CURRENT & CURRENT & FUTURE VULNERABILITY OF FUTURE - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
current current future vulnerability of future
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

CURRENT & CURRENT & FUTURE VULNERABILITY OF FUTURE - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

May 08, 2023 143 likes •644 views

CURRENT & CURRENT & FUTURE VULNERABILITY OF FUTURE VULNERABILITY OF SARASO SARASOTA COUNTY COUNTY, FL, T , FL, TO HURRIC HURRICANE ST NE STORM ORM SUR SURGE & E & SEA LEVEL RISE SEA LEVEL RISE Dr. Tim Frazier, Penn

slide-1
SLIDE 1

CURRENT & CURRENT & FUTURE VULNERABILITY OF FUTURE VULNERABILITY OF SARASO SARASOTA COUNTY COUNTY, FL, T , FL, TO HURRIC HURRICANE ST NE STORM ORM SUR SURGE & E & SEA LEVEL RISE SEA LEVEL RISE

  • Dr. Tim Frazier, Penn State University –The University of Idaho
  • Dr. Brent Yarnal, Penn State University
  • Dr. Nathan Wood, U.S. Geological Survey
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Introduction

Goal

Develop a comprehensive vulnerability assessment framework that integrates geospatial analysis and stakeholder input to facilitate enhanced community resilience through planning.

– Vulnerability assessment including SLR – Decision-support methodology incorporating scientific understanding with value-based human dynamics – Inject SLR scenarios into long-range planning activities

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Prior Research

SLOSH Model = Sea, Lake, Overland Surges from Hurricanes Model

Wu et al. (2002) Kleinosky et al. (2007) Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Prior Research

Wood, Church, Frazier, & Yarnal (2007) Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Study Area

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Category 1 SLOSH

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Category 1 with 30 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Category 1 with 60 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Category 1 with 90 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Category 1 with 120 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Category 2 with SLOSH

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Category 2 with 30 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Category 2 with 60 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Category 2 with 90 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Category 2 with 120 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Category 3 with SLOSH

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Category 3 with 30 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Category 3 with 60 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Category 3 with 90 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Category 3 with 120 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Category 4-5 SLOSH

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Category 4-5 with 30 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Category 4-5 with 60 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Category 4-5 with 90 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Category 4-5 with 120 cm Sea Level Rise

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-26
SLIDE 26

All Categories with SLR

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-27
SLIDE 27

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent of Total Population in Surge Zone ‐ Category 1

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-28
SLIDE 28

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Total Population in Surge Zone ‐ Category 2

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-29
SLIDE 29

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Total Population in Surge Zone ‐ Category 3

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-30
SLIDE 30

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Total Population in Surge Zone ‐ Category 4/5

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-31
SLIDE 31

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Population Over 65 in Surge Zone‐ Category 3

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-32
SLIDE 32

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Female Head of Households in Surge Zone‐ Category 3

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-33
SLIDE 33

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Tax Parcels in Surge Zone ‐ Category 1

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-34
SLIDE 34

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Tax Parcels in Surge Zone ‐ Category 2

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-35
SLIDE 35

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Tax Parcels in Surge Zone ‐ Category 3

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-36
SLIDE 36

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Bee Ridge Desoto Lakes Englewood Fruitville Gulf Gate Estates Kensington Park Lake Sarasota Laurel Longboat Key Nokomis North Port North Sarasota Osprey Plantation Ridge Wood Heights Sarasota Sarasota Springs Siesta Key South Gate Ridge South Sarasota South Venice Southgate The Meadows Vamo Venice Venice Gardens Warm Mineral Springs Unincorporated Sarasota County

Percent Tax Parcels in Surge Zone ‐ Category 4/5

SLOSH Plus 30 Plus 60 Plus 90 Plus 120

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Sarasota County, Florida: Land Use 2050

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Focus Groups

  • 33 Participants
  • Divided into subgroups

– Business – Environmental – Planners – Facilities & infrastructure – Government officials

  • Presentation of research
  • Assign task

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-39
SLIDE 39

SLOSH Output: All Categories

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Category 3 With 30, 60, 90, 120, cm of SLR

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Results: Overall

  • Location of

development

  • Location urban

service boundary

  • Infrastructure inside

hazard zones

  • Cost of shifting

development

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Results: Business

  • ID beach specific

businesses

  • Rebuilding with

FEMA restrictions

  • Moving critical &

essential facilities

  • Imposing mitigation

restrictions

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Results: Environmental

  • Mitigate SLR impacts
  • n environmental

areas

  • Transfer development

rights

  • Develop land swaps
  • Replenish wetlands

for surge mitigation

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Results: Planners

  • Increase density
  • utside hazards zones
  • Incentives to steer

development

  • Strategies to retreat

from coast

  • Limited by economic

realities

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Results: Facilities & Infrastructure

  • Mitigate now

– Move dated infrastructure – Ensure functional flexibility – Revise existing plan

  • Plan better for

future

– Cautiously place infrastructure in hazard zones – Evacuation

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Results: Government Officials

  • Evaluate placement
  • f urban service

boundary

  • Mitigation need vs.

cost of moving (facilities & infrastructure)

  • Locate high density

residential outside hazard zones

  • Transportation add

more N to S

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Conclusions

  • Development constricted to

hazards zones

  • Specific adjustments

– Relax urban service boundary – Steer development out of hazards zones – Relocate/replace infrastructure – Explore evacuation alternatives

Urban growth boundaries in coastal communities could contribute to hurricane hazards exposure

Introduction Phase 1 Results Phase 2 Results Conclusions

slide-48
SLIDE 48