Risk Identification using Hazus
City of Boston, Suffolk County, MA
Dave Shortman, GISP,
CFM
6/21/2016
Agenda






2
Objective
Project Location
Hazus Overview
Hazus Level 2 Risk Assessment
Comparison and Reporting of Results
Conclusions
Objective
3
Objective
 The main objective of the study was to determine the
potential economic loss associated with coastal flooding
 Also to compare results from Hazus 2.1 to 3.1
4
Project Location
5
Project Location - Suffolk County, MA
6
Hazus Overview
Hazus
 FEMA’s HAZards United States (HAZUS) tool is designed to
produce loss estimates for use by federal, state, regional and
local governments and private enterprises in planning for risk
mitigation, emergency preparedness, response and recovery
 HAZUS includes capabilities to analyze earthquakes, floods
and hurricane winds
 Hazus was recently updated with census 2010 data
Levels of Analysis
Link HAZUS with Hydraulic
Model
Percentage of Area
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
bu
Su
D
en
se
U
rb
an
rb
.
rb
.
bu
rb
.
bu
Su
ed
.
Su
ht
M
Lig
O
pe
n/C
oa
st
al
0%
Damage
Distribution of Terrain
45%
Level 3
Community-Specific Damage
Functions
Flood Depth
Level 2
Modify Building
Inventory
Number of Buildings by Specific Occupancy
120
Level 1
Building Count
100
80
60
40
20
0
RES1
RES2
Use Default Databases
Level 1
9
RES3
RES4
RES5
RES6
Aerial Photo
Flood Model Methodology
Estimate Losses
Determine Damage
Define and Overlay Inventory
Define Hazard: Flood Surface Land Surface
10
Level 1 Analysis – Floodplain Boundary
Level 1 Analysis – Buildings with Substantial
Damage
Level 1 Analysis – Total Losses
HAZUS Level 2 Risk Assessment
14
Boston Harbor HAZUS Study
 Level 2 analysis using historic flood hazard information and
census data – Effective Flooding (1990)
 Level 2 analysis using detailed engineering data along with
census data – Preliminary (2013) and Revised Preliminary
(2015, new effective)
 “Modified” Level 2
Defining the Hazards
 Topographic data from
FEMA’s Charles River HUC 8
LiDAR FY2010
 Flood surface generated from
 Effective Data (1990 FIS, study
performed in 1987)
 Preliminary Data (November
15, 2013)
 Revised Preliminary Data (July
9, 2015)
 Using CHAMP/WHAFIS results
along with updated elevation
data we developed depth
grids that are compatible
with the HAZUS model
 Census data from Hazus 2.1 &
3.1
Defining the Hazards
 Topographic data from FEMA’s
Charles River HUC 8 LiDAR
FY2010
 Flood surface generated from
 Effective Data (1990 FIS, study
performed in 1987)
 Preliminary Data (November 15,
2013)
 Revised Preliminary Data (July 9,
2015)
 Using CHAMP/WHAFIS results
along with updated elevation
data we developed depth grids
that are compatible with the
HAZUS model
 Census block data from Hazus
2.1 & 3.1
Waterfront Development Areas
South Boston Waterfront (Effective SFHA overlay)
Coastal Updates
Waterfront Development Areas
South Boston Waterfront (Preliminary SFHA overlay)
Coastal Updates
Waterfront Development Areas
East Boston Shorefront (Effective SFHA overlay)
Coastal Updates
Waterfront Development Areas
East Boston Shorefront (Preliminary SFHA overlay)
Coastal Updates
Defining the Hazards
MEDFORD
 Topographic data from FEMA’s
Charles River HUC 8 LiDAR
FY2010
 Flood surface generated from
REVERE
Mystic
R
iver
Charlestown
 Effective Data (1990 FIS, study
performed in 1987)
 Preliminary Data (November 15,
2013)
 Revised Preliminary Data (July 9,
2015)
 Using CHAMP/WHAFIS results
along with updated elevation
data we developed depth grids
that are compatible with the
HAZUS model
 Census block data from Hazus
2.1 & 3.1
Ch
els
CHELSEA
SOMERVILLE
ea
Riv
e
r
EVERETT
East
Boston
WINTHROP
North
End
CAMBRIDGE
West
End
Beacon
Hill
ha
nn
el
er
Downtown
Boston
Harbor
Fo
rt P
oin
tC
Riv
rles
Cha
Leather
District
Back
Bay
Bay
Village
Chinatown
South Boston
Waterfront
Fenway
South
End
BOSTON
South Boston
Legend
N
whdepth2015
Town Boundary
Value
Neighborhoods
High : 45.4059
Low : -24.3278
0
0.5
1
2
Miles
Boston Harbor Hazus
Woods Hole Group
Residential Total Loss
Defining the Hazards
 Topographic data from
FEMA’s Charles River HUC 8
LiDAR FY2010
 Flood surface generated from
 Effective Data (1990 FIS, study
performed in 1987)
 Preliminary Data (November
15, 2013)
 Revised Preliminary Data (July
9, 2015)
 Using CHAMP/WHAFIS results
along with updated elevation
data we developed depth
grids that are compatible
with the HAZUS model
 Census block data from
Hazus 2.1 & 3.1
Dasymetric Data
Hazus 2.1
24
Hazus 3.1
Results
25
Total Losses – Effective
Hazus 2.1
Hazus 3.1
MEDFORD
REVERE
Mystic
R
Ch
els
CHELSEA
SOMERVILLE
ea
Riv
er
EVERETT
iver
Charlestown
East
Boston
WINTHROP
North
End
CAMBRIDGE
West
End
Beacon
Hill
ha
nn
el
er
Downtown
Boston
Harbor
Fo
rt P
oin
tC
Riv
rles
Cha
Back
Bay
Leather
District
Bay
Village
Chinatown
South Boston
Waterfront
Fenway
South
End
BOSTON
South Boston
Legend
TotalLoss
0
Town Boundary
Neighborhoods
1 - 1000
1001 - 2000
2001 - 3000
N
3001 - 4000
4001 - 5000
5001 - 8000
8001 - 10000
10001 - 17500
0
0.5
1
2
Miles
Boston Harbor Hazus
Effective
Total Loss
Total Losses – Revised Preliminary
Hazus 2.1
Hazus 3.1
MEDFORD
REVERE
Mystic
R
Ch
els
CHELSEA
SOMERVILLE
ea
Riv
er
EVERETT
iver
Charlestown
East
Boston
WINTHROP
North
End
CAMBRIDGE
West
End
Beacon
Hill
ha
nn
el
er
Downtown
Boston
Harbor
Fo
rt P
oin
tC
Riv
rles
Cha
Back
Bay
Leather
District
Bay
Village
Chinatown
South Boston
Waterfront
Fenway
South
End
BOSTON
South Boston
Legend
TotalLoss
0
Town Boundary
Neighborhoods
1 - 1000
1001 - 2000
2001 - 3000
N
3001 - 4000
4001 - 5000
5001 - 8000
8001 - 10000
Over 10000
0
0.5
1
2
Miles
Boston Harbor Hazus
Revised Preliminary
Total Loss
Summary
 Hazus 2.1 Results:
 Overall Exposure: $32,381.1M
 Damages:
 Effective Total:
 Building Loss:
 Contents Loss:
 Other Loss*:
$305M
$141.5M
$158.5M
$50.1M
 Revised Preliminary Total:
$973.2M
 Building Loss:
 Contents Loss:
 Other Loss*:

$345.7M
$592.7M
$34.8M
*Other Loss Includes Inventory, Relocation, Income, Rental Income, and
Wage Losses
 Hazus 3.1 Results
 Overall Exposure: $94,466.4M*
 Damages:
 Effective Total:
 Building Loss:
 Contents Loss:
 Other Loss*:
$268.8M
$119.9M
$145.0M
$3.9M
 Revised Preliminary Total:
$1,274.6M
 Building Loss: $434.1M
 Content Loss: $800.9M
 Other Loss: $39.7M
Structure Density – Boston North
Structures Added to Preliminary SFHA
Coastal Updates
Population Density – Boston North
Population Density for Structures
Within the Preliminary SFHA
Coastal Updates
Structure Density
Population Density for Structures
Within the Preliminary SFHA
Changes Since Last FIRM
Community
Boston
Boston
Boston
Chelsea
Chelsea
Chelsea
Revere
Revere
Revere
Winthrop
Winthrop
Winthrop
Suffolk County
Suffolk County
Suffolk County
Change
CHHA
SFHA
NonSFHA
CHHA
SFHA
NonSFHA
CHHA
SFHA
NonSFHA
CHHA
SFHA
NonSFHA
CHHA
SFHA
NonSFHA
Area
Area
Increase Decrease Area Net
Area mi2 mi2
mi2
mi2
5.3
2.0
0.0
2.0
12.3
2.8
0.2
2.6
2.0
1.4
0.0
1.4
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
1.2
0.7
0.0
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.0
0.1
3.4
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.9
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
2.7
0.0
4.4
18.6
4.1
0.2
3.9
2.4
1.6
0.1
0.8
Change Definitions
CHHA – coastal high hazard area (Velocity zone increase/decrease
SFHA – special flood hazard area increase/decrease (Zone A, AE, AO,
AH)
NonSFHA – 0.2% Annual Chance Flood increase/decrease
Comparison to HAZUS-MH Values in Draft
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
 Analysis done by Metropolitan Area Planning Commission
 Earthquake Damages
 5.0 magnitude with an epicenter in downtown Boston - $3,450.0M
 6.0 magnitude with an epicenter on Cape Ann - $431.7M
 6.5 magnitude with an epicenter in central New Hampshire - $457.1M
 Wind Damages
 1938 Hurricane - $372.2M
 Hurricane Carol (1954) - $819.6M
 Hurricane Irene (2011) - $8.6M
 Riverine and Stream Flooding (100 year event)





Charles River Watershed - $16.6M
Mother Brook Watershed - $105.6M
Muddy River Watershed - $81.1M
Mystic River Watershed - $9.0M
Combined - $212.3M
Conclusions
 Updated SFHA and topographic data provide more accurate
results
 Hazus 3.1 gives an up to date assessment of exposure and
damages
 Boston coastal housing and commercial stock has gained significant
value since 2000 census
 Coastal development has increased
 Barring a major event the growth in Boston will continue
 Hazus with 2020 census?
 Flood Risk Assesment Database cannot handle these values (Long
data type ~ 2.1 billion)
Questions?