

� 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

ASCE 24-14: Zone V & CAZASCE 24-14: Zone V & CAZ


� 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

ASCE 24-14: Miscellaneous ConstructionASCE 24-14: Miscellaneous Construction

Significant Changes in the Flood Provisions of the

2015 I-Codes

Chapter 1 AdministrativeChapter 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


Chapter 1 AdministrativeChapter 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

46

2015 Chapter 1 Amendments2015 Chapter 1 Amendments

47

� 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

2015 IRC Amendments2015 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



� 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 insuranceFreeboard: Lower risk, lower insurance

50


� 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

51

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.



52

� 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 wind-driven rain

� 2015 IRC: Requires flood openings in breakaway walls

� 2015 IRC: Requirements for tanks

2015 IBC Amendments2015 IBC Amendments

� Reference ASCE 24-14 (first printing shows “ASCE 24-13,” errata to be issued)

� Add definitions for “Coastal A Zone” and “Limit of Moderate Wave Action”

53

2015 IBC Appendix G Amendments2015 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


2015 IEBC Amendments2015 IEBC Amendments

55

Existing buildings that are Substantially Improved or repaired after Substantial Damage:

� Previous editions: Required compliance with IBC Section 1612

� 2015 IEBC: Requires compliance with flood provisions of IBC or IRC, as applicable to the occupancy

2015 IEBC Amendments2015 IEBC Amendments

56

� Chapter 11 Additions

� 1103.5: new item so that new foundations and replacement foundations shall comply with flood requirements (regardless of whether SI/SD)

Significant Changes in ICC/NSAA 500-14,

Standard for the Design and Construction of

Storm Shelters


ICC 500-2014ICC 500-2014

� Completion due by December 2014

� Incorporated by reference in 2015 IBC

ICC 500: Flood LoadsICC 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 SheltersICC 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 elevationassociated with Category 5 hurricane in storm surge area


*Same

Same

Same

*Maximum inundation elevation

associated with any modeled hurricane Category (including wave effects)

Minimum elevation of lowest floor required by community

*Exception: Does not apply to

tornado-only shelters.


ICC 500: Elevation of Residential SheltersICC 500: Elevation of Residential Shelters


Minimum elevation of lowest floor required by community; or

Highest recorded flood elevation +1 (if unmapped)


*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

*Exception: Does not apply to

tornado-only shelters.

ICC 500: Flood Hazard Area Siting CriteriaICC 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


Satisfying NFIP Requirements 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 & ConsiderationsCodes: Advantages & Considerations

� What are the advantages?

� What are some things to consider when administering flood provisions for buildings through the building codes?

65

AdvantagesAdvantages

� 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


ConsiderationsConsiderations

� 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 Fitting it All Together

Flood Resistant


NFIP Regulations (44 CFR Parts 59 & 60)

ASCE 7

ASCE 24


Regulations*

or

IBC Appendix G*

* 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


Regulations*

or

IBC Appendix G* Flood

Resistant


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

Coordinating the I-Codes and NFIPCoordinating 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 24

70


New RFL: Comparing NFIP & I-CodesNew 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

Class

Registered Design Professional

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-CodesNew 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

Class

Registered Design Professional

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


BFE & DFEBFE & DFE

� IBC, ASCE 7 and ASCE 24 define BFE and DFE

� In most communities DFE = BFE

73

� 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

� 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

Buildings/Structures & DevelopmentBuildings/Structures & Development

InspectionsInspections

� NFIP: regulations do not specify inspections (FEMA 480 suggests inspections at several times during construction)

75

� 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)


New RFL: Nuts & BoltsNew RFL: Nuts & Bolts

76

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?

Were flood provisions in the body of the

Codes modified?

Which codes (and which editions) are

adopted?

Was Appendix G of the IBC modified by

the State?

Is Chapter 1 of the I-Codes adopted? 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

or buildings?

How are manufactured homes

regulated?

Is specific work exempt from building

permits?

Does the State Code Council issue

interpretations?

Are specific buildings exempt from the

Code

New RFL: Nuts & BoltsNew RFL: Nuts & Bolts

77

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?

Were flood provisions in the body of the

Codes modified?

Which codes (and which editions) are

adopted?

Was Appendix G of the IBC modified by

the State?

Is Chapter 1 of the I-Codes adopted? 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

or buildings?

How are manufactured homes

regulated?

Is specific work exempt from building

permits?

Does the State Code Council issue

interpretations?

Are specific buildings exempt from the

Code

Resolving ConflictsResolving 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-by-case application of “more restrictive prevails”)

78


Administrative ProvisionsAdministrative 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

� 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 24

80

State Code Amendments and FloodState 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

Local Code Amendments and FloodLocal Code Amendments and Flood


Adding Higher Standards … see RFLAdding Higher Standards … see RFL

Amend The I-Codes Ordinance or IBC Appendix G

Additional Height (Freeboard) Manufactured Home Limitations

Prohibit Enclosures Below Elevated

Buildings

Flood Protection Setback Along

Waterways

Limit the Size of Enclosures Below Elevated

Buildings

Subdivision Limitations

Require Nonconversion Agreements Compensatory Storage

Treat Coastal A Zone Like Zone V Flood Hazard Map Other Than, or in

Addition to, the FIRMCumulative Substantial Improvement

Repetitive Flood Damage (Substantial

Damage)

Limitation on Use of Fill

Design Certification of All Foundations

Protection of Critical and Essential Facilities

It’s in there!

82

Exceeding NFIP MinimumsExceeding 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 RequirementsExceeding 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


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

� 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“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


� 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 OrdinancesModel Code-Coordinated Ordinances

89

Model Code-Coordinated OrdinancesModel Code-Coordinated Ordinances

Links are in there!

� Contact your NFIP State Coordinating Agency

� Contact your FEMA Region Office

90

For AssistanceFor Assistance


Substantial Damage Estimator –

Pre- and Post-Disaster

Reduce Risk to Existing StructuresReduce Risk to Existing Structures

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.

Intent of the NFIP Substantial Improvement and Substantial Damage Provisions:

92

Substantial Damage DefinedSubstantial 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.

93

Cost to Repair to Pre-Damage Condition ≥ 50%Pre-Damage Market Value of Building


Substantial Damage vs. Other InspectionsSubstantial 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 SDFactors 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 ResponsibilitiesCommunity 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


Process for Determining SDProcess for Determining SD

97

FEMA P-758: SI / SD Desk ReferenceFEMA 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

99

FEMA P-784 SDE ManualFEMA P-784 SDE Manual

� Helps local officials collect data, screen large numbers of damaged buildings

� Rapid, defensible estimates


Benefit of Using the SDE ToolBenefit 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 non-

residential structures

100

Pre-Disaster PreparationsPre-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 PreparationPre-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


Field Preparation (pre- or post-event)Field Preparation (pre- or post-event)

103

� Files and Photos

� Prepare file for each address

� Include copy of propertytax data

� Tax map with structure footprint

� Dimensions, foundation types, number of stories

Field PreparationField Preparation

104

� 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

Best Practices for Making DeterminationsBest Practices for Making Determinations

105

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


Rapid Safety InspectionsRapid Safety Inspections

� Drive the damage areas to estimate the number of damaged structures

� Estimate the split between residential and non-residential 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 InspectorsPrepare 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 HighlightsTraining Highlights

108

� 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


Terminology & Data RequirementsTerminology & Data Requirements

SD terms and definitions Non-residential structure uses

“Property” vs. “Assessment” Field vs. office data requirements

Structure attributes Foundation types (define crawl space)

Initial construction quality Depreciation rating

Use of the “No Physical Damage” checkbox

Use of default data (to save time and reduce data entry errors)

Minimum data required to save a record

Collection of additional, community-specific data not required by SDE

109

Field WorkField Work

110

� 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

Interior InspectionInterior Inspection

111

� Conduct a room-by-room inspection

� Note damage to walls, ceiling, and floor

� Identify percent damage for all appropriate elements

� Take photographs of significant damage

Source: Iowa DNR


Exterior InspectionExterior Inspection

112

� 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

Estimating Building DimensionsEstimating Building Dimensions

113

� 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.)


SDE Percent Damaged ReportSDE Percent Damaged Report

115

Making SD DeterminationsMaking 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


Why Develop a Methodology?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

ObjectiveObjective

To quantify losses avoided through the adoption and enforcement of

disaster-resistant building codes.

119

ApproachApproach

� 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


FY11 HAZUS Pilot StudiesFY11 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 StudiesFY11 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 LearnedPilot 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


Pilot Study: Lessons LearnedPilot Study: Lessons Learned

Losses Avoided Trend (post-2000 bldgs)

� M7.0 EQ (Salt Lake City): $400-500M 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

124

� Residential ~ 60% of bldg. value exposed; 70-80% of Losses Avoided

� Commercial offices ~ 12% of bldg. value exposed; 20-30% of Losses Avoided

FY12 RIV Demonstration Study 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 FY12 RIV Demonstration Study

Method

� Acquire data & adapt to HAZUS format1. Building code adoption dates by jurisdiction2. 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


RIV Code Adoption HistoryRIV Code Adoption History

127

CoreLogic DatabaseCoreLogic 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 DatabaseCoreLogic 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 1999

859,892

Parcels with a Square Footage > 0 842,374

Indirectly Derived HAZUS Specific Occupancy 842,374 For Building Repl Value CalculationDirectly Derived HAZUS Specific Occupancy 707,180

Subject to Building Code Hazard Provisions ~600,000 in progress

129


Other Data CollectionOther 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

ConclusionConclusion

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


http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/buildingscience/

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 HelplineFEMA Building Science Helpline

� 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

[email protected]

Helpline: (866) 927-2104

FEMA PublicationsFEMA Publications

�www.fema.gov/library/

� 800-480-2520

135


NFIP Technical BulletinsNFIP Technical Bulletins

� Revised T1, T2, T4, T5 and T9

� Each cites the I-Codes

� Notes insurance implications

136

Mitigation Division, Building Science Branch

www.fema.gov/building-science/

[email protected]

(866) 927-2104

137

2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA presentation: 2015 Flood ... · 2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA...

Documents

Transcript of 2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA presentation: 2015 Flood ... · 2014 ICC Annual Conference FEMA...