{"id":369517,"date":"2024-10-20T02:15:16","date_gmt":"2024-10-20T02:15:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/uncategorized\/fema-buildingcodessave-2020\/"},"modified":"2024-10-26T03:51:36","modified_gmt":"2024-10-26T03:51:36","slug":"fema-buildingcodessave-2020","status":"publish","type":"product","link":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/publishers\/fema\/fema-buildingcodessave-2020\/","title":{"rendered":"FEMA BuildingCodesSave 2020"},"content":{"rendered":"
None<\/p>\n
PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4<\/td>\n | Executive Summary <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
11<\/td>\n | Table of Contents <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
17<\/td>\n | Acronyms and Abbreviations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
19<\/td>\n | Glossary <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
26<\/td>\n | 1 Introduction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
27<\/td>\n | 1.1 Goals of the Building Code Saves Study <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
28<\/td>\n | 1.2 Background on International Codes <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
29<\/td>\n | 1.2.1 Code Development Process 1.2.2 Code Adoption <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
30<\/td>\n | 1.2.3 History <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
31<\/td>\n | 1.2.4 Cost Impact of Building Codes <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
32<\/td>\n | 1.3 Summary of Phases 1, 2, and 3 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
33<\/td>\n | 1.3.1 Phase 1: Pilot Study 1.3.2 Phase 2: FEMA Region IV Demonstration Study 1.3.3 Phase 3: Development of National Methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
34<\/td>\n | 1.4 Organization of the Report <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
35<\/td>\n | 2 Overview of the National Methodology 2.1 Applied National Methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
39<\/td>\n | 2.2 Why Hazus? 2.3 Hazard Design Level Events <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
40<\/td>\n | 2.4 Simulations for Building Code Provisions 2.4.1 Hazus Runs or Simulations for Pre-I-Code Provisions 2.4.2 Hazus Runs or Simulations with I-Code or Similar Provisions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
41<\/td>\n | 2.4.3 One-Year Code Adoption Lag 2.5 Losses Avoided Computations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
42<\/td>\n | 3 Data Collection and Filtering <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
43<\/td>\n | 3.1 Building Code Adoption Data 3.1.1 State-Level Code Adoption <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
44<\/td>\n | 3.1.2 Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
46<\/td>\n | 3.2 Parcel-Level Assessor Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
47<\/td>\n | 3.2.1 Acquisition, Filtering, and Formatting of CoreLogic Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
51<\/td>\n | 3.2.2 Other Parcel Data Sources <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
52<\/td>\n | 3.2.3 Hazus Replacement Cost Model <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
53<\/td>\n | 3.3 Data Quality <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
56<\/td>\n | 3.3.1 Accuracy and Gaps 3.3.1.1 CoreLogic Data 3.3.1.2 Building Code Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
57<\/td>\n | 3.3.1.3 Additional Sources of Information 3.3.1.4 Gap Filling <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
59<\/td>\n | 3.3.2 Data Processing and Quality Control <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
62<\/td>\n | 4 Flood Hazard Analysis <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
63<\/td>\n | 4.1 Flood Code Adoption 4.1.1 Selection of Freeboard as Primary Modeling Practice <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
65<\/td>\n | 4.1.2 Sources of Freeboard Adoption Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
68<\/td>\n | 4.2 Flood Hazard Data 4.2.1 Flood Hazard Mapping <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
69<\/td>\n | 4.2.2 Flood Profile Modeling <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
73<\/td>\n | 4.3 Flood Modeling Methodology 4.3.1 Flood Depth Damage Functions 4.3.1.1 Summary of DDFs <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
77<\/td>\n | 4.3.2 Modeling Procedure <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
78<\/td>\n | 4.4 Flood Modeling Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
79<\/td>\n | 4.4.1 County-Level Results: California and Florida Annual Losses Avoided 4.4.1.1 Floodplain Analysis and Freeboard Adoption 4.4.1.2 Loss Avoidance Values <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
85<\/td>\n | 4.4.2 National Annual Losses Avoided 4.4.2.1 Floodplain Analysis and Freeboard Adoption <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
88<\/td>\n | 4.4.2.2 Loss Avoidance Values <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
93<\/td>\n | 5 Hurricane Wind Hazard Analysis <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
94<\/td>\n | 5.1 Wind Code Adoption <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
95<\/td>\n | 5.1.1 Overview of Wind Code Adoption in the Hurricane Wind Hazard Study Area <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
98<\/td>\n | 5.1.2 Wind Codes and Standards by Year of Construction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
102<\/td>\n | 5.2 Wind Hazard Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
106<\/td>\n | 5.3 Wind Modeling Methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
110<\/td>\n | 5.4 Hurricane Wind Modeling Results 5.4.1 Florida Average Annual Losses Avoided 5.4.1.1 Post-2000 Florida Building Replacement Value <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
112<\/td>\n | 5.4.1.2 Florida Losses Avoided <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
117<\/td>\n | 5.4.2 National Average Annual Losses Avoided <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
126<\/td>\n | 5.4.3 Savings Based on Year of Construction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
128<\/td>\n | 6 Seismic Hazard Analysis <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
131<\/td>\n | 6.1 Seismic Code Adoption 6.1.1 Identification of the Pre-IBC Code 6.1.2 History of Code Requirements for One- and Two-Family Dwellings <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
132<\/td>\n | 6.1.3 Code Histories by State <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
136<\/td>\n | 6.2 Seismic Modeling Methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
137<\/td>\n | 6.2.1 Development of Final Analysis Datasets <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
139<\/td>\n | 6.2.1.1 Advanced Engineering Building Module Inputs Based on Occupancy, Structure Type, and Design Level <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
140<\/td>\n | 6.2.2 Hazus Earthquake AAL and Customization of the Hazus AEBM Code <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
141<\/td>\n | 6.3 Seismic Modeling Results 6.3.1 Average Annual Losses and Losses Avoided <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
144<\/td>\n | 6.3.2 Normalized Loss Ratios <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
145<\/td>\n | 6.3.3 Negative Losses Avoided <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
147<\/td>\n | 6.3.4 Losses by Occupancy <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
150<\/td>\n | 7 Findings <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
151<\/td>\n | 7.1 Comparison of Results by Hazard 7.1.1 Tabular Comparisons <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
155<\/td>\n | 7.1.2 Mapped Comparisons <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
160<\/td>\n | 7.2 Comparison of Results by Demographics 7.2.1 Hazard Level and Growth Rate <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
163<\/td>\n | 7.2.2 Residential Opportunity 7.2.3 Income-Driven Opportunities <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
166<\/td>\n | 7.3 Future AALA Estimates \u2013 Extrapolating Results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
167<\/td>\n | 7.3.1 I-Code AALA Growth in the Future <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
168<\/td>\n | 7.3.2 I-Code AALA Extrapolation to the Whole Built Environment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
170<\/td>\n | 8 Advancing Community Benefits 8.1 Economic Considerations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
171<\/td>\n | 8.1.1 Community Benefits Evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
173<\/td>\n | 8.1.2 Rapid Recovery 8.2 Outreach and Effective Communication <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
174<\/td>\n | 8.3 Portfolio of Supported Elements and Programs <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
176<\/td>\n | 9 Conclusions and Actions for Resilience 9.1 Conclusions of National Building Code Saves Study <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
177<\/td>\n | 9.2 Next Steps: Actions for Resilience 9.2.1 Residential Resilience <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
178<\/td>\n | 9.2.2 Community Strengthening: The Final Case for Code Benefits <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
179<\/td>\n | 10 References <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
187<\/td>\n | 11 Acknowledgements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Building Codes Save: A Nationwide Study<\/b><\/p>\n |