FEMA BuildingCodesSave Appendices 2020
$38.35
Building Codes Save: A Nationwide Study, Appendices
| Published By | Publication Date | Number of Pages |
| FEMA | 2020 | 216 |
None
PDF Catalog
| PDF Pages | PDF Title |
|---|---|
| 1 | Building Codes Save: A Nationwide Study |
| 5 | Table of Contents |
| 13 | APPENDIX A: CoreLogic Data Summary and AALA Results |
| 15 | A.1 CoreLogic Data Summary |
| 26 | A.2 AALA Results Tables |
| 27 | APPENDIX B: Building Code Data |
| 29 | B.1 ISO BCEGS Maps |
| 35 | APPENDIX C: Data Processing Methodology and Quality Control |
| 37 | C.1 Summary of Data Processing C.1.1 ArcGIS Data Processing Procedure Summary |
| 38 | C.1.2 Amazon Web Services Data Processing Procedure Summary |
| 39 | C.1.3 Data Processing Conclusions |
| 41 | C.1.4 Data Quality Control C.2 In-Depth ArcGIS Data Processing C.2.1 Preprocessing the CoreLogic Data C.2.2 Level 1 Filter: Empty Parcels |
| 42 | C.2.3 Level 2 Filter: Parcels Not Built from 2000 to 2018 C.2.4 Level 3 Filter: Merge Stacked Parcels C.2.5 Level 4 Filter: Square Footage Less than 500 Square Feet C.2.6 Level 5 Filter: Merge Large Buildings |
| 43 | C.2.7 Level 6 Filter: Parcels to Buildings C.2.8 Level 7 Filter: Counties with Less than 10 Buildings C.2.9 Final Data Calculations |
| 44 | C.3 ArcGIS Quality Control |
| 46 | C.4 In-depth Amazon Web Services Data Processing C.4.1 Block 1: Building Stock Methodology |
| 48 | C.4.2 Block 2: Data Augmentation |
| 49 | C.4.3 Block 3: Python Script Processing |
| 59 | C.5 Amazon Web Services Data Quality Control C.6 ArcGIS to Amazon Web Services Data Comparison |
| 61 | APPENDIX D: Flood Hazard Methodology Details |
| 63 | D.1 Supplemental Information for Flood Code Adoption D.1.1 NFIP and I-Codes |
| 64 | D.1.1.1 Use of IRC with Freeboard Adoption Assumptions |
| 65 | D.1.1.2 Freeboard Flood Requirements in the IBC |
| 68 | D.1.1.3 Freeboard Flood Requirements for Manufactured Housing |
| 69 | D.1.2 State-Level Data |
| 70 | D.1.3 Community Rating System Data D.1.3.1 Overview of CRS Data Analysis Assigning Freeboard Levels |
| 71 | CRS Data Analysis Process |
| 72 | Freeboard Assignments by Year |
| 73 | CRS Freeboard Data Summary D.1.3.2 Detailed CRS Analysis Procedures |
| 74 | Methodology to Populate Missing or “0” Year Assessed Values |
| 78 | Development of Freeboard Matrix |
| 80 | Final Detailed CRS Freeboard Data Summary |
| 85 | D.1.4 Local Freeboard Data Sources D.1.5 Final Study Freeboard Database |
| 91 | D.2 Supplemental Information for Flood Hazard Data D.2.1 Flood Profile Modeling: Development of PELV Curve Data |
| 95 | D.2.2 Flood Profile Modeling: Final PELV Curve Data used for Study |
| 98 | D.3 Supplemental Information for Flood Modeling Methodology |
| 99 | D.3.1 Supplemental Information for Flood Modeling Methodology D.3.1.1 Supplemental Flood Data |
| 100 | D.3.1.2 Number of Stories D.3.1.3 Foundation Type D.3.2 Supplemental Information for Flood Depth-Damage Functions |
| 101 | D.3.2.1 Residential DDF Development |
| 103 | Initial Development of One-Story Single-Family Coastal DDFs |
| 106 | Initial Development of Two-Story Single-Family Coastal DDFs |
| 108 | Comparison of One- and Two-Story DDFs for Houses on Piles |
| 109 | Development of Additional DDFs |
| 110 | Closed Foundations High Wave and Moderate Wave Conditions |
| 114 | Basement Foundations Subject to Flooding |
| 120 | D.3.2.2 Non-Residential DDF Development D.3.2.3 Contents DDF Development |
| 121 | D.4 Data Quality |
| 125 | APPENDIX E: Wind Hazard Methodology Details |
| 127 | E.1 Supplemental Information for Wind Code History E.1.1 Hurricane Wind Hazard Study Area States with No Significant Wind Design Amendments to Model Codes |
| 128 | E.1.2 Connecticut E.1.3 Delaware E.1.4 Hawaii E.1.5 Louisiana |
| 129 | E.1.6 Mississippi E.1.7 North Carolina E.1.8 Rhode Island E.1.9 BCEGS States |
| 130 | E.2 Supplemental Information for Hurricane Wind Modeling Methodology |
| 134 | E.2.1 Building Code History Model |
| 135 | E.2.1.1 Wind-Borne Debris Region/Shutters E.2.1.2 Roof-to-Wall Connection |
| 136 | E.2.1.3 Roof Deck Attachment |
| 137 | E.2.1.4 Full Load Path for Wood Construction |
| 138 | E.2.1.5 Window Design Pressures |
| 139 | E.2.2 Hazus Loss Modification Functions |
| 140 | E.2.2.1 Ring-Shank Nails |
| 143 | E.2.2.2 Full Load Path |
| 146 | E.2.2.3 Window Design Pressures |
| 151 | APPENDIX F: Seismic Hazard Methodology Details |
| 153 | F.1 Supplemental Code Adoption History F.1.1 Identification of the Pre-IBC Code |
| 154 | F.1.2 Code History in California F.1.3 Code History in Oregon F.1.4 Code History in Washington F.1.5 Code History in Utah |
| 155 | F.1.6 Code History in Alaska |
| 156 | F.1.7 Code History in Hawaii F.2 Supplemental Seismic Hazard Data F.2.1 Probabilistic Ground Motion Data |
| 157 | F.2.2 Soils Data |
| 158 | F.2.3 UBC Seismic Zone Maps and Near-Fault Data |
| 162 | F.2.4 Analysis Prioritization |
| 164 | F.3 Supplemental Seismic Modeling Methodology F.3.1 Hazus Design Level Determination F.3.1.1 Development of Hazus Design Levels for Exceptionally High Hazard |
| 165 | F.3.1.2 Incorporation of Site Soils Data into Design Level |
| 166 | F.3.1.3 Hazus Design Level Assignments for Pre-IBC Commercial Construction |
| 167 | F.3.1.4 Hazus Design Level Assignments for Commercial Construction under the 1997 UBC |
| 169 | F.3.1.5 Hazus Design Level Assignments for Commercial Construction under the IBC |
| 172 | F.3.1.6 Hazus Design Level Assignments for Residential Construction under the 1994 UBC |
| 175 | F.3.1.7 Hazus Design Level Assignments for Residential Construction under the 1997 UBC |
| 176 | F.3.1.8 Hazus Design Level Assignments for Residential Construction for all Editions of the International Residential Code |
| 178 | F.3.2 Hazus Model Building Type Determination and Required Data F.3.2.1 Height Proxy Approach |
| 182 | F.3.2.2 Model Building Type |
| 188 | F.3.2.3 Custom Modeling of Post and Pier Houses in Hawaii |
| 189 | F.3.3 Limitations of the Seismic Methodology |
| 191 | F.4 Supplemental Information for California Demonstration Study Results F.4.1 Development of Final Analysis Datasets for California |
| 196 | F.4.2 California Average Annual Losses Avoided |
| 197 | F.4.2.1 Negative Losses Avoided |
| 200 | F.4.2.2 Losses by Analysis Priority F.4.2.3 Inclusion of all Buildings versus Only Those Producing Losses Avoided F.4.2.4 Losses by Occupancy Class |
| 201 | F.4.3 California Inventory and Business Interruption Losses by County and Occupancy |
| 206 | F.5 Data Development for the New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ) F.5.1 NMSZ States – County Analysis Prioritization |
| 208 | F.5.2 NMSZ States – NEHRP Soil F.5.3 NMSZ States – Code Adoption History |
| 211 | F.5.4 Extrapolation of the Current BCS Study Results for the Western States to the NMSZ States |
| 212 | F.5.4.1 BCS Results Used in the NMSZ Extrapolation |
| 213 | F.5.4.2 CoreLogic Data for the NMSZ States F.5.4.3 Limitations of the Current Extrapolation Approach |
| 216 | F.5.4.4 Results of the Extrapolation |
