Sea Level Rise Projection Needs Capacities and Alternative Approaches

Transcription

1 Sea Level Rise Projection Needs Capacities and Alternative Approaches William Butler, Robert Deyle, Cassidy Mutnansky, and Lindsay Stevens Florida Planning and Development Lab Department of Urban and Regional Planning The Florida State University September 2013

2

3 Sea Level Rise Projection Needs Capacities and Alternative Approaches A Policy Briefing for the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Final Draft September 1, 2013 Prepared by Florida Planning and Development Lab Department of Urban and Regional Planning The Florida State University William Butler, Robert Deyle, Cassidy Mutnansky, and Lindsay Stevens This report was funded in part, through an agreement with the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Coastal Management Program by a grant provided by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award #NA11NOS The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, NOAA or any of their subagencies.

4

5 Table of Contents Introduction...1 Section 1: Decision Making Contexts and Needs of State, Regional and Local Government Users Introduction Decision Contexts Local Community Decision Contexts Regional Agency Decision Contexts State Agency Decision Contexts Political Context Local Political Context Regional Political Context State Political Context Uses of Sea Level Rise Information Needs and Capacities Regional Government Organizations and Collaborations Water Management Districts Regional Planning Councils Metropolitan Planning Organizations Southeast Florida Regional Partnership Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact State Agencies Department of Transportation Department of Environmental Protection Division of Emergency Management Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Department of Economic Opportunity Department of Health Summary/Synthesis References Cited i

6 Section 2: Institutional Options for Meeting Sea Level Rise Adaptive Planning Information and Resource Needs in Florida Introduction Technical Capabilities Needed to Develop SLR Scenario Products Existing Institutional Capacities to Develop Disseminate and Maintain These Products Regional Government Organizations and Collaborations Water Management Districts Regional Planning Councils Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact Southeast Florida Regional Partnership State Agencies Department of Transportation Department of Environmental Protection Division of Emergency Management Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Federal Agencies Federal Emergency Management Agency U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Estuarine Research Reserves U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Non-Governmental Organizations Climate Central [Surging Seas] New England Environmental Finance Center [COAST] The Nature Conservancy The Natural Capital Project [InVEST] Warren Pinnacle Consulting [SLAMM] ii

7 2.4 Summary/Synthesis Visualization Tools Impact Layers Storm Surge/Special Flood Hazard Area GIS Shapefiles of Sea Level Rise Scenarios Sea Level Rise Scenario Development Technical Assistance Sea Level Rise Projections LiDAR Data and/or DEMs Vulnerability Assessment Tools Vulnerability Assessment Technical Assistance Role of Partnerships and Collaboration References Cited Section 3: Pros and Cons of Using Consistent Sea Level Rise Projections in Florida Introduction Pros and Cons of Statewide Consistency Geographic Scale and Spatial Resolution and Accuracy Pros and Cons of Consistent Scale Resolution and Accuracy Tide Gauge Station Pros and Cons of Consistent Tide Station Reference Tidal Datum Pros and Cons of Consistent Tidal Datum Projection Method The State of the Science of Sea Level Rise Prediction Alternative Sea Level Projection Methods National Research Council Analysis of Engineering Implications of SLR (1987) USEPA Probability of Sea Level Rise (1995) IPCC Assessment Reports (2001 and 2007) Semi-Empirical Projections (2007; 2009) SLAMM: Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (2010). 87 iii

8 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sea Level Change Considerations for Civil Works (2011) NOAA Guidance for the National Climate Assessment (2012) NRC Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington (2012) The Tradeoffs Among Alternative Projection Methods The Pros and Cons of Consistent Sea Level Rise Projection Methods Projection Estimate Pros and Cons of Consistent Sea Level Rise Projection Estimates Time Horizon Plan Time Horizon Contexts for Sea Level Rise Projections Defining Optimal Sea Level Rise Projection Time Horizons Predictability Time to Implement Length of Impact Pros and Cons of Consistent Time Horizons Florida State of Practice Projection Method Projection Estimate and Time Horizon Summary/Synthesis References Cited Section 4: Summary and Recommendations Introduction Decision Context and Needs of Users Institutional Capacity of Providers Sea Level Rise Projection Approaches and the Question of Consistency Recommendations iv

9 Appendix 1: Methods of Data Collection A1-1 Organizations Sampled A1-2 Focus Groups A1-3 Telephone Interviews Appendix 2: Sea Level Rise Adaptation Planning Analytic Tools and Resources A2-1 Climate Central Surging Seas A2-2 COAST Damage Assessment Tool A2-3 Coastal Resilience Network Flood Scenario Decision Support Tools A2-4 FDOT/GeoPlan Sea Level Scenario Sketch Planning Tool A2-5 InVEST Coastal Vulnerability Model A2-6 NOAA Coastal Services Center A2-6.1 Coastal Inundation Mapping Resources A2-6.2 Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer A2-6.3 Sea Level Rise Tool for Sandy Recovery A2-7 SLAMM: Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model A2-8 USACE Sea Level Change Calculator A2-9 References Cited v

10 vi

11 Introduction The Florida Planning and Development Lab at Florida State University has prepared this report for the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity s Community Resiliency Initiative to offer guidance on assessing alternative approaches for developing consistent projections of future sea level rise scenarios for adaptation planning in the State of Florida. We set the context for this inquiry in Section 1 by providing a snapshot of the current status of sea level rise adaptation planning in Florida. We provide an overview of the decision making contexts and political contexts within which such planning is taking place. We also describe the different uses to which sea level rise projection information is being put and summarize the range of needs and capacities among different public sector organizations in the state. We close with brief descriptions of the sea level rise adaptation planning initiatives under way by various regional and state agencies. Section 2 offers an overview of the institutional capacities needed to meet the data and technical assistance requirements of organizations in the State engaged in sea level rise adaptation planning. We profile regional and state agencies, federal agencies, and non-governmental organizations. We also briefly describe available institutional capacities for providing specific sea level rise projection data and tools. Appendix 2 supplements this section with more detailed information about specific sea level rise projection and vulnerability assessment tools. Section 3 examines the pros and cons of attempting to follow a consistent approach to developing sea level rise projections in the state. We examine six dimensions of sea level rise projections: (1) geographic scale and spatial resolution and accuracy, (2) tide gauge station, (3) tidal datum, (4) projection method, (5) projection estimate, and (6) time horizon. We begin by summarizing the general pros and cons of promoting consistency among the various local, regional, and state actors engaged in sea level rise adaptation. We then examine each of the projection dimensions in turn and assess how those pros and cons apply to them. We also provide a snapshot of the state of practice in the state with a focus on three dimensions: projection method, projection estimate, and time horizon. In Section 4 we offer a final summary and recommendations. Appendix 1 provides information on the research methods we employed to develop the contextual information in Sections 1 through 3. 1

12 2

13 Section 1: Decision Making Contexts and Needs of State, Regional and Local Government Users 1.1 Introduction While neither the state nor federal governments currently mandate that local, regional, or state agencies incorporate sea level rise into planning efforts, many local governments and regional and state agencies in Florida are considering doing so and some have already begun to develop vulnerability assessments and adaptation strategies and policies. In this section we provide an overview of the decision making and political contexts within which such planning is taking place as well as a synthesis of the different uses to which sea level rise projection information is being put and a summary of the range of needs and capacities among different public sector organizations in the state. We also provide brief descriptions of the sea level rise adaptation planning initiatives under way by various regional and state agencies. For the purposes of this project, the Florida Planning and Development Lab (FPDL) research team conducted focus groups and interviews with a sample of officials from municipalities, counties, regional planning agencies, water management districts, and state agencies throughout Florida. The focus groups and interviews covered a range of topics, and included questions about existing planning work incorporating sea level rise, data uses and needs, agency and staff capacity, as well as future planning work considering sea level rise. We examined the context within which agency planners are working and the political environment which impacts the ultimate focus of long range planning efforts. We also explored the needs and capabilities of the various local, regional, and state agencies to produce and utilize sea level rise data in their respective planning processes. A more detailed description of the focus group and interview process and content is included in Appendix 1 of this document. In addition to interviewing planning practitioners at various governmental levels, we consulted the broader academic, governmental, and professional literature to identify the range of needs, capacities, and alternatives for incorporating sea level rise into planning processes. 3

14 The input we obtained revealed a spectrum of agency technical capacities and data needs for performing sea level rise adaptation planning for three key areas of use: building awareness/educate, performing vulnerability assessments, and adaptation planning (see Figure 1-1). Many agencies are in the early stages of building awareness of sea level rise and are utilizing information and technology to help visualize the impacts of sea level rise on infrastructure, critical facilities, natural resources, and other assets. The visualization information and data are general in nature and provide a highlevel look, in the form of paper maps or online visualization tools, to illustrate the potential extent and impacts of sea level rise. Agencies in the intermediate stages of adaptation planning utilize GIS layers that depict sea level rise inundation, its effects on coastal flooding and storm surge boundaries, and associated impacts to assess the vulnerability of built and natural assets. Those agencies which have progressed furthest are beginning to move beyond the vulnerability assessment phase to conduct adaptation planning studies which include alternatives analysis utilizing modeling and various sea level rise scenarios. As shown in Figure 1-1, technology needs become more sophisticated as one progresses from visualization to vulnerability assessment and alternatives analysis. Figure 1-1. Adaptation planning uses of sea level rise information and associated technology needs. This section describes the decision making contexts within which local, regional, and state agencies in Florida are currently planning for sea level rise adaptation. These cover the spectrum of adaptation planning information uses across a variety of domains impacted by sea level rise. We then explore the political contexts within which these agencies are functioning and the needs for and uses of sea level rise data and information. We conclude by describing regional and state agencies current sea level rise adaptation planning efforts. 4

15 1.2 Decision Contexts The contexts within which government agencies in Florida make sea level rise adaptation planning decisions range from no official recognition of sea level rise to active concern about its effects and the various levels of effort depicted in Figure 1-1. Through our interviews, focus groups, and other modes of data collection, we determined that these decision making contexts at all levels of government can be fit into the following levels of engagement: What sea level rise? We don t talk about that around here. We have other things to worry about. Just tell us what we have to do. We re ready to roll but we could use some help. We re on it. We re here to help. Organizations at the lowest level of engagement ( What sea level rise? ) do not have the issue of sea level rise within their world views. In our sample of interviewed organizations, we did not encounter any agencies completely unaware of the issue. However, we recognize the possibility of an organization existing at this lowest level of engagement. The we don t talk about it around here level reflects political contexts that limit the perceived ability of local officials to discuss sea level rise. As discussed in Section 1.3, political constraints limiting the discussion of sea level rise and related issues within organizations can come from key leaders within an agency, as well as elected officials and their constituents. Those agencies at the intermediate level of engagement ( just tell us what to do and we re ready to roll, but need some help ) have some level of recognition and support for sea level rise adaptation planning measures within the agency and among its constituents, but are unsure where to start or need technical assistance. Many of these agencies that are just beginning sea level rise adaptation planning have low or intermediate levels of technical planning capacity and need technical assistance to develop and analyze the data and information necessary to assess sea level rise vulnerability and alternatives. Agencies in the we re on it level of engagement actively recognize sea level rise as an issue of concern and have the higher levels of technical planning capacity needed to conduct vulnerability assessments and adaptation alternatives 5

16 analyses. Those at the highest level of engagement, we re here to help, not only have the technical capacity to conduct sea level rise adaptation planning, they also have the resources and commitment to provide technical assistance to others. This spectrum of engagement reflects attributes of the organizations we examined. As we discuss further in the next section, the politics of sea level rise within the organization or among its constituents influences the extent to which agency staff undertake sea level rise planning initiatives. The perceived relevance of sea level rise to an agency s mission, including the vulnerability of its constituency to the effects of sea level rise, is also an important factor. Many agencies at the lower end of the engagement spectrum are functioning in a planning context where sea level rise is not presently recognized or discussed within the agency. In some cases, especially at the local level, planners are constrained by perceptions among elected officials that there is a lack of reliable scientific information to support the existence of sea level rise. Some of the agencies at the local, regional, and state levels indicated that while sea level rise is an acknowledged concern, other more immediate concerns take priority and stretch the agency s limited capacities and resources. For example, one local agency indicated that while sea level rise will certainly impact their coastal community, concern over ensuring the garbage is collected next week is a much higher priority given limited staff and financial resources. Other agencies acknowledged that sea level rise is a concern, but indicated that it would be preferable for a higher level entity (i.e. state or federal government) to clearly articulate what efforts are required to plan for sea level rise adaptation. This position may reflect the political environment and/or the sense of local priorities. This position may also reflect the capacity or resources available within the local agency to allocate towards adaptation planning. Many agencies indicated a strong desire to work on sea level rise adaptation planning, but noted that additional technical assistance will be needed to successfully undertake this venture. A few of the most sophisticated local, regional, and state agencies have already undertaken sea level rise adaptation planning efforts and indicated that they are either on it or are so advanced in their work that they are willing and able to serve as a resource to assist other organizations Local Community Decision Contexts A number of communities in Florida are in the early stages of addressing sea level rise and/or climate change adaptation in a variety of planning contexts, including long-range vision plans, comprehensive plans, local 6

17 mitigation strategies, post-disaster redevelopment plans, and long-range transportation plans. Several counties are collaborating with the Northeast Regional Council in developing a series of community resiliency sea level rise assessments focused on raising awareness and educating local government officials on the salience of the issue. St. Johns County is participating in the Northeast Regional Council initiative and conducting its own more detailed vulnerability assessment. Others, such as Hillsborough and Pinellas counties, are in the information gathering stage and are searching for reliable sources of information on sea level rise projections and impacts. Only a few local governments have addressed sea level rise in their comprehensive plans, so far. Sarasota County was the first community to do so. The City of Punta Gorda and Lee County have developed comprehensive plan adaptation policies based on vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning analyses prepared for them by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Levy County is working with the University of Florida Department of Urban and Regional Planning to develop adaptation strategies. Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Monroe counties collaborated with the South Florida Regional Planning Council and other organizations to form the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact. The compact developed regional sea level rise projections, a vulnerability assessment, and adaptation alternatives that are now being used by the counties and some municipalities to develop adaptation plans and policies. These three counties also joined Martin, St. Lucie, and Indian River counties, and a group of more than 150 public, private, and civic stakeholders from the seven-county region, to form the Southeast Florida Regional Partnership. The Partnership, in collaboration with the Treasure Coast and South Florida regional planning councils, is developing the Seven50 Southeast Florida Prosperity Plan which takes sea level rise into account. Nonetheless, several of the local communities we interviewed do not consider sea level rise when planning for their jurisdiction because of political constraints to acknowledging the occurrence of sea level rise or because of a focus on what are perceived to be more immediate planning concerns. Some local governments at this level of engagement, or with limited staff and/or technical capacity, would consider addressing sea level rise in their planning efforts if done so within a planning or management mandate from a higher level of government. Such guidance could be incorporated as a requirement in Chapter 163 of the Florida Statues governing local comprehensive plans, or federal requirements for continued community eligibility under the National Flood Insurance Program, or as a required element of local mitigation plans. 7

18 Broward County Sea Level Rise Adaptation Initiatives Many of the local governments with whom we spoke, who are at an intermediate level of engaging sea level rise and its impacts, have acknowledged the existence of sea level rise within the context of planning for coastal hazards or floodplain map updates. Generally, staff in these communities are in the early stages of gathering the best available information to incorporate in efforts to educate the community Broward County is one of the local governments in Florida leading the way in developing policies for adapting to the impacts of climate change, including sea level rise. The county is an active participant in two major regional initiatives that are addressing sea level rise impacts, the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact and the Southeast Florida Regional Partnership. The county has incorporated sea level rise as a hazard in its local mitigation strategy and added a map of Priority Planning Areas for Sea Level Rise and a Climate Change Element to its comprehensive plan. The Climate Change Element calls for numerous sea level rise adaptation initiatives: incorporating sea level rise effects in remapping coastal storm hazard zones, re-evaluating first floor elevation standards in flood hazard zones, and generate support for considering sea level rise as part of a standard planning initiative (such as updating flood hazard maps or coastal high hazard zone boundaries). Similar to the low-engagement jurisdictions that do not recognize or plan for sea level rise, the intermediateengagement jurisdictions generally prefer that sea level rise be incorporated into the mandates for existing planning processes. High-engagement local jurisdictions are currently involved in varying stages of actively considering the impact of sea level rise on their communities. These communities recognize sea level rise as a factor to plan for, and are either working with an external entity to complete vulnerability assessments, or have developed inhouse expertise and are moving forward with adaptation planning. While some communities have already incorporated sea level rise into their comprehensive plans, most communities are earlier in the process of considering whether to plan for a change in circumstances due to sea identifying public investments and infrastructure at risk from sea level rise, developing new 100-year storm water elevation projections, addressing sea level rise in the planning, siting, design, and replacement of public infrastructure, evaluating the effects of sea level rise, including saltwater intrusion, on water supply, wastewater, and storm water management facilities, and on coastal ecosystems, developing policies and model codes for encouraging postdisaster redevelopment in areas less vulnerable to sea level rise inundation and storm surge flooding continuing to improve its analysis and mapping capabilities for identifying areas vulnerable to sea level rise. 8

19 level rise into coastal flood hazard or mitigation plans. Many of these highengagement communities are actively working to incorporate sea level rise data into their local mitigation strategies and/or post-disaster redevelopment plans. Similar to the low- and medium-engagement jurisdictions, the highengagement communities indicated that sea level rise is easiest to incorporate into existing coastal flooding and hazards work being conducted by their respective local agencies Regional Agency Decision Contexts The decision making contexts of regional agencies are as diverse as those at the local level. Many of the regional planning councils (RPCs) recognize sea level rise as an issue that should be addressed in local comprehensive and long-range planning. However, RPCs have no authority to mandate that local government agencies consider sea level rise in planning efforts. Those RPCs in regions with strong local interest in sea level rise adaptation planning, such as the Treasure Coast, Southwest Florida, and South Florida RPCs, are actively collaborating with other regional entities as well as local, state, and federal partners, to develop long-range sea level rise vulnerability assessments and adaptation policies and strategies. Water management districts also vary significantly in the degree of sea level rise adaptation planning. Most of the districts we contacted recognize sea level rise as a concern, but there is not a unified approach on how to incorporate sea level rise into the various dimensions of their missions. Some districts are not engaged in any assessment of sea level rise vulnerability or otherwise working to address sea level rise in long-range water supply planning. Others, such as the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), are actively partnering with local, regional, state, and federal agencies to perform vulnerability assessments and develop sea level rise adaptation plans State Agency Decision Contexts State agency planners also operate within a wide variety of decision contexts. Some state agencies recognize sea level rise as a factor to incorporate into long-range plans, such as the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which is collaborating with the State Department of Economic Opportunity to incorporate climate change in the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the Department of Health, which is addressing sea level rise as part of its Building Resilience Against Climate Effects (BRACE) initiative. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is actively engaged in assessing the vulnerability of state species of concern to the effects of sea level rise and in developing adaptation strategies. Other state 9

20 agencies are not formally addressing sea level rise. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), for example, has no official position on sea level rise. However, FDEP is collaborating with both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on projects that are taking the effects of sea level rise into account. FDEP also is beginning to respond to requests from several water management districts, including the South Florida Water Management District and the South Florida Water Management District, for assistance in addressing sea level rise in long-range water supply planning. In summary, agencies at all levels local, regional, and state are approaching sea level rise across a wide range of decision contexts that span the engagement spectrum. Some are not formally acknowledging sea level rise as a factor to consider when developing plans. Others are just beginning to assess the implications of sea level rise and raise the awareness of their constituents. However, a significant number of government organizations in Florida are moving towards or actively integrating sea level rise into vulnerability assessments and adaptation plans. 1.3 Political Context Most of the local, regional, and state agency staff with whom we consulted indicated that their political environments significantly influence the extent to which they consider sea level rise in planning efforts. Some agency staff are working in a supportive political environment where accelerated sea level rise is a topic of interest and concern to decision makers. Others told us that the political views of the elected officials and other constituents to whom they are accountable constrain their efforts. Agencies operating in a supportive political environment regarding sea level rise are mostly planning at the We re ready to roll but we could use some help level and above. Those agencies working with key decision makers who are resistant to bringing sea level rise analysis and discussions into public forums are at the lower end of the spectrum of engagement between what sea level rise? and we don t talk about that around here levels Local Political Context Some local and regional officials we contacted reported strong perceptions of uncertainty within their communities about the reality or extent of sea level rise. Some members of the public question the validity of the science of sea level rise, while others hold strong property rights perspectives and 10

21 question the potential impacts of adaptation policies on their personal property uses and values. Both local and regional planners noted that local elected officials often take cues from their constituents, and, as a result, integrating sea level rise into existing planning initiatives would be very difficult at this time unless mandated by a higher level of government. Planners concerned about sea level rise operating in these contexts must focus on educating and raising the awareness of those individuals and their constituencies. On the other hand, local governments and regional agencies located in larger metropolitan areas or otherwise participating in larger, regional climate change initiatives, such as the members of the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC), indicated that many of the elected officials in their communities are leading the call for incorporating sea level rise into community planning efforts. In these contexts, a substantial amount of time or effort educating elected officials or constituents about sea level rise is not necessary as much of this education has already occurred as part of the larger, regional efforts. However, intergovernmental coordination amongst these jurisdictions remains important as they move from educating to adaptation planning, alternatives analysis and project implementation. These agencies also noted increasing complexity in coordinating sea level rise efforts, since there are many emerging and different ways to obtain, model, and interpret sea level rise data. They also highlighted the complex political nature of collaborating with other local and regional bodies on sea level rise initiatives. We describe the major collaborative initiatives in Section 2. Many of the planners we consulted at all jurisdictional levels indicated a need to carefully select the terminology used, information presented, and information sources cited so as not to alienate elected officials and community members. Several reported that coastal flood hazard mitigation is the most readily accepted context within which to bring sea level rise into discussions with elected officials and the public. In some communities, planners working to educate elected officials and the public about sea level rise have focused on historic trends based on NOAA tide gauge station data and have not delved into the larger discussion about climate change or accelerating rates of sea level rise. Others have found their constituents are comfortable with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projections that account for climate change effects because they believe the agency is credible Regional Political Context Most regional planning councils (RPCs) work with and for the local governments in their regions. Most of their council members are local 11

22 elected and appointed officials, so their primary political cues originate from local communities. If an RPC is located in an area where a significant number of municipalities and counties are calling for vulnerability assessments and other planning studies to incorporate sea level rise the RPC will be more likely to be engaged and able to provide support in the form of data and staffing for sea level rise adaptation planning. On the other hand, if the local governments within the region do not recognize or are otherwise not concerned with sea level rise, the RPC is less likely to engage the issue. Six of the state s eleven RPCs are actively engaged in conducting sea level rise/climate change studies according to the Florida Regional Councils Association Annual Report (FRCA, 2013). Those six include the East Central, Northeast, South Florida, Southwest Florida, Tampa Bay, and Treasure Coast RPCs. Among the RPCs we consulted, a few noted that they were, at most, able to provide good information and gentle guidance on sea level rise issues to local governments in hopes that the local governments will become increasingly aware of sea level rise and potential implications. Water management district boards are appointed by the Governor to represent the counties or other sub-district areas within the district. Most of the appointees are from the business sector. As such, their politics also are likely to be local but less tied to the electorate than many RPC council members. Nevertheless, staff at three of the four districts we contacted did not raise political context as a relevant issue in discussing their agencies concerns and approaches to adapting to the effects of sea level rise. The exception is the SFWMD, the most actively engaged of the districts with whom we consulted. It is an active participant in the SFRCCC. The staff person we interviewed attributed their high level of engagement to the high political salience of sea level rise and climate change in this part of the state State Political Context The role of politics in influencing sea level rise adaptation initiatives is as varied at the state level as it is among the local governments we contacted. Some state agency initiatives to consider and plan for sea level rise are out front and apparently strongly supported within the agency. In other state agencies, efforts are lower profile or extremely limited because of staff concerns that higher levels of administration within the agency and/or the Governor s office might find the subject of sea level rise politically risky. In one agency we contacted, some staff members seemed reluctant to even discuss the topic of sea level rise. It is within this variable political climate that state agencies and their staff work at varied degrees of visibility to respond to technical support requests from regional and local agency partners, or to develop the data needed to respond to federal requests for state-specific 12

23 information related to sea level rise. State agencies will generally look to higher levels of authority, namely the agency head, Governor, or the federal government to provide indications as to whether the topic of sea level rise can be or should be actively considered by the agency. 1.4 Uses of Sea Level Rise Information As we describe in Section 1.1, the uses of sea level rise data and information for adaptation planning can be classified in one of three categories that comprise a progression in both sophistication and technology needs: build awareness/educate, perform vulnerability assessments, and adaptation planning (see Figure 1-1). We talked with planners at the local, regional, and state levels who are engaged in each of these activities. Based upon our interviews and focus groups, the use of data and information appears to be tied in part to the political context within which a particular planner is working. For example, in political contexts where discussion of climate change is off limits, some local and regional planners are focusing on historic trend sea level rise information and its importance to mitigating coastal flooding and erosion hazards with no mention of climate change or the prospects of accelerated sea level rise. Distrust or skepticism among the planner s constituency about projections based on climate models, rather than hard data, i.e. tide gauge records, also influence the types of sea level rise information used. The source of the information also may be important in these contexts - federal agencies such as the Army Corps of Engineers or NOAA are viewed as more credible than international science organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In these contexts, planners are typically focusing on awareness building and basic education. Therefore, their sea level rise information needs are fairly simple - paper maps or on-line visualization tools. At this stage, they do not need high-resolution inundation GIS layers or vulnerability assessment data and analytic tools. This basic data or information is used as an entrée to discussing the topic of sea level rise with elected officials and the public with the intent to incrementally build awareness and perhaps eventually cross into the domain of climate change-based projections. In other jurisdictions, predominantly in southern and southwestern Florida and the Tampa Bay region, initial awareness building and education about sea level rise have occurred to a greater degree and sea level rise as a planning issue is more generally accepted. In these areas, local and regional planning staff are pursuing more sophisticated data, information 13

24 and analyses necessary to incorporate sea level rise adaptation into existing coastal hazard mitigation planning. Some communities, regional planning councils, and state agencies have begun or completed sea level rise vulnerability assessments. Others, such as Pinellas County and St. Lucie County, and the Northeast Regional Council, are at the beginning stage of formulating an approach to incorporating sea level rise in coastal hazard vulnerability assessments, comprehensive plan policies, and ultimately the land development code. The majority of jurisdictions with which we consulted fit into this intermediate level of sea level rise information use. Communities and regional and state agencies incorporating sea level rise into coastal hazard mapping and vulnerability assessments are typically conducting GIS overlay analyses for which they need high-resolution data layers that will allow them to specify areas of vulnerability and identify specific built and natural assets (infrastructure such as roads and sewage treatment plants, critical facilities, wetlands, wildlife habitat) at risk from sea level rise inundation and expanded coastal flood and storm surge zones. Many of the intermediate- and high-engagement planning entities we consulted are using vulnerability assessment tools such as the Coastal Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Tool (COAST), the InVEST Coastal Vulnerability model, and the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM). These tools require the user to have the capacity to develop and enter specific sea level rise projection data into their system as well as digital elevation models that are the basis for producing inundation scenarios. Appendix 2 provides descriptions of these tools as well as several others being developed including Climate Central s Surging Seas, the Coastal Resilience Network s flood scenario decision support tools, and FDOT s sea-level rise Sketch Planning Tool. Some of these tools also require or allow the user to input their own sea level rise projections. Thus these organizations also need access to what they consider to be credible projection information. Section 3 describes the principal methods being used to support sea level rise adaptation planning and several projection information websites and tools. A few planning jurisdictions in Florida, such as Broward and Lee counties and the City of Punta Gorda, are beyond the vulnerability assessment phase and have begun the process of developing adaptation policies to incorporate into various local plans including comprehensive plans, capital improvement and other infrastructure related plans, long-range transportation plans, local mitigation strategies, and post-disaster redevelopment plans. Communities and regional and state agencies at this stage need the most sophisticated and high-resolution data on sea level rise available as well as tools for formally assessing adaptation alternatives. 14

25 1.5 Needs and Capacities Local governments, as well as regional and state agencies, have various capacities to produce and work with sea level rise projections and scenarios for adaptation planning. Their data analysis capacities also impact the types of data they need. Some low-engagement communities also have low technical capacity. They have a relatively small number of staff members in-house and are limited in their ability to manipulate data and information for planning purposes. One local official working in a low-engagement jurisdiction specifically stated that her agency would need to have a printed map to work with as the local staff did not have the capacity to work with GIS data to incorporate sea level rise into planning efforts. In contrast, some low-engagement communities, and all of the medium- and high-engagement communities with whom we consulted, have the GIS capabilities necessary to use existing models of sea level rise inundation and incorporate the models into existing planning processes. Very few local governments have the capacity to actually develop projections or inundation models themselves, although some such as St. Johns County indicated this in-house capability. From a technical perspective, local governments tend to have basic GIS capacities to work with existing data. In general, these communities would benefit from a higher level of government developing projections and scenarios that could be imported as GIS shape files for sea level rise inundation scenarios for their own use and manipulation for conducting vulnerability assessments and evaluating adaptation alternatives. In some cases, local agencies have higher technical capacities but need guidance on how to develop the GIS outputs they need. Regional and state agencies are both users and producers of sea level rise data. Many state and regional entities have relatively high in-house technical capacities to work with and manipulate sea level rise projection and scenario data and information. However, some of these entities also rely upon consultants or other collaborators to perform some of the more complex modeling and analysis. Some have the capacity to provide technical assistance to local governments and other agencies. Based on our investigation of the sea level rise information and analysis needs and capacities of government entities in Florida we have developed the following typology: Show me the scenarios - Provider offers visualization tool for inundation scenarios for awareness building 15

26 I need a map - Provider develops paper maps of 1 or more preset scenarios (pre-determined year, tide gauge station, tidal datum, projection method, and projection estimate) and users utilize the maps for planning purposes (awareness building, vulnerability assessment, or adaptation) I need shapefiles - Provider develops GIS shapefiles showing inundation for one or more pre-set scenarios and users work with the shapefiles for planning purposes Help me make scenarios - Provider develops digital elevation models (DEMs) and/or projections and provides technical assistance for producing shapefiles from them Give me the tools and I ll make the scenarios - Provider develops DEMs and/or sea level rise projections so that users can produce inundation shapefiles Give me the basics, some instructions and I ll make the tools - Provider delivers LiDAR data and/or projection curve equations and technical assistance for producing DEMs and/or projections from them Give me the basics, I ll take it from there - Provider delivers LiDAR data and/or projection curve equations and the user develops their own DEMs and/or projections themselves. In Sections 1.6 and 1.7 we describe in more detail the sea level rise adaptation planning contexts, needs, and capacities of regional and state organizations in the state. 1.6 Regional Government Organizations and Collaborations Several regional government organizations have missions that are being influenced by sea level rise: water management districts, regional planning councils, and metropolitan planning organizations. The FPDL research team conducted web-based focus groups and interviews with samples from each of these types of organizations to discuss their decision contexts, political contexts, uses of information, and data and analysis needs, and capacities to meet those needs Water Management Districts We interviewed water management district staff members involved in long-range water supply planning. We found that water management 16

27 districts around the state are engaged in adaptation planning for sea level rise at various levels. While all water management districts have the capacity to perform sophisticated modeling, particularly when addressing water supply issues, several are not working on any projects related to sea level rise. However, most of the districts we contacted are, at a minimum, discussing how to model the effects of sea level rise on groundwater and surface water systems. None of the districts we contacted explicitly mentioned political context as an important influence on their engagement in sea level adaptation planning. One of the most active is the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) which has been involved with the SFRCCC, among other activities. As an active partner in the compact, the SFWMD has provided technical assistance for regional-scale vulnerability assessments and vulnerability mapping. The agency also has developed white papers on climate change and sea level rise, has provided other data resources for the compact, performed adaptation planning, and has developed some adaptation strategies for addressing vulnerabilities of its mission elements. One of its staff members has been appointed to the National Climate Assessment Development & Advisory Committee (NCADAC) which has been developing the 2014 National Climate Assessment (NCA) report. SFWMD staff also helped develop unified sea level rise projections for the SFRCCC. Similar to several other water management districts, the Suwanee Water Management District (SWMD) is focused primarily on monitoring the effects of rising sea levels on water resources, with a focus on saltwater intrusion into coastal aquifers. The district has not yet begun to plan for sea level rise adaptation. The St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) is concerned about the effects of sea level rise on flooding, water supplies, and associated infrastructure (for example, saltwater intrusion into coastal well fields). The district also is concerned about the impacts of sea level rise on environmentally sensitive lands, such as salt marsh habitat and sea grasses, and more generally on freshwater rivers, lakes, and wetlands. The district has contracted with the University of Central Florida (UCF) to evaluate all of these potential sea level rise impacts. UCF is developing a dynamic model that will incorporate the effect of ocean-based temporal sea level oscillation patterns and tidal surges in addition to static sea level rise projections. The SJRWMD also has initiated coordination with the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (US IOOS) and the South Eastern Coastal Ocean Observing Regional Association (SECOORA), and is actively participating 17

28 with the Florida Water Climate Alliance, a consortium of university researchers, water supply utilities and water management districts. The district also is relying on sea level rise information and evaluation tools being developed by numerous organizations and alliances to stay up-to-date on sea level rise and climate change Regional Planning Councils We conducted a web-based focus group with staff from regional planning councils (RPCs) with coastal counties. In recent years, the decision contexts within which RPCs have been operating have shifted as a result of changes to the state s growth management statutes which removed state funding from the RPCs and altered the role in reviewing local comprehensive plans. As a result, the councils have had to work to redefine their roles and transform their business models into ones where special projects or planning initiatives must be initiated and/or funded by local governments, state or federal agencies, or other outside funding sources. Some of the RPCs noted that local governments within their regions are not aware of or interested in pursuing sea level rise adaptation planning. RPC staffs find themselves trying to gently sell local governments the idea of sea level rise, and some are facing resistance. Increasingly, RPC staff has noted a slight shift in awareness which is being aided by the increased availability of online sea level rise visualization tools. The webinar discussion revealed that RPCs generally have robust GIS capacities, and that they are able to provide everything from paper maps to data and modeling, and technical assistance to local governments. However, provision of this data and technical assistance must typically be requested and funded by the local government. Some RPCs have not been taking the initiative to provide this type of assistance unless specifically requested by a local government. Other RPCs, such as the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) and the Northeast Regional Council (NERC) have been more entrepreneurial. The SWFRPC took the initiative to conduct a regional climate change vulnerability assessment and recruit local governments interested in having them prepare draft climate change adaptation policies. The NERC is collaborating with coastal counties in its region to develop a series of community resiliency sea level rise assessments focused on raising awareness and educating local officials. RPCs tend to work together and act as support for one another. If one RPC can serve as a pilot for disseminating and using sea level rise projections and mapping tools, the other RPCs around the state have the potential to build upon the initial effort and utilize such tools for educating, planning and supporting local government adaptation planning efforts. 18

29 Funding appears to be the main barrier to RPCs in the current. If outside financial resources, including grants or other governmental funds at the local, state, or federal levels are identified, RPCs generally have the technical capacity to provide significant technical assistance and expertise to local government partners Metropolitan Planning Organizations Our consultations with local governments revealed that some Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are incorporating sea level rise into their Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) processes. One example is the Hillsborough County MPO, which was selected by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to conduct a pilot project to assess the regional transportation system s resiliency to extreme weather. In collaboration with the Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission, Hillsborough County, the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, and the University of South Florida, the Hillsborough MPO will utilize sea level rise data and models developed for the Florida Department of Transportation by the University of Florida GeoPlan Center (see Section 1.7.1) to develop strategies to offset the effects of inland flooding, storm surge, and sea level rise. Some of these mitigation projects will then be included in the Hillsborough 2040 Transportation Plan. Another example is the collaboration by the Broward, Palm Beach, and Miami-Dade MPOs with the SFRCCC, the State Department of Transportation, and the South Florida Transportation Authority to assess the challenges of climate change for the southeast Florida regional transportation system with support of an FHWA grant (Streeter, 2013). The findings will be incorporated into the Broward 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan and those of the other two MPOs. It is likely that in the near future additional MPO s will integrate sea level rise into the LRTP process, as the FDOT is actively working on tools that could ultimately become integrated into the LRTP and other transportation planning processes (see Section 1.7.1) Southeast Florida Regional Partnership The Southeast Florida Regional Partnership (SEFRP) is a regional initiative that includes seven counties (Monroe, Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Martin, St. Lucie and Indian River) and more than 150 public, private, non-profit, and civic stakeholders. In collaboration with the Treasure Coast and the South Florida RPCs, the SEFRP received a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to develop the so-called Seven-50 plan, a regional vision and blueprint for economic prosperity, that covers the 7 county region and has a 50-year time horizon. The aim of 19

30 the partnership is to strategically situate the region for economic growth, sustainability, and resilience by leveraging regional consensus around a common vision and prioritization of key investments (Southeast Florida Regional Partnership, 2013). The seven50 initiative utilizes a scenario planning model for the region and incorporates sea level rise projections and scenarios from the SFRCCC as one of the factors the region will have to face over the 50-year plan horizon. The county and RPC members of the partnership have the in-house technical capacity not only to develop and analyze data for this planning initiative, but they also could potentially assist local communities in implementing the sea level rise adaptation elements of the vision Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC) is a collaboration between the counties of Monroe, Palm Beach, Miami- Dade, and Broward counties to assess the effects of climate change and sea level rise on the four-county area and develop adaptation strategies to help guide local government planning and action. The compact has produced a regional climate action plan - A Region Responds to a Changing Climate (SFRCCC, 2012b) - and two documents that specifically relate to sea level rise: A Unified Sea Level Rise Projection for Southeast Florida (SFRCCC, 2011) and Analysis of Vulnerability of Southeast Florida to Sea Level Rise (SFRCCC, 2012a). One of the great successes of the SFRCCC is providing a venue to develop a unified approach for projecting regional sea level rise as well as the collective technical capacity to meet all its data development and analysis needs. One of the spin-off projects resulting from the compact is an initiative to identify which roads, highways, railroads and transportation system elements are most vulnerable to climate change. This project will elaborate on the sea level rise vulnerability assessment conducted by the compact in As noted in Section 1.6.3, this project is a collaborative effort with the four county MPOs and other state and regional transportation organizations that will inform strategies for protecting current transportation infrastructure and in making new long-range transportation system investments. 1.7 State Agencies The FPDL research team also conducted interviews with staff from the major state agencies likely to be impacted by sea level rise to assess their 20

31 sea level rise adaptation planning contexts, data and analysis needs, and capacities Department of Transportation The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has addressed sea level rise in recent transportation system vulnerability assessments. Following the destruction of the I-10 bridges over Escambia Bay during Hurricane Ivan in 2004, FDOT initiated a project to assess the wave loading vulnerability of the state s bridges (FDOT, 2010). As part of this effort, the department contracted with Ocean Engineering Associates (OEA) to conduct an analysis of the bridges in Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties (Ocean Engineering Associates, 2008). OEA included an adjustment for 2100 relative sea level rise in its design water surface elevations following the method developed by Titus and Narayanan (1995). The department is conducting similar vulnerability analyses of bridges throughout the state. FDOT s Office of Policy Planning provides technical support to the state s MPOs including guidance on preparing their long-range transportation plans (LRTPs). The department is currently funding development of a Sketch Planning Tool by the University of Florida s GeoPlan Center that can be used as a module with the department s environmental screening tool (EST) during the Efficient Transportation Decision Making process (ETDM). The EDTM provides the means to assess ecosystem, land use, social, and cultural issues early in the process of developing state and federallyfunded transportation improvement projects and to facilitate review and input from other agencies and the public (FDOT, 2012, p. 4-6). The process includes two project screening events: Planning and Programming (FDOT, 2013). During the Planning Screen, the department and the MPO consider comments received from the Department s District Environmental Technical Advisory Team (ETAT) and the public to help prioritize proposed transportation projects for inclusion in the LRTP. During the Programming Screen, qualifying projects are reviewed when being considered for funding in the state s Five-Year Work Program or the MPO s Transportation Improvement Program, or if already funded, before advancing to the Project Development and Environment Phase. The EST facilitates coordination with the ETAT through an online interactive database and mapping application that provides quick, standardized GIS analysis to identify potential natural, physical, cultural, and community resources present in the project area. The GeoPlan Center s Sketch Planning Tool will allow EST users to assess 21

32 the vulnerability of existing and proposed transportation projects to sea level rise inundation for a variety of scenarios (see detailed description in Appendix 2) (Thomas & Cahill, 2013). FDOT recommends that all major transportation improvement projects be screened with the EST under the EDTM Planning Screen. Several of the state s 26 MPOs run initial EDTM screening when developing their LRTPs (Cahill, 2013). Others use the tool later at some point during the Programming Screen Department of Environmental Protection FDEP s functions are focused on environmental regulation, land preservation, recreation, and natural resource planning and management. The agency s priorities include restoring the Everglades, improving air quality, restoring and protecting the water quality, conserving environmentally-sensitive lands, and providing citizens and visitors with recreational opportunities (FDEP, 2013). The decision context our contacts described regarding sea level rise is one primarily of reaction rather than active adaptive planning. We were told that the department currently has no official position on sea level rise and that its focus is on monitoring environmental quality rather than projecting future change. However, the agency has begun internal discussion of how to respond to requests for guidance from some of the water management districts. In addition, FDEP is collaborating on some sea level rise research and adaptation planning where federal partners are taking the lead. One example is FDEP s participation in NOAA s Sentinel Sites Initiative through two of the National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs) that FDEP manages under cooperative agreements with the federal agency. As a state partner with contractual and grant deliverable obligations to NOAA, FDEP is conducting long-term monitoring of water levels, salinity, and weather at these two locations. Surface Elevation Table monitoring of wetlands within the reserves will help FDEP and NOAA determine if the marshes are accreting sediment quickly enough to adapt to changing sea levels. FDEP s Division of Water is collaborating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and other organizations in the a Sediment Assessment and Needs Determination (SAND) study for on-going beach management projects in five counties: St. Lucie, Martin, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade, and Broward Counties. The SAND study accounts for the effects of sea level rise on future beach renourishment sand needs for the next 50 years by increasing the estimates by 15 percent. This adjustment was determined through 22

33 collaboration among the USACE, FDEP, engineering contractors, dredging contractors, county administrators, and some county commissioners. Partners agreed to use the USACE intermediate sea level rise projection in developing the estimate (see Section ). In the case of the Planning Matanzas project, an FDEP unit, the Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve (GTM NERR), has partnered with the University of Florida s College of Design, Construction, and Planning to develop science and planning tools for sea level rise adaptation with funding from NOAA s National Estuarine Reserve Science Collaborative. Staff form the NERR and the university are working to obtain stakeholder input, perform vulnerability assessments, analyze land use conflicts, develop ecological conservation designs, and perform a governance readiness assessment for future adaptation efforts. The end products of the Planning Matanzas project will be a report with findings and recommendations and a planning toolbox to provide guidance to decision makers and stakeholders within the Matanzas basin. The sea level rise scenarios and bath tub modeling are being developed by the University of Florida. While mainly collaborating with outside agencies on sea level rise adaptation projects, FDEP does have significant in-house technical capacity that can complement sea level rise modeling and analysis capacities of its partners. For example, FDEP staff includes professional engineers, hydrologists, and modelers that are able to develop and analyze data related to high frequency storm events and historical erosion rates. The department also has strong capabilities in information gathering and monitoring for many factors related to sea level rise. In all of the projects described by our contacts, the sea level rise projection analyses were conducted by partners Division of Emergency Management The Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) is currently partnering with the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (FDEO) to consider appropriate integration points for climate change, including sea level rise, in the State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP). Working under contract with FDEO, the Florida Planning and Development Lab at Florida State University is developing draft amendments to the SHMP that describe the potential effects of climate change on the state s hazards, observed trends, and projected impacts. These revisions will provide a foundation for assisting local governments in incorporating sea level rise in local hazard mitigation planning. The division also has significant GIS and data management capabilities in-house which have been deployed to support recent revisions to the state s 23

34 regional hurricane evacuation plans. However, the agency has no ongoing projects to develop new data or information to support sea level rise adaptation planning in the state (Butgereit, 2013) Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) is actively engaged in both vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning for the effects of sea level rise on many of the state s species of concern and their habitats. Agency staff are working to determine the effects of climate change and anticipate the impacts on Florida s fish and wildlife populations. According to interviewees in the agency, ultimately they are trying to figure out how to best develop adaptation strategies to address changes and impacts associated with climate change and sea level rise. Specifically, there is an adaptation working group and a monitoring and research working group. These groups are seeking to integrate climate change into all planning efforts of the agency from wildlife management areas to specific species of concern. The commission has the technical capacity to do some sea level rise impact modeling running the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM). They also have tapped into external expertise, including consultants, collaborating partners, state and federal agencies, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to assess species vulnerability to climate change and sea level rise. The FWC collaborated with Defenders of Wildlife (DoW) and a research team from MIT to employ two approaches for assessing species vulnerability to climate change for its draft State Wildlife Action Plan (FFWCC, 2011). In the first approach, DoW facilitated species-level assessments using NatureServe s Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI) (pp. 113; 117). This involved working with an expert panel of ecologists and wildlife biologists with professional expertise on the status, distribution, conservation and threats to fish, wildlife and their habitats to obtain the species-specific information needed to implement the CCVI (p. 115). The second approach used spatial analysis to evaluate six focal species in greater detail drawing from the work of MIT researchers, Flaxman and Vargas-Moreno (2011): the American crocodile, Key deer, least tern, Atlantic salt marsh snake, short-tailed hawk, and Florida panther (FFWCC, 2011, p. 113). This effort focused on vulnerability to habitat change from a series of five alternative future land use scenarios based on population growth, shifts in planning approaches and regulations, financial resources available for conservation activities, and three sea level rise projections (FFWCC, 2011, p. 118). 24

35 The FWC worked with another consultant, GeoAdaptive, on the Florida Keys Marine Adaptation Planning Project (KeysMAP). In this effort, the partners created two future climate change scenarios incorporating both sea level rise and sea surface temperature projections based on IPCC projections and examined the effects on natural resources using the SLAMM model (Glazer, 2013). They then couple[d] these expected outcomes against a number of adaptation strategies to plan for future conditions and test[ed] the effectiveness of a set of potential management actions across this range of conditions (GeoAdaptive, 2012). They drew on a wide diversity of outside experts from state and federal agencies and NGOs to specify and validate their scenarios. In the KeysMAP project, the FWC relied primarily on the IPCC sea level rise projections included in the SLAMM model for its vulnerability assessment analyses. For the Wildlife Action Plan, however, the MIT team, went beyond the IPCC s 2007 projections because of concerns among their conservation stakeholders that those projections did not adequately represent contributions from melting ice sheets. The commission staff member we interviewed noted that additional information is needed on the effects of sea level rise on coastal accretion and erosion rates and storm surge. The FWC is in the process of developing an adaptation guide for wildlife managers that describes the specific consequences of various climate change impacts, including sea level rise, on species habitats. In addition, the commission is working on a larger effort to develop a comprehensive approach to incorporating climate change into all of the agency s management planning, including wildlife management area plans, imperiled species management plans, and the state wildlife action plan Department of Economic Opportunity In 2012, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEODEO) began a five year project focused on coordinating planning efforts throughout the state and integrating sea level rise into existing planning mechanisms, including local comprehensive plans, local hazard mitigation plans, and post-disaster redevelopment plans. This effort is known as the Community Resiliency Initiative (CRI). The CRI also includes projects to better coordinate adaptation efforts on a statewide basis. The CRI coordinates and receives extensive input from external agencies, including federal, state, regional and local partners. Much of this input is collected through the Community Resiliency Focus Group (CRFG), which is a group of statewide experts on sea level rise adaptation planning 25

36 and coastal stakeholders. DEO works with the CRFG to determine what resources and information are needed to develop guidance for sea level rise adaptation planning efforts. When preparing guidance related to sea level rise projections, FDEO also looks to federal partners such as the US Army Corps of Engineers, FEMA, NOAA, and the IPCC. However, despite this consideration of national and international resources, it should be noted that DEO recognizes that deciding upon which sea level rise projection to utilize is currently a local decision (Dennis, 2013). The CRI is working quickly to examine existing data and practices about current sea level rise adaptation planning efforts underway, while developing guidance for agencies considering this type of planning moving forward. During the first year of the CRI, DEO compiled an inventory of sea level rise research from around the state and nation to identify technical assistance resources available to support community sea level rise adaptation planning efforts. This resulted in a document entitled How Counties, States, and Florida Address Sea Level Rise - A Compendium of Climate Adaptation Research (DEO, 2012). During second year of the CRI, DEO also began a supplemental Project of Special Merit to explore options available to local governments wishing to incorporate Adaptation Action Areas (AAAs) into their local comprehensive plan. The Community Planning Act of 2011 defines an AAA as an optional comprehensive plan designation for areas that experience coastal flooding and are vulnerable to the related impacts of rising sea levels for the prioritizing funding for infrastructure and adaptation planning. Section (1), Florida Statutes (2012). Local governments that adopt an AAA may consider policies within the coastal management element in their comprehensive plan to improve coastal flooding resilience. In 2012, DEO also began a partnership with the City of Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, and the South Florida Regional Planning Council to pilot the adoption of AAAs in the City of Ft. Lauderdale comprehensive plan. Upon completion of the Ft. Lauderdale pilot project, DEO will produce outreach materials to be used by DEO staff and its partners to provide technical assistance to local governments considering incorporation of AAAs in local comprehensive plans. The outreach materials will include an easy-to-read guidebook with a case study, a video on AAAs, and podcasts with interviews of key players from the project (DEO, 2011). These resources will be available on the DEO website, in addition to being presented by staff via webinars and workshops. In addition to the AAA pilot project in Ft. Lauderdale, second year CRI tasks also include: completing an inventory of sea level rise scenarios and vulnerability analysis modeling methodologies currently used around the state and comparing each of these projects in terms of cost, methodology, 26

37 transferability, precedence, precision, accuracy, and capacity of the model to provide sufficient data for sea level rise to be addressed in the State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP). This information will be used to discuss parameters for this project and create guidance for local governments to incorporate sea level rise in local mitigation plans. Additionally, DEO is also working to provide best practice planning strategies for sea level rise adaptation through an online clearinghouse of resources and targeted technical assistance for local governments through training, site visits, workshops, and meetings related to community resiliency and sea level rise adaptation. DEO will also work with the CRFG to establish sea level rise scenarios and evaluate guidance for the integration of adaptation into the existing comprehensive planning framework. Finally, DEO will select two or more pilot communities to serve as a testing ground for incorporation of sea level rise adaptation planning into local plans. (Dennis, 2013) The selected pilot communities will represent an average community in Florida and the pilot project will take a holistic approach to adaptation planning (DEO, 2011). During the third year of the CRI, DEO will develop adaptation plans for the two pilot communities identified during the second year of the CRI. The adaptation plans will include a risk and vulnerability analysis for each of the pilot communities. DEO also will develop and present options for a statewide vulnerability assessment to the CRFG. The CRFG will work with DEO to refine the options for statewide vulnerability assessments to best meet the needs of stakeholders. Additional guidance and outreach materials will also be developed during this phase. These materials will include: outreach materials for local governments that explain the economic benefits of adaptation and the relationship between sea level rise and the insurance industry; a white paper connecting the CRI and sea level rise adaptation with the preservation of historic structures; and guidance for local governments on how to address sea level rise adaptation in the Local Mitigation Strategy. In sum, much of the CRI s work will result in the production of guidance documents for local governments and other agency partners. These materials will ultimately be widely distributed and accessible on DEO s website and through other venues (Dennis, 2013). DEO is also beginning to incorporate adaptation planning for sea level rise in forums outside of the CRI. For example, in 2013, the DEO Division of Community Development provided technical assistance funds to the City of Yankeetown to explore adaptation options. In addition to providing technical assistance funding, DEO is incorporating information sharing about adaptation planning during meetings for other DEO initiatives. Most recently, DEO invited the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council to 27

38 speak about the City of Punta Gorda s adaptation strategy to the Waterfronts Florida Program Meeting. Finally, DEO created a guidance document on how to address adaptation planning during the long term recovery process as the fifth and final phase of the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Planning Initiative. In conclusion, the DEO recognizes the importance of adaptation planning for sea level rise for the coastal communities of Florida, and is actively working within the agency and with outside partners to further the incorporation of this issue into planning initiatives. (Dennis, 2013) Department of Health In 2012, the Florida Department of Health (FDOH) received a four-year grant from the Centers for Disease Control s Climate-Ready States and Cities Initiative to initiate a Building Resilience Against Climate Effects (BRACE) program. The CDC s BRACE initiative is designed to increase resilience to the health effects of climate variability through increased capacity in the public health sector (Jagger, 2013). It targets many climate-related hazards, including sea level rise. The department has partnered with many other organizations on the project and has a technical advisory group which includes climatologists, researchers, county health departments, non-profit organizations, and regional and local planners currently implementing adaptation plans in their jurisdictions. The BRACE framework includes five parts (Jagger, 2013). The first, forecasting climate impacts and assessing vulnerabilities, will produce a climate and health profile report and a vulnerability assessment. This is expected to be completed by the end of The second part of the framework is projecting disease burden which will result in a health risk assessment for at least five health outcomes or risk factors. The third element, assessing public health interventions will summarize the effectiveness of public health interventions and provide guidance on the best methods for communicating interventions to target audiences. The fourth stage will be developing and implementing a climate and health adaptation plan. In the final stage, evaluating impact and improving quality of activities, the department will develop and implement a process for evaluating program activities (Jagger, 2013). The department is currently engaged in the first phase of the BRACE project under which it has contracted with the University of South Carolina s Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute to assess the social and medical vulnerability of the state s populations to hazard impacts. The assessment is anticipated to be released in late In analyzing sea-level rise risk, the team used a composite digital elevation model from the Florida Geographic Data Library to map three different inundation scenarios for 2100 relative 28

39 to The low and intermediate scenarios of 28.5 cm and 66.9 cm are based on running the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research s MAGICC regional climate scenario generator for the IPCC B1 and A1B greenhouse gas emission scenarios. The high scenario of cm is based on the maximum 2100 global eustatic sea level rise estimate developed by Rahmstorf (2007). The study also assesses possible effects of sea level rise risk on coastal ground water table elevations. The first part of the BRACE also calls for a Climate and Health Profile which FDOH is developing in consultation with the Florida State University Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies and the Southeast Regional Climate Center at the University of North Carolina. Also due in 2013, this analysis is organized by climate hazard, and includes sea level rise. Each hazard profile will include a summary of climate vulnerability, a description of historic climate patterns, an introduction to health implications, health indicators, disease burden, and correlations between indicators and climate. Two health effects and their potential indicators and data sources have been identified for sea level rise saltwater contamination of private drinking water wells and mental health and stress disorders resulting from population migrations (Jagger, 2013). 1.8 Summary/Synthesis While neither the state nor federal governments currently mandates that local, regional, or state agencies incorporate sea level rise into planning efforts, many local governments and regional and state agencies in Florida are considering doing so and some have already begun to develop vulnerability assessments and adaptation strategies and policies. In some cases political wariness or disavowal of climate change is constraining sea level rise adaptation initiatives, even where agency staff are inclined to do so. In other settings, concerns with other community or agency problems and objectives limit the resources available to address sea level rise adaptation. Where local governments and regional and state agencies have begun to address sea level rise adaptation, they are undertaking three principal types of initiatives: raising awareness and educating elected officials and their constituents, assessing vulnerability to the effects of sea level rise on built and natural assets, and assessing alternative adaptation strategies and policies. Many are at the front end of this sequence, seeking credible, relevant data and information and assessing alternative approaches to conducting vulnerability assessments and evaluating adaptation alternatives. Several agencies are actively conducting vulnerability assessments, and a 29

40 few government organizations in the state have moved on to developing adaptation strategies and formally adopting adaptation policies. Where the political environment is not conducive to talking about climate change and accelerating sea level rise, planners have found that focusing on historic sea level change trends, based on NOAA tide station data, in the context of well-recognized hazards of coastal flooding and erosion, offers the best entree to broaching sea level rise adaptation. A number of local and regional planners say that their constituents would be more likely to address the issue if there were a recognized federal or state mandate to do so. Some reported that they are able to take-up the prospects of changing sea level rise scenarios where they draw on the guidance and projection tools provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers which is widely regarded as a credible source of knowledge and information. In some areas of the state, however, most notably south Florida, community concern about sea level rise and demand for adaptation action are more widespread resulting in some of the most cutting-edge sea level rise adaptation initiatives in the U.S. The data and technical needs of the agencies we consulted vary. They depend on the organization s level of engagement with the sea level rise adaptation challenge, the stage of adaptation planning in which they are engaged, and their in-house technical capacities. Low-engagement communities focused on awareness building and education have fairly simple information needs - paper maps or on-line visualization tools that do not require high-resolution sea level rise inundation data. Intermediate-engagement agencies require more sophisticated and higher-resolution data and information. Most have the capacity to conduct the types of GIS analyses required to prepare vulnerability assessments, but many need, or would prefer to have access to, GIS inundation scenarios prepared by other entities. Others have much or all of the capacity to construct their own inundation scenarios and even extend their analyses to project the effects of sea level rise on coastal flood and storm surge boundaries. Many intermediate- and high-engagement planning communities and regional and state agencies are using vulnerability assessment tools that require the user to have the capacity to develop and enter specific sea level rise projection data into their system as well as digital elevation models that are the basis for producing inundation scenarios. These organizations therefore need access to what they consider to be credible projection information. Communities and agencies that are developing and assessing adaptation alternatives need the most sophisticated and high-resolution data 30

41 on sea level rise available, as well as tools for formally assessing adaptation alternatives. Several collaborative initiatives have emerged that pool the expertise and technical resources of multiple local and regional agencies, most notably the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact. In other areas, regional planning councils (RPCs) have taken the lead in conducting vulnerability assessments in collaboration with local governments and in assisting them in developing adaptation strategies and policies. Several state agencies have begun vulnerability assessments to support their agency missions, in particular the State Department of Health and the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Others are developing information and resources that can be used by regional and local government organizations in their adaptation planning efforts. The State Department of Transportation has initiated development of a vulnerability assessment tool for use in long-range transportation planning by Metropolitan Planning Organizations, while the Department of Economic Opportunity is developing several resources to promote community resiliency to coastal flooding and sea level rise including collaboration with the Division of Emergency Management to integrate climate change into the State Hazard Mitigation Plan. RPCs are best equipped to provide technical assistance to local government adaptation planning but must be entrepreneurial to secure funding for such initiatives. 1.9 References Cited Butgereit, R. (2013). Personal communication, July 30. Florida Division of Emergency Management. Cahill, M. (2013). Personal communication, June 25. Florida Department of Transportation. Dennis, J. (2013). Personal communication, September 12. Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. Flaxman, M. & Vargas-Moreno, J.C. (2011). Considering climate change in Florida s state wildlife action planning: A spatial resilience planning approach. Retrieved from ConsideringClimateChange-WildlifeActionPlan.pdf. Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). (2012). How Counties, States, and Florida Address Sea Level Rise - A Compendium of Climate Adaptation Research. Retrieved from 31

42 w w.f lor idaj obs.org/fdc p/dc p/adapt at ionplanning/ CompendiumNationalStateLocalAdaptationProjects.pdf Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). (2011). Implementing Adaptation Action Area Policies in Florida. Retrieved from aaapolicy.pdf. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). (2013). Mission statement and objectives. Retrieved from mainpage/about/statement.pdf. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (2010). Florida wave loading study improves bridge safety. Research Showcase, Fall/Winter, pp Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (2012). Metropolitan planning organization program management handbook. Retrieved from mpohandbook/. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (2013). FDOT efficient transportation decision making (ETDM) process overview. Retrieved from Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC). (2011). Florida s wildlife legacy initiative: Florida s state wildlife action plan. Retrieved from Florida Regional Council Association (2013). Partnerships for the Future. Annual Report and Directory. Retrieved from flregionalcouncils.org/. GeoAdaptive. (2012). Florida Keys marine adaptation planning. Retrieved from Glazer, R. (2013). KeysMAP. Retrieved from projects/climate_change/ecology_february_2013/12_glazer.pdf. Jagger, Meredith. (2013). Grant overview: building resiliency against climate effects (BRACE). [PowerPoint slides]. Jagger, Meredith. (2013). Building resilience against climate effects (BRACE) grant crosswalk. [Technical Advisory Group Meeting Handouts]. Tallahassee, FL: State of Florida Department of Health. 32

43 Ocean Engineering Associates (OEA). (2008). Bridge scour evaluation for Monroe and Miami-Dade Counties. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Transportation. Rahmstorf, S. (2007). A semi-empirical approach to projecting future sealevel rise. Science, 315, Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2011). A unified sea level rise projection for southeast Florida. Retrieved from themes/summit/pdf/sea%20level%20rise.pdf. Streeter, A. (2013). South Florida assessing climate change impact on roads, bridges, railroads, airports. Huffpost Miami, August 2. Retrieved from Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2012a). Analysis of vulnerability of Southeast Florida to sea level rise. Retrieved from Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2012b). A region responds to a changing climate. Retrieved from southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org/pdf/regional%20climate%20 Action%20Plan%20FINAL%20ADA%20Compliant.pdf. Southeast Florida Regional Partnership. (2013). Retrieved from com/regional%20partnership.htm. Thomas, A., Pierre-Jean, R., Watkins, R. & Cahill, M. (2013). Development of a GIS tool for the preliminary assessment of the effects of predicted sea level and tidal change on transportation infrastructure. Transportation Research Board, 92nd Annual Meeting, January 13-17, Washington, D.C. #P Retrieved from docs/92_trb_annual_meeting/development%20of%20a%20gis%20 Tool%20for%20the%20Preliminary%20Assessment%20of%20the%20 Effects%20of%20Predicted%20Sea%20Level.pdf. Titus, J.G. & Narayanan, V.K. (1995). The probability of sea level rise. EPA 230-R Retrieved from 33

44 34

45 Section 2: Institutional Options for Meeting Sea Level Rise Adaptive Planning Information and Resource Needs in Florida 2.1 Introduction This section describes the existing institutional capacity of federal, state, and regional agencies and private organizations to provide sea level rise scenario information and services necessary for a range of planning needs. Local, regional and state level governmental entities have a range of needs from raising awareness through visualization exercises to conducting vulnerability assessments, scenario planning, and sea level rise adaptation planning. Not all entities have the capacity to develop and utilize sea level rise projection data for modeling and mapping purposes. Based on the range of needs of government planners interviewed for this project, federal, state, regional and private entities may be called upon to provide up-to-date sea level rise projection information as well as technical assistance to integrate that information into planning efforts. This section provides an overview of existing initiatives and capacities of regional, state and federal governmental agencies as well as private organizations to develop and disseminate tools and technical assistance for the purpose of sea level rise projection and scenario development. 2.2 Technical Capabilities Needed to Develop Sea Level Rise Scenario Products As identified in Section 1 of this report, there are multiple products that users will need depending on their technical capabilities and expertise in manipulating spatial data for depicting inundation scenarios for sea level rise: Show me the scenarios - Provider offers visualization tool for inundation scenarios for awareness building I need a map - Provider develops paper maps of 1 or more preset scenarios (pre-determined year, tide gauge station, tidal datum, 35

46 projection method, and projection estimate) and users utilize the maps for planning purposes (awareness building, vulnerability assessment, or adaptation) I need shapefiles - Provider develops GIS shapefiles showing inundation for one or more pre-set scenarios and users work with the shapefiles for planning purposes Help me make scenarios - Provider develops digital elevation models (DEMs) and/or projections and provides technical assistance for producing shapefiles from them Give me the tools and I ll make the scenarios - Provider develops DEMs and/or sea level rise projections so that users can produce inundation shapefiles Give me the basics, some instructions and I ll make the tools - Provider delivers LiDAR data and/or projection curve equations and technical assistance for producing DEMs and/or projections from them Give me the basics, I ll take it from there - Provider delivers LiDAR data and/or projection curve equations and the user develops their own DEMs and/or projections themselves. Local governments in Florida, and some regional and state agencies, need the full range of options described above. Many local governments, regional agencies, and state agencies are engaging in awareness building using visualization tools available online. A few have conducted or are beginning to work on vulnerability assessments which require more precise data on inundation scenarios and location of critical facilities and infrastructure. In a couple of cases, local governments are in the early stages of engaging in scenario planning for sea level rise adaptation. The ability to use sea level rise projection and inundation information varies greatly across the state. Most local governments we heard from in this study can at a minimum work with GIS shapefiles depicting inundated areas under a range of sea level rise projection scenarios. However, one of the interviewees contributing to this study lacked this basic GIS capacity and would require paper maps showing inundation boundaries. A few local governments and regional agencies are much more technically advanced and have the capacity to work directly with LiDAR data and sea level rise projection information to develop their own DEMs and construct their own inundation scenarios. Moreover, among the high capacity local governments and regional agencies who participated in this study, all would prefer to work from a pre-existing DEM and sea level rise scenarios if available and standardized. Therefore, there are needs in the state that cut across the 36

47 spectrum identified in the seven categories above. The following sections describe regional, state, and federal agency initiatives related to sea level rise and their capacities to create and disseminate products and services that could be used by other entities for sea level rise adaptation planning purposes. 2.3 Existing Institutional Capacities to Develop Disseminate and Maintain These Products Numerous regional and state agencies have a range of capacities to develop, disseminate, and maintain the necessary products and services to support local governments and regional planning agencies in integrating sea level rise projections and scenarios into adaptation planning. This section identifies what capacities exist in regional, state, and federal agencies, and private organizations to provide these products and services. This description is not based on a comprehensive review; however, it does provide a sense of the range of services and products that are currently utilized in Florida based on interviews and Internet searches conducted for this project Regional Government Organizations and Collaborations Water Management Districts Water Management Districts have planning jurisdictions that span multiple counties. The mission of WMDs focuses on water supply management and water quality. WMDs have a range of technical capabilities and run complex modeling programs for groundwater and surface water hydrology to analyze flows, water supply, and water quality issues. Moreover, WMDs have technical capabilities and data available that could be used by other entities. They maintain the most comprehensive and up-to-date LiDAR and DEMs in the state (Butgereit, 2013b), which are the foundation data for developing sea level rise inundation scenarios. The highest quality data sets are too large to access online, but can be obtained on disc. The WMDs primary focus on water quality and water supply issues suggests that they are well positioned to work with other entities on conducting vulnerability assessments that cover water resources assets. Within this context, some WMDs in Florida have been active in planning for sea level rise, and they have a range of technical capacities that can be useful for sea level rise adaptation planning efforts. Based on the experiences 37

48 of the WMD personnel we interviewed, WMDs in Florida are generally well positioned to contribute technical and analytical capabilities to account for sea level rise impacts on water resources. For example, the South Florida WMD (SFWMD) has estimated the impacts of projected sea level rise on water resources in southeast Florida counties, including surface and groundwater hydrologic impacts as well as water supply and water control system impacts (Trimble et al., 1998). More recently, the agency established an interdepartmental climate change working group which has examined the impacts of climate change more broadly on water management in south Florida, including the impacts of sea level rise (SFWMD, 2009). The Northwest Florida WMD was working with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the University of Central Florida on a five-year sea level rise impact project for the Panhandle coastal counties (Harrington, 2010). The project aims to utilize a range of sea level rise tools to help local governments obtain the data and information necessary to incorporate sea level rise vulnerability into coastal elements of comprehensive plans. The district subsequently had to discontinue participation in the effort because of insufficient staff. WMDs have also been very valuable contributors to broader regional vulnerability assessment processes. In particular, the SFWMD contributed to the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact by evaluating and cleaning up DEM data provided by the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) to prepare a unified dataset for the counties of the compact. WMDs also can serve as a resource for local communities conducting vulnerability assessments to help determine what impact sea level rise will have on water resources. For example, Broward County has drawn on SFWMD white papers on climate change impacts on water resources as the county actively plans for sea level rise adaptation. Other WMDs are in earlier stages of sea level rise planning processes Regional Planning Councils Regional Planning Council (RPC) staff who contributed to this research all have the capacity to work with, manipulate, and in some cases, model data and information in GIS to be able to depict sea level rise impacts using LiDAR data, construct DEMs, and depict various sea level rise scenarios. One of the strengths of the RPCs is that they have the capacity to work with local governments to tailor products to meet the specific needs of those local governments. Moreover, given that they are working at a smaller geographic areas than state agencies, the RPCs have the computing power to be able to develop products at a fine grain horizontal and vertical resolution. This capacity to provide finer grained analysis is useful for local governments 38

49 who may be interested in developing vulnerability assessments for specific critical facilities and other community assets. In terms of sea level rise planning, Florida s RPCs have been very active. Most of the RPCs with coastal counties participated in the EPA funded project to develop sea level rise reports in the early 2000s. The Southwest Florida RPC (SWFRPC) received the EPA grant in 2000 and coordinated the effort. The other RPCs worked with the SWFRPC on developing their respective analyses. The RPCs shared information, data, and expertise while completing the project. The Treasure Coast report, for example, mentions all of the other RPCs and specifically identifies staff in the SWFRPC who helped develop inundation maps and sharing planning ideas (Treasure Coast RPC, 2005). This approach points to one delivery model that seems to be effective, which is to have one of the RPCs serve as the coordinating agency and then other RPCs can adopt the techniques and approaches modeled by the pilot council. More recently, RPCs have been able to assist with raising awareness about sea level rise through the use of visualization tools. The Northeast Florida RPC (NEFRPC) has conducted a series of community resiliency assessments using the NOAA Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer tool to depict inundation associated with sea level rise of one, three, and six feet. This effort focuses on raising awareness and educating local government officials on the salience of the issue. The NEFRPC chose this range of possible scenarios based on the intermediate and high projections of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, 2011) for 2060 and Also, they are coordinating their efforts with the Matanzas Basin planning effort (see section ) which has identified 3 feet of sea level rise as a tipping point for major impacts in the basin. This example demonstrates that RPCs may be a resource for facilitating a planning process to use a range of sea level rise planning tools. Other interviewees also pointed out the fact that they frequently facilitate coordination among local government officials or work across multiple local governments to engage in efforts to coordinate planning. Other RPCs have been engaging in sea level rise adaptation planning efforts. The SWFRPC has taken a proactive approach to planning for climate change and sea level rise by initiating a range of projects at the regional level and conducting both sea level rise scenario planning and vulnerability assessments for local governments in the region (SWFRPC, 2013a, 2013b). Specifically, the SWFRPC, along with the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP), have developed the following studies and planning documents: 39

50 Comprehensive Southwest Florida/Charlotte Harbor Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (Beever et al., 2009a) Adaptation Plan for the City of Punta Gorda (Beever et al., 2009b) Charlotte Harbor Regional Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CHNEP, 2010) Lee County Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (Beever et al., 2010a) Lee County Climate Change Resiliency Strategy (Beever et al., 2010b) Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Opportunities for Salt Marsh Types in Southwest Florida (Beever et al., 2011) Estimating and Forecasting Ecosystem Services within Pine Island Sound, Sanibel Island, Captiva Island, North Captiva Island, Cayo Costa Island, Useppa Island, Other Islands of the Sound, and the Nearshore Gulf of Mexico (Beever & Walker, 2013). The Comprehensive Southwest Florida/Charlotte Harbor Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment presents climate change projections of possible futures based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios for a range of possible global greenhouse gas emission futures (Meehl et al., 2007). The assessment projects impacts on climate stability, sea level, hydrology, geomorphology, natural habitats and species, land use changes, economy, human health, and human infrastructure in southwest Florida through The assessment lists the SWFRPC as the key planning agency that contributed technical and analytical expertise to develop the analysis. This effort demonstrates the SWFRPC s ability to contribute to a broader regional effort to conduct analysis on a range of variables with considerable uncertainty and complexity. The South Florida RPC and Treasure Coast RPC also have been engaged in regional vulnerability assessments and have supported local vulnerability assessments through the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact and the Southeast Florida Partnership (discussed in Sections and ). Uniformly, RPCs require some level of external funding to support their technical assistance work. Funding can come from local governments contracting with the RPC for technical assistance or from grants obtained from other sources to support regional planning efforts. Thus, while the RPCs have the technical capabilities and technological resources to deliver a range of sea level rise scenario products to local governments, they are hampered by a lack of dedicated funding to support delivering these products. As a result, most of the RPC staff we spoke with clarified that they 40

51 would not likely take on providing sea level rise inundation map products or vulnerability assessments for their region proactively. Instead, they will require dedicated funding to support the effort. In summary, RPCs can provide technical support to local governments in incorporating sea level rise projections and scenarios into vulnerability analysis for the purposes of adaptation planning, hazard mitigation, comprehensive planning and other long range planning functions. From a technical perspective, the RPCs tend to have sufficient GIS capabilities to conduct analyses using available data from a variety of sources. In some cases, RPCs have modeling capabilities to develop their own bathtub models for planning purposes. Moreover, the RPCs can conduct some of the subsequent planning analyses such as vulnerability assessments to support local government planning efforts Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC) brings together the counties of Monroe, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade, and Broward to collect information and produce guidance on climate change and sea level rise for the four-county area. The Compact has produced a regional climate action plan - A Regional Responds to a Changing Climate (SFRCCC, 2012b) - and two documents that specifically relate to sea level rise: A Unified Sea Level Rise Projection for Southeast Florida (SFRCCC, 2011) and Analysis of Vulnerability of Southeast Florida to Sea Level Rise (SFRCCC, 2012a). The Unified Sea Level Rise Projection document was developed by an ad-hoc technical working group which brought together academics, local government officials, science and technical working groups from the counties, and staff from the SFWMD and the USACE. This document presents a unified projection based on the USACE methods applied to historic tide gauge data from the NOAA Key West tide station. The Compact s project uses the USACE high and medium projection curves to outline the range of sea level rise values to use for planning purposes. The Analysis of Vulnerability depicts impacts on critical facilities in each of the four counties based on a 1-foot, 2-foot, and 3-foot sea level rise. This assessment drew on expertise and data from the counties, the FDEM, SFWMD, and NOAA Coastal Services Center staff. GIS specialists from each of the four counties used a regionally-consistent methodology to conduct the vulnerability assessments themselves. The Compact and participating state and federal agencies aided in gathering relevant information and data to support the effort. As a unified group, the Compact has all of the 41

52 technical and analytic capacity to produce the entire range of sea level rise planning products, paper maps to inundation scenarios, using sea level rise projections and up-to-date LiDAR elevation data. The federal, state, and regional agencies all supported the counties by helping develop a unified methodology for vulnerability assessments and providing and cleaning up all of the relevant data layers for conducting the analysis. The three counties to the north of the Compact (Martin, St. Lucie, and Indian River) have used the Compact s methodology to develop their own sea level rise vulnerability assessments Southeast Florida Regional Partnership Collaboration The Southeast Florida Regional Partnership, a group of more than 150 public, private and civic stakeholders from the seven-county region that includes Monroe, Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Martin, St. Lucie, and Indian River counties is collaborating with the Treasure Coast and South Florida RPCs to develop the Seven50 Southeast Florida Prosperity Plan for the region for the next 50 years (Seven50.org, 2013). The plan takes sea level rise into account. The Seven-50 planning team was able to develop inundation models and scenarios for a 2-foot sea level rise both with and without tidal adjustments. For planning purposes, the team chose to develop one static scenario (a 2-foot sea level rise) rather than use a range of projections and scenarios to provide more dynamic information. With RPCs, WMDs, the seven counties, and state agencies participating in the project, the technical capacity exists to construct sea level rise inundation scenarios using LiDAR elevation data, DEMs, and projection information. The partnership gathers the necessary expertise, computing power, and technical capacity to provide tools and products to local governments that cut across the entire range of needs derived from projection information and digital elevation models. The partnership builds on the existing technical capacity of the SFRCCC participants to conduct scenario planning analyses and exercises State Agencies Department of Transportation The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is both a user and producer of sea level rise projection and scenario information. With a significant amount of infrastructure vulnerable to sea level rise in the state, the agency has contracted with the University of Florida s GeoPlan Center to develop a Sketch Planning Tool to help Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the FDOT account for sea level rise inundation vulnerabilities in transportation planning efforts (see a description of the tool in Appendix 2, A2-4 and the decision context in Section 1). FDOT s grant to support 42

53 model development of sea level rise inundation and transportation system vulnerabilities by GeoPlan is one of the most promising efforts to bring together data at a statewide level that could be utilized by local governments and regional planning agencies to integrate sea level rise projections and scenarios into adaptation planning. The GeoPlan Sketch Planning Tool is not yet complete; however, certain modules are available (leo.ags.geoplan.ufl.edu/slr/) and the team continues to roll out products. There are technical limitations associated with the model described in Appendix 2. Specifically, the horizontal resolution of 5-meters in the statewide composite DEM may not be sufficiently high for some vulnerability assessment applications. This level of resolution is suitable for statewide and regional level analyses but may be less applicable to local users seeking to conduct site-specific vulnerability assessments. However, given the technical capacities of the GeoPlan team developing the model and the data availability, this limitation could be overcome by developing higher-resolution county-level DEMs and inundation models. The GeoPlan team plans to provide open access to all of the data underlying their tools. This access allows users of the online interface to identify specific segments of transportation infrastructure that will be inundated based on the pre-loaded scenarios. However, more advanced users can download the data, not only accessing shapefiles of pre-loaded inundation layers but also obtaining the underlying data layers and DEMs to manipulate in their own GIS systems. Users can overlay the GeoPlan inundation layers onto their own critical facilities or other locally relevant GIS map layers. Moreover, they can input their own sea level rise projection data and produce inundation layers in addition to those available from the preloaded projection scenarios provided by GeoPlan. The major challenge of the GeoPlan model is that there is not currently funding to support further enhancing the tool. However FDOT staff seem interested in pursuing additional enhancements, and the GeoPlan team has sufficient technical capacity and computing resources to develop the range of tools needed by users at both the regional and local levels Department of Environmental Protection As explained in section 1.7.2, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) primarily engages in sea level rise adaptation planning indirectly. According to the staff members we interviewed, the agency does not have an official position on sea level rise in the context of climate change. Most of the sea level rise work the agency is engaged in involves partnerships with NOAA, the USACE, and state and regional agencies. 43

54 The agency s strength is in monitoring and modeling coastal system dynamics including beach erosion and accretion, and near-shore coastal water ecosystems. FDEP is currently participating in the monitoring stage of NOAA s Sentinel Site Program, which is focused on adapting to changing sea levels and coastal inundation (NOAA, 2013c). The agency is collaborating with the USACE to analyze sand needs and supplies for beach renourishment projects in the state over the next 50 years. That analysis is accounting for the probable effects of sea level rise on beach erosion rates. The agency also supported the work of other state agencies such as FDEO s Community Resiliency Initiative through grants under the Federal Coastal Zone Management Program administered by NOAA. The most proactive sea level rise adaptation initiative being taken under the auspices of FDEP is the Planning Matanzas Project in which the Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve is a major player (see Section ). FDEP appears to have substantial latent capacity to contribute to state, regional, and local efforts to better prepare for the effects of sea level rise. While the agency has a range of scientists, engineers, and modelers working in the agency on various aspects of environmental protection and regulation, that capacity has not yet been extensively utilized for sea level rise adaptation planning based on the interviews we conducted with staff in the agency Division of Emergency Management The Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) has significant GIS and data management capabilities in-house but no ongoing projects to develop new data or information to support sea level rise adaptation planning efforts in the state (Butgereit, 2013b). The agency took the lead to assemble and procure high-quality LiDAR data for a major initiative to update the state s regional hurricane evacuation studies (Butgerieit, 2013a). The National Hurricane Center and the NOAA Meteorological Development Laboratory used those data as elevation inputs to run the Sea Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model to define storm surge inundation zones. The regional planning councils then used the SLOSH outputs to prepare updated regional evacuation plans. Because of this work, the agency serves as a repository of some of the best LiDAR data for coastal counties in the state, which are essential in developing DEMs and sea level rise inundation scenarios. LiDAR and SLOSH model run data are available at as are links to other data portals for Florida LiDAR and DEM data. The agency also maintains a mosaic of the best available DEM data in the state (Butgereit, 2013b) and provides links to a range of other GIS data and layers via floridadisaster.org/gis/data. 44

55 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) has demonstrated significant expertise and capacity to undertake both vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning for the effects of sea level rise on wildlife and ecosystems. The agency uses the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) (see Appendix 2, A2-7) to assess the impacts of sea level rise on a range of species including both marine and terrestrial species and endangered or threatened and invasive species. Through SLAMM, the agency uses IPCC projections to determine a range of sea surface temperatures as well as sea level rise inundation scenarios for southern Florida. The agency does not appear to be actively providing sea level rise inundation or vulnerability assessment data or technical assistance to other public-sector organizations in the state beyond its draft State Wildlife Action Plan (FFWCC, 2011). However, the agency is in the process of developing a state guide modeled on the National Climate Action Plan developed by the Council of Environmental Quality and released in This guide is intended to be a one stop shop for managers seeking to incorporate natural resources and ecological consequences of climate change (including sea level rise) into their vulnerability assessments and other climate adaptation planning efforts. With a high level of scientific staff capacity, the agency is well positioned to undertake complex analyses of sea level rise projections and scenario development, particularly regarding impacts on natural resources, species of concern, and ecological systems. A staff member we spoke with noted that other agencies are turning to FWC for the SLAMM analyses, particularly in the Keys where the effects of sea level rise are well underway. With this capacity and the agency s natural resources orientation, the FWC is well suited to be a contributor to broader vulnerability assessments which take natural resources changes and assets into account Federal Agencies Federal Emergency Management Agency The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) offers some guidance to the public on accounting for sea level rise effects on 1 percent annual flood elevations. The agency cautions the public not to rely on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) produced for the National Flood Insurance Program as the basis for predicting future coastal flood elevations. In the most recent edition of its Coastal Construction Manual, FEMA (2011, p. 3-23) 45

56 urges building designers, community officials, and property owners to apply a method such as that developed by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, 2011) to account for sea level rise when designing structures with design lives of 10 years or more. In its post-hurricane Sandy guidance for building within coastal flood hazard areas, the agency recommends including at least 1 foot of addition elevation (freeboard) to account for historic rates of sea level rise in the New York-New Jersey coastal area (FEMA 2013, p. 7). Future sea level rise is not directly considered in FEMA s regulatory flood insurance studies and mapping (Accurti & Mahoney, 2012). Flood Insurance Studies (FIS) draw on both historic and current data of rates and intensity of flood events. Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), derived from these studies, do not account for predicted future climate changes that may impact the intensity or frequency of flood events, like sea level rise or changes in tropical storm or precipitation rates more broadly. FIS and FIRMs do account for historical relative sea level rise as they use present day sea level and topography. The flood studies and insurance maps are regulatory products used to guide flood hazard and floodplain management efforts at both the federal and state level. Non-regulatory products, such as Risk MAP, can illustrate storm impacts with larger surges than the threshold contained in FIRMs. The community s risks of flooding can be further analyzed using such products. The Coastal Increased Inundation Areas (CIIA) map is a non-regulatory product that shows the inundation areas of the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) as well as an additional 1 ft, 2 ft, and 3 ft of flood water depth. Local planners can draw on this map to determine what impacts they could expect if flood elevations were deeper than the BFE. The following Florida counties have been funded for CIIA mapping: Florida (NWFWMD): Escambia, Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, Walton, Bay, Gulf, Franklin, Wakulla and Jefferson. Florida (SRWMD): Taylor, Dixie, Levy (product put together by RAMPP, rolled out by SRWMD). Florida: Citrus, Hernando, Pasco, Pinellas, Hillsborough, Manatee, Brevard, Indian River, Martin, St. Lucie, Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, Flagler and Volusia U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) provides a range of tools and services to facilitate sea level rise planning efforts. In particular, the Corps provides a guidance document for considering sea level rise in the design 46

57 of civil works projects (USACE, 2011) and provides sea level rise projection information that can be used to develop sea level rise inundation scenarios. A new web-based interface, the Corps Sea Level Change Calculator, allows users to identify a NOAA tide station reference and generate sea level change curves and tabular data (USACE, 2013). This information can be used to develop a range of projections based on NRC (1987) intermediate and high curves as well as the historic trend based on tide gauge records. Users can also produce curves based on a more recent projection curves developed by NOAA (Parris et al., 2012). Tabular data can be downloaded to define alternative projection scenarios. The tool also provides information on estimating the effects of sea level rise on special flood hazard area (SFHA) 1 percent annual flood elevations, a way of accounting for sea level rise in coastal storms and coastal flooding scenarios. Appendix 2, section A2-8 provides a synopsis of the web-based calculator while Section 3 describes the projection methods National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has a range of products and other resources that can provide institutional capacity for both technical services and planning processes related to sea level rise adaptation. At a basic level, NOAA supplies tide gauge data which allow the user to track local relative sea level changes. The agency s Sea Levels Online website provides trend data and plots based on the historic record at each station (NOAA CO-OPS, 2013). NOAA also maintains a website for the U.S. Interagency Elevation Inventory with up-to-date DEM data for the state of Florida and other areas (NOAA CSC, 2013a). As described in Appendix 2, NOAA has developed three other important resources: The online sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts viewer (see section A2-6.2) The online sea level rise tool for Sandy recovery (see section A2-6.3). A basic introduction to mapping coastal inundation from sea level rise (see section A2-6.1) The NOAA Coastal Services Center (CSC) maintains a widely used online visualization tool, the Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer (NOAA CSC, 2013b), which allows users to depict inundation levels from 1 to 6 feet above mean higher high water (MHHW) in onefoot increments. Users can display a range of layers including social and economic vulnerability index scores, loss and migration of coastal marshes, the confidence level of projected inundation areas, and more. NOAA allows 47

58 users to obtain the underlying DEMs and the GIS layer files for further analysis and planning. The Sandy recovery tool (NOAA, 2013b) allows users in the areas of New Jersey and New York impacted by Hurricane Sandy to visualize the effects of future sea level scenarios on the boundaries of the coastal 1 percent annual special flood hazard areas (SFHA) which are the basis for the National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance rate maps. The tool applies the sea level rise projections developed by NOAA for the National Climate Assessment (Parris et al., 2102). This tool is complemented by the addition of a base flood elevation (BFE) input variable in the Corps of Engineers online Sea Level Change Calculator tool (see above Section and Appendix 2 section A2-9). The Corps tool allows a user to estimate the incremental effects of sea level rise on SFHA flood elevations. NOAA also provides technical assistance for coastal managers seeking to undertake sea level rise adaptation planning. The CSC recently published a basic introduction to mapping coastal inundation from sea level rise (NOAA CSC, 2102a). The Coastal Inundation Mapping Resources program provides training to support floodplain managers in building the capacity to produce their own sea level rise inundation scenarios starting with LiDAR data to produce digital elevation models (DEMs) and mapping sea level rise using modeled tidal surfaces and projections. NOAA is clearly well positioned to provide tools and services related to sea level rise planning. Indeed, the agency is probably the leading federal entity involved in sea level rise planning efforts. In particular, the agency has the technical capabilities to develop and deliver high-resolution DEMs and integrate sea level rise projection data. Moreover, the existing services of the agency provide a robust visualization tool for awareness building and technical training to enable local planners and managers to undertake more detailed vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning efforts National Estuarine Research Reserves The National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) system, as part of NOAA, has the capacity to undertake regional planning efforts for sea level rise adaptation. With three NERRs in Florida (Apalachicola, Guana Tolomato Matanzas, and Rookery Bay), Florida has a NERR presence in both the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. FDEP is the state partner for the NERRs in Florida. All NERR staff are FDEP employees. One project of particular interest is a three-year initiative by the Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve (GTM NERR) utilizing a multi-stakeholder collaborative process to develop science and planning tools for sea level 48

59 rise adaptation. The project team is developing sea level rise vulnerability assessments to present to a range of stakeholder representatives who will subsequently develop sea level rise adaptation scenarios to be presented at a regional workshop in As stated on the program website, the data generated, such as geospatial modeling and analysis results (maps), will be publicly available. Beyond the report and data, we hope to achieve local commitment to continue to plan for sea level rise, with identified processes for doing so (GTM NERR, 2013). As described by one of the project team leaders, The project team has conducted SLAMM runs for a range of sea level rise scenarios to the year We are anticipating future development patterns based on land suitability for an approximately fifty year time horizon, to the year We will use this information, along with habitat and species models, principles of conservation ecology, and public input, to design spatially explicit habitat migration corridors (Frank, 2013). The project aims to provide guides on planning processes to other NERR system sites, state planning agencies, natural resource management agencies, and potentially other coastal areas. Another NERR based project funded by NOAA is exploring sea level rise impacts on ecological systems in the northern Gulf of Mexico (Alizad, Bilskie, & Passeri, 2013). This project is based out of the NERRs in the Apalachicola, Weeks Bay, Alabama, and Grand Bay, Mississippi. A team of researchers from the University of Central Florida is helping conduct some of the analyses and is working on a visualization tool for ecological effects of sea level rise. Based on these projects, NERRs have the potential to be a source of data and information on sea level rise scenarios and impacts on natural resources and ecological systems U.S. Environmental Protection Agency The USEPA has been focused on supporting sea level rise planning since at least 1995 when the agency convened several panels of experts to assist in preparing the report The Probability of Sea Level Rise (Titus & Narayanan, 1995). This initiative developed a method for calculating sea level rise projections for specific locations by constructing a probabilistic model of sea level rise to apply to NOAA tide station data. With funding from EPA, Florida RPCs used the Titus and Narayanan method to conduct sea level rise adaptation assessments in the early 2000s. This project was part of a larger EPA effort to conduct assessments of developed land at risk of inundation due to sea level rise along the Atlantic Coast from Massachusetts to Florida (Titus, et al. 2009). Furthermore, EPA provided technical support to the South Florida Regional Climate Change Compact s efforts to develop its climate change action plan. 49

60 The agency also has provided financial and technical support for sea level rise vulnerability assessments as part of the Climate Ready Estuaries program, a partnership between the USEPA and National Estuary Program to assess climate change vulnerabilities in coastal areas, develop and implement adaptation strategies, engage and educate stakeholders, and share the lessons learned with other coastal managers (USEPA, 2013c). EPA is the lead agency for managing the National Estuary Program (NEP) which engages in collaborative planning and adaptive management efforts to support programs in 28 estuaries designated as nationally significant. Four estuaries in Florida are part of the NEP: Charlotte Harbor, Tampa Bay, Sarasota Bay, and Indian River Lagoon. All four of the Florida NEPs have supported regional and local vulnerability assessments and sea level rise adaptation planning efforts, as highlighted on the Climate Ready Estuaries website (USEPA, 2013d): In collaboration with the SWFRPC, the Charlotte Harbor NEP conducted a vulnerability assessment, identified climate change indicators, developed conceptual ecological models of climate change and worked with the City of Punta Gorda, Florida to develop adaptation options. The SWFRPC provided much of the technical capacity for conducting the regional assessment of climate change vulnerability. The Indian River Lagoon NEP assisted the City of Satellite Beach to assess its sensitivity to sea level rise and is investigating changes in wetland habitat to inform future land-use and conservation plans. The Sarasota Bay Estuary Program is developing an adaptation plan that includes public outreach and supports updating local comprehensive plans with adaptation measures. The Tampa Bay Estuary Program is working to identify actions for improving resiliency in estuarine restoration and protection plans in all coastal communities along the Gulf Coast. Based on these experiences, the USEPA is well positioned to provide scientific support and some funding to facilitate the use of sea level rise projections and development of vulnerability assessments by local and regional agencies in Florida Non-Governmental Organizations Climate Central [Surging Seas] Climate Central, an independent organization of scientists and journalists focused on developing climate mitigation and adaptation information and 50

61 tools, is in the process of updating its sea level rise vulnerability assessment tool, Surging Seas (Climate Central, 2013d). The current product includes a web-based visualization tool similar to the NOAA CSC s Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer (NOAA CSC, 2103b), but with greater utility. Users can depict scenarios of sea level rise plus storm surge 1 for one-foot height intervals from 1 to 10 feet above local mean high water relative to 2009 (Strauss, Tebaldi, & Ziemlinski, 2102, pp. 4; 12). Decade balloons mark 55 tide stations for which there is at least a 1-in-6 chance of the selected water level occurring at least once during the time interval relative to Surging Seas 2.0 will include Risk Finder, an interactive data toolkit that shows populations, infrastructure, and assets exposed to coastal flooding aggravated by sea level rise (Climate Central, 2013a). According to the website for the tool, The Risk Finder incorporates the latest, highresolution, high-accuracy lidar elevation data from NOAA and assesses exposure of countless infrastructure and other elements from airports to road miles, from schools to hospitals to wastewater treatment plants in order to allow users to tabulate and tally vulnerability by zip code, legislative districts, agency districts, planning districts, and other administrative units, from local through state through federal levels (Climate Central, 2013a). The data underlying the tool will be downloadable and the tool will be able to generate interactive maps, tables and figures as well as risk timelines and other tools for assessing vulnerability to sea level rise. For more information, see Appendix 2, A New England Environmental Finance Center [COAST] The Coastal Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Tool (COAST) is a Global Mapper SDK software product that predicts damages from varying amounts of sea level rise and storms of various intensities and evaluates relative benefits and costs of [adaptive] response strategies (New England Environmental Finance Center, 2013). It uses tide gauge data and locally derived data on vulnerable assets (real estate, economic activity, infrastructure, natural resources, human health, others) and candidate adaptation actions wherever possible. Users enter their own data, including tabular eustatic sea level rise curve data and annual average rate of sea level rise for the nearest tide station. A tutorial data set apparently includes eustatic sea level rise 1 Apparently Climate Central uses the term storm surge to represent the historic 1 percent annual coastal flood (Strauss, Tebaldi, & Ziemlinski, 2102, p. 4). 2 Their odds calculations assume that 90 percent of global sea level rise since 1880 has resulted from global warming (Strauss, Tebaldi, & Ziemlinski, 2102, p. 12). 51

62 projections derived from Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009). COAST output is in the form of files compatible with Google Earth, and tables showing cumulative expected damages for the selected vulnerable asset under the adaptation scenarios stakeholders have developed, that allow cost benefit analysis of candidate adaptation actions.... (New England Environmental Finance Center, 2013). These files can be converted to shapefiles for use in ArcGIS. For more details see Appendix 2, A The Nature Conservancy The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has a particular interest in providing tools to communities that account for climate change vulnerabilities of natural resource assets and habitats that contribute to biodiversity. The organization is the lead in a collaborative initiative to develop the Coastal Resilience Network Flood Scenario plugin tools, an online suite of decision support tools to provide basic information on the vulnerability of natural resource assets for sea level rise and storm surge scenarios (see description in Appendix 2, A2-3). The tool is primarily a visualization tool as it is not designed to deliver digital output for further analysis. TNC is also engaged with partner, most notably the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, to examine the effects of sea level rise on sensitive ecosystems. In particular, the organization has sought to support efforts in modeling ecological changes related to sea level rise and climate change in the Keys. TNC can contribute expertise, data and information to local and regional planning entities seeking to integrate natural resources assets into vulnerability assessments. The most likely role for TNC would be as a partner, a role the organization has played in a range of ecological restoration, monitoring, and growth management efforts in Florida The Natural Capital Project [InVEST] Based at Stanford University, The Natural Capital Project has developed a GIS-based Coastal Vulnerability Model (CVM) as part of its multidimensional InVEST tool for quantifying and mapping the values of environmental services and identifying areas where investment may enhance human well-being and nature (The Natural Capital Project, 2012). The CVM can be used to calculate a vulnerability index for the impacts of erosion and inundation on coastal communities that accounts for projected change in sea level. By showing the areas where coastal populations are threatened and highlighting the relative role of natural habitat at reducing exposure, the model can be used, in a simple way, to investigate how some management action or land use change can affect the exposure of human populations to erosion and inundation. The model produces thematic 52

63 shoreline maps based on the vulnerability index, with a coarse spatial resolution ( 250 meters). Users must create their own input GIS layer representing net sea level change. For details see Appendix 2, A Warren Pinnacle Consulting [SLAMM] The Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) simulates changes in the area and habitat type of tidal marshes in response to long-term changes in sea level (Warren Pinnacle Consulting, 2013). The model simulates five processes associated with sea level rise: inundation and associated salt boundary migration, sediment erosion, barrier island overwash, soil saturation from rising ground water elevation, and sediment accretion. Required input data include a DEM, NOAA tidal data, Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory data, and estimates of local subsidence and isostatic adjustment. Model outputs include tabular data and Microsoft Word and raster GIS layers of tidal marsh changes for the projected time period. The raster GIS layers can be used to provide inundation scenarios by reclassification to depict only the open water classes. Users may choose from a variety of options for estimating future eustatic sea level rise based on a series of 2100 end points (Clough et al., 2010, pp. 5-8). These include eustatic sea level rise curves based on the IPCC s 2001 third assessment report for a variety of SRES scenarios, eustatic curves for three pre-specified 2100 sea level elevations: 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 meters, and a eustatic curve for a user-specified 2100 sea level elevation. Local relative sea level can then be estimated in one of two ways that correct for local subsidence and isostatic adjustment (Clough et al., 2010, p. 4). For more information, see Appendix 2, A Summary/Synthesis We summarize this section by identifying entities that have the ability to provide the products needed by local governments and regional planning agencies to integrate sea level rise inundation scenarios into their adaptation planning. These product needs include visualization tools, sea level rise impact layers, storm surge/flood hazard area change projections and shapefiles, sea level rise inundation shapefiles, sea level rise scenario development technical assistance, sea level rise projections, LiDAR data and/ or DEMs, and vulnerability assessment tools and technical assistance. There is a range of organizations and agencies that can provide some or all of these 53

64 needs. Also, there are existing products that supply some of these needs. Table 2.1 summarizes the capacities of different regional, state, federal, and non-governmental organizations as well as a range of tools available Visualization Tools Visualization tools are primarily aimed at raising awareness of public officials and stakeholders as well as for basic scenario planning efforts. Tools for these purposes simply require the user to have online access and a basic understanding of simple spatial principles such as those that a user might need to navigate an online mapping interface such as Google Maps. Existing online tools fill this need quite effectively (e.g. NOAA Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer, NOAA s Sea Level Rise Tool for Sandy Recovery, Climate Central s Surging Seas, the Coastal Resilience Network Flood Scenario online decision support tool, and FDOT s Sketch Planning Tool). Some local and regional agencies in Florida have already used the NOAA sea level rise viewer to raise awareness among the public and elected officials Sea Level Rise Impact Layers A range of tools provide GIS layers that depict sea level rise impacts on different assets. SLAMM produces layers that show the impacts of sea level rise on coastal wetland systems. InVEST depicts how the removal of coastal ecosystems will change flooding impacts on both social and ecological assets. COAST predicts damages to vulnerable assets based on both sea level rise and storm surge models. The Climate Central Surging Seas tool will provide a range of impact layers, including an assessment of vulnerable populations and assets. The FDOT Sketch Planning Tool also provides downloadable GIS layers, at this point focused on the impacts of sea level rise on transportation infrastructure. The FWC has provided SLAMM model outputs to others such as TNC for inclusion in the Coastal Resilience Network Flood Scenario online decision support tool that is under development Storm Surge/Special Flood Hazard Area A few agencies are beginning to take storm surge into account. RPCs are initiating a process to run storm surge models to project the impacts of hurricanes with a wider array of trajectories than those used to produce the most recent hurricane evacuation studies. They expect to include sea level rise in this effort going forward. NOAA s Sandy Recovery Tool, the USACE, and FEMA all have begun to integrate sea level rise into special flood hazard area (SFHA) boundaries. None of the other tools currently available assesses 54

65 Table 2.1 Institutional Capacity to Provide Sea Level Rise Planning Needs* * This table does not reflect a comprehensive review of the capabilities of organizations, agencies, and products. A blank cell does not indicate the absence of capacity; it simply means that we did not uncover evidence of the agency or organization providing the product or service. D = DEM; L = LiDAR; IP = in progress; TA = technical assistance; X = available;? = may be available. 55

66 storm surge or flooding hazards. Instead, they take a bathtub approach to modeling simple sea level rise inundation. Under its Risk MAP initiative, FEMA is preparing non-regulatory Coastal Increased Inundation Area maps that show the Base Flood Elevation plus the areas that could be inundated by an additional 1, 2, and 3 feet of flood water. These can be used to add a buffer to account for coastal flood storm surges greater than the current 1 percent annual flood and thus can be used to account for the effects of sea level rise on coastal flood elevations GIS Shapefiles of Sea Level Rise Scenarios Some local governments have the capacity to turn DEMs and projections into shapefiles of inundation layers, but many prefer to have inundation shapefiles provided. FEMA s Risk Map initiative eventually will have shapefiles available for sea level rise effects on the 1% annual flood zone. The Climate Central Surging Seas Risk Finder also aims to provide downloadable shapefiles of inundation layers. The GeoPlan team developing the FDOT Sketch Planning Tool provides downloadable shapefiles for preloaded inundation layers. The team is also is working to provide the DEMs and projections as well as instructions on how to make shapefiles if users want to construct their own shapefiles and inundation layers. SLAMM output can be reclassified to show inundation areas for users with interests broader than sea level rise impacts on coastal wetlands. Some RPCs have demonstrated the capacity to build inundation layers and deliver shapefiles to local governments Sea Level Rise Scenario Development Technical Assistance A range of agencies can provide technical assistance to local or regional entities undertaking sea level rise scenario development. Many of the RPCs have the capacity to provide an array of technical assistance services to local governments and other regional agencies if they have the necessary funding either from outside grants or through contracts with local governments. These services range from developing the sea level rise scenarios to engaging in planning processes to raising awareness or working through scenarios for adaptation planning purposes. The FWC is in the process of developing a guidebook for use by managers who seek to understand the impacts of sea level rise on wildlife and ecological systems. NOAA s Coastal Services Center also provides training and technical assistance to users who need support in constructing sea level rise scenarios or using NOAA data inputs. 56

67 2.4.6 Sea Level Rise Projections The primary sources of sea level rise projections include NOAA, USACE, and USEPA. NOAA s sea levels online website provides historic trend sea level rise rates from NOAA tide stations. NOAA also prepared a technical support document for the National Climate Assessment that presents four global eustatic sea level rise scenarios based on the most current science. The USACE web-base sea level rise calculator generates local relative sea level rise curves and tabular output at 5-year intervals for several scenarios. The Corps tool also allows a user to estimate the incremental effects of sea level rise on special flood hazard area 1 percent annual flood elevations. Finally, the USEPA methodology developed by Titus and Narayanan in 1995 has been used by several RPCs in Florida to calculate local relative sea level rise. Several other regional agencies, particularly those in south Florida such as the SFWMD, SWFRPC, and Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact, have produced sea level rise projections that can be used by others. Existing tools incorporate sea level rise projections, and in some cases, users can choose among a range of projection options for creating inundation scenarios. SLAMM has sea level rise scenarios based on IPCC projections built into the model and allows the user to input other projections. The FDOT Sketch Planning Tool will allow users to use the default projections based on USACE projection curves LiDAR Data and DEMs Florida s Division of Emergency Management is a repository for LiDAR data that can be used to develop DEMs. Several of the WMDs also provide access to LiDAR data. Some of the WMDs and RPCs have worked on regional LiDAR data, refining and cleaning data for use in a variety of planning contexts, including constructing DEMs. Many RPCs provide access to DEMs which can be downloaded. The NOAA Coastal Services Center also provides downloadable DEMs. The FDOT Sketch Planning Tool allows users to download the underlying DEM, as will Climate Central s next version of Surging Seas Vulnerability Assessment Tools An array of vulnerability assessment tools have been or are being produced by multiple non-governmental organizations and public agencies. Many produce vulnerability assessment impact layers, and in some cases, sea level rise inundation scenario layers, that users can download. Climate Central s Surging Seas Risk Mapper will produce COAST, the Coastal 57

68 Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Tool, is a damage assessment software product that predicts damages from varying amounts of sea level rise and storms of various intensities and evaluates relative benefits and costs of response strategies. The Coastal Resilience Network Flood Scenario online decision support tool which is still under development, will allow users to assess ecological, social, and economic dimensions of vulnerability to sea level rise and storm surge. The InVEST Coastal Vulnerability model estimates how direct and indirect removal of natural habitats for coastal development can affect exposure to storm-induced erosion and flooding, including the effects of sea level rise. SLAMM, the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model, simulates changes in the area and habitat type of tidal marshes in response to long-term changes in sea level. The University of Florida GeoPlan Center is developing a sea level scenario Sketch Planning Tool for FDOT that can be used to identify transportation infrastructure that may be inundated under a variety of sea level rise scenarios. This tool has the potential to meet the sea level rise projection and vulnerability assessment needs of local, regional, and state agencies across almost the entire spectrum of technology needs and capacities Vulnerability Assessment Technical Assistance A wide range of regional, state, and federal agencies have demonstrated the capacity to provide technical assistance to other entities undertaking vulnerability assessments. In particular, WMDs, RPCs, and the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact have all participated in facilitating or taking the lead in developing vulnerability assessments at county and regional scales. The FWC is in process of developing a guidebook for managers conducting vulnerability assessments of ecological assets. NOAA s Coastal Services Center has the potential to provide a range of technical services as demonstrated by the agency s support of the users of the Sandy Recovery Tool and the vulnerability assessment training available through the center. And, the GeoPlan Center expects to provide user support for FDOT s Sketch Planning Tool. Each of the providers of the available vulnerability assessment tools provides some level of technical support for users Role of Partnerships and Collaboration One of the key findings of this report regarding institutional capacity is that collaborative partnerships can facilitate the development and use of sea level rise data and information. The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact and the Southeast Florida Regional Partnership, the partnerships used by the SWRPC and Charlotte Harbor NEP, and the participation of 58

69 federal and state agencies in various aspects of the work generated by these collaborations serve as useful examples. The collaborations are sometimes formally structured through a memorandum of understanding (MOU) or other document such as for the Southeast Regional Compact and the Southeast Regional Partnership. Other entities are clearly using partnerships even if not formally structured through an MOU or other agreement. The SWFRPC and Charlotte Harbor NEP, for example, drew on partnerships with multiple local governments, the SWWMD and other federal and state agencies to conduct much of the work accomplished on sea level rise to date in that region. And, the Matanzas Basin Plan also relies on a strong partnership with a range of stakeholders and organizational and agency representatives. These ad-hoc collaborative institutional models are potentially replicable in other areas of the state vulnerable to sea level rise. These partnerships point to the fact that combining resources, technical capacities, and working with a range of inputs through working groups and technical advisory committees can be a very effective way to come up with the necessary computing power, unified and agreed upon sources of data and information about sea level rise, and development of sea level rise scenarios for the purpose of generating inundation maps for vulnerability assessments. These collaborations allow local government planners and specialists to draw on regional, state, and national expertise as they develop vulnerability assessments and scenario planning processes for sea level rise. This model suggests that a multi-scalar and multi-jurisdictional institutional approach might be an appropriate way to integrate sea level rise scenarios and projections into planning in state, regional, and local contexts. These collaborations can be highly effective at generating region-wide and local analyses relevant for various planning entities by combining the efforts of users and producers of technical information about sea level rise. The partnerships have made substantial progress toward integrating sea level rise into local and regional planning efforts across multiple jurisdictions in a coherent way. They hold significant promise for region-wide approaches to engaging in sea level rise adaptation planning in Florida going forward. 2.5 References Cited Accurti, B., & Mahoney, T. (2012). Sea level rise and the National Flood Insurance Program talking points. Retrieved from southeastcoastalmaps.com/siteassets/pages/documents/coordination_ mtgs/slr Talking Points docx. 59

70 Alizad, K., Bilskie, M.V., & & Passeri, D. (2013). Integrated modeling of hydrodynamics and marsh evolution under sea level rise in Apalachicola, Florida. Florida Watershed Journal. Retrieved from flwatershedjournal.org/?p=248. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Cobb, D., Utley, J., & Beever, L.B. (2009a). Comprehensive Southwest Florida/Charlotte Harbor climate change vulnerability assessment. Ft. Myers, FL: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Retrieved from Natural_Resources/Ecosystem_Services/Vulnerability_Assessment_ Final.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Cobb, D., Utley, J., Hutchinson, D., Gibbons, J., Abimbola, M., Beever, L.B., & Ott, J. (2009b). Adaptation plan for the City of Punta Gorda. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council and Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program, Technical Report Retrieved from Resources/Ecosystem_Services/Punta_Gorda_Adaptation_Plan.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Cobb, D., Utley, J., Hutchinson, D. (2010a). Lee County climate change vulnerability assessment. Ft. Myers, FL: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council and Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program. Retrieved from gov/dept/sustainability/documents/lee%20county%20climate%20 Change%20Vulnerability%20Assessment%20Final%20201.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Utley, J., Hutchinson, D., Walker, T., & Cobb, D. (2010b). Lee County climate change resiliency strategy. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Retrieved from _Services/Lee_ County_Climate_Change_Resiliency_Strategy.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Beever, L.B., Cobb, D., & Walker, T. (2011). Climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation opportunities for salt marsh types in southwest Florida. 379 pp. Retrieved from swfrpc.org/content/natural_resources/ecosystem_services/salt%20 Marsh%20Study%202012%20FINAL%20reduced.pdf. Beever, J.W., & Walker, T. (2013). Estimating and forecasting ecosystem services within Pine Island Sound, Sanibel Island, Captiva Island, North Captiva Island, Cayo Costa Island, Useppa Island, other islands of the sound, and the nearshore Gulf of Mexico. Retrieved from swfrpc.org/content/natural_resources/ecosystem_services/ _ Estimating_and_Forecasting_Ecosystem_Services_complete.pdf. 60

71 Butgereit, R. (2013a). LiDAR and SLOSH statewide GIS coordination. Retrieved from resmgr/2013_winter_conference_presentations/butgereit_florida_ lidarcoord.pdf. Butgereit, R. (2013b). Personal communication, July 30. Florida Division of Emergency Management. Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP). (2010). Charlotte Harbor climate change vulnerability assessment. Retrieved from Regional%20Vulnerability%20Assessment.pdf. Climate Central. (2013a). Coming soon, a major expansion of surging seas. Retrieved from Climate Central. (2013b). About Surging Seas map: Map accuracy. Retrieved from Climate Central (2013c). Projecting sea level rise. Retrieved from sealevel.climatecentral.org/research/methods/projecting-sea-level-rise/. Climate Central (2013d). Surging seas. Retrieved from climatecentral.org/surgingseas/. Clough, J.S., Park, R.A., & Fuller, R. (2010). SLAMM 6 beta technical documentation. Release beta. Retrieved from com/prof/slamm6/slamm6_technical_documentation.pdf. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2011). Coastal construction manual: Principles and practices of planning, siting, designing, constructing, and maintaining residential buildings in coastal areas. Fourth edition, P-55. Retrieved from gov/library/viewrecord.do?id=1671. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2013). Designing for flood levels above the BFE after Hurricane Sandy. RA5. Retrieved from sandy_ra5_design_above_bfe_final_508_rev_2.pdf. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC). (2011). Florida s wildlife legacy initiative: Florida s state wildlife action plan. Retrieved from 61

72 Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve (GTM NERR). (2013). Planning for sea level rise in the Matanzas Basin. Retrieved from Harrington, N. (2010). NW FL Water Management District participates in sea level rise study. WCTV News. Retrieved from news/headlines/ html?site=mobile National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2013a). National Estuary Research Reserve System. Retrieved from nerrs.noaa.gov/. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2013b). Sea level rise planning tool - New Jersey and New York State (Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester Counties). Retrieved from noaa.gov/home/item.html?id=3097fc32e98f490cbacc e9. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2013c). NOAA sentinel site program. Retrieved from gov/sentinelsites/. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (NOAA CO-OPS). (2013). Sea levels online. Retrieved from sltrends.shtml. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2012a). Mapping coastal inundation primer. Retrieved from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2013a). U.S. interagency elevation inventory. Retrieved from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2013b). Sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts viewer. Retrieved from National Research Council (NRC). (1987). Responding to changes in sea level: Engineering implications. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. New England Environmental Finance Center. (2013). COAST v.1.0. Retrieved from Parris, A., Bromirski, P., Burkett, V., Cayan, D., Culver, M., Hall, J., Horton, R., Knuuti, K., Moss, R., Obeysekera, J., Sallenger, A., & Weiss, J. (2012). 62

73 Global sea level rise scenarios for the US National Climate Assessment. NOAA Tech Memo OAR CPO-1. Retrieved from sites/cpo/reports/2012/noaa_slr_r3.pdf. South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). (2009). Climate change and water management in South Florida. Retrieved from pdf/climate_change_and_water_management_in_sflorida_12nov2009. pdf Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2011). A unified sea level rise projection for southeast Florida. Retrieved from themes/summit/pdf/sea%20level%20rise.pdf. Seven50.org. (2013). Local experts begin drafting Seven50 Plan for southeast Florida s future. Retrieved from Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2012a). Analysis of vulnerability of Southeast Florida to sea level rise. Retrieved from Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2012b). A region responds to a changing climate. Retrieved from southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org/pdf/regional%20climate%20 Action%20Plan%20FINAL%20ADA%20Compliant.pdf. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC). (2013a). Natural resources: Climate change. Retrieved from climate_change.html. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC). (2013b). CHNEP/ SWFRPC climate ready programs. Retrieved from org/content/natural_resources/climate_change/climate_change.pdf The Natural Capital Project. (2012). The need for a new tool. InVEST documentation. invest-releases/documentation/current_release/the_need_for. html#introduction. Titus, J.G., Hudgens, D.E., Trescott, D.L., Craghan, M., Nuckols, W.H., Hershner, C.H., Kassakian, J.M., Linn, C.J., Merritt, P.G., McCue, T.M., O Connell, J.F., Tanski, J., & Wang, J. (2009). State and local 63

74 governments plan for development of most land vulnerable to rising sea level along the US Atlantic coast. Environmental Research Letters, 4. DOI: / /4/4/ Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. (2005). Sea level rise in the Treasure Coast region. Retrieved from projects/tcrpc%20slr%20report% pdf. Trimble, P.J., Santee, E.R., & Neidrauer, C.J. (1998). Preliminary estimate of impacts of sea level rise on the regional water resources of southeastern Florida. Retrieved from pg_grp_sfwmd_hesm_pubs/portlet_hesm_publications/tab / searise.pdf. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2011). Sea-level change considerations for civil works programs. EC Retrieved from EC Nov2011.pdf. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2013). Sea level change curves. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2013a). Federal and EPA adaptation programs. Retrieved from: climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2013b). Southeast impacts and adaptations. Retrieved from: gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/southeast.html#adapt. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2013c). National Estuary Program overview. Retrieved from oceb/nep/index.cfm. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2013d). Climate ready estuaries. Retrieved from index.cfm. United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2013). National elevation dataset. Retrieved from United States Global Change Research Program. (2013). Sea level rise tool for Sandy recovery. Retrieved from 64

75 Vermeer, M. & Rahmstorf, S. (2009). Global sea level linked to global temperature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(51), DOI: / pnas Warren Pinnacle Consulting. (2013). SLAMM: Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model. Retrieved from 65

76 66

77 Section 3: Pros and Cons of Using Consistent Sea Level Rise Projections in Florida 3.1 Introduction In this section we take up the central issue of this analysis: What are the pros and cons of developing and using consistent sea level rise projections for adaptation planning in the State of Florida. In so doing we consider six dimensions of sea level rise projections: (1) geographic scale and spatial resolution and accuracy, (2) tide gauge station, (3) tidal datum, (4) projection method, (5) projection estimate, and (6) time horizon. We begin by outlining several generic points about the pros and cons of promoting consistency among the various local, regional, and state actors engaged in sea level rise adaptation. We then examine each of the projection dimensions in turn and assess how those pros and cons apply to the individual dimensions. We ground our analysis in our understanding, documented in Section 1, of the three elements of adaptation planning for which local, regional, and state agencies are using future sea level rise projections: (1) awareness building, (2) vulnerability assessment, and (3) assessing adaptation alternatives. 3.2 Pros and Cons of Statewide Consistency Pros A single consistent statewide projection of future sea level rise can facilitate awareness building, particularly with national and state elected officials who may express frustration and/or confusion when they hear different stories from different groups. Developing such a common narrative for communicating with federal elected officials was a major motivation behind formation of the Southeast Regional Climate Change Compact. A consistent statewide projection that multiple users can apply in different settings would simplify the logistics of production, 67

78 Cons maintenance, and distribution, which could be done by a single institution. State agencies that administer regulatory or funding programs that account for sea level rise may want to use a consistent sea level rise projection for equity and efficiency. For example, a state grant program for coastal flood hazard mitigation might require all applicants to use the same approach to estimating the effects of sea level rise on future flood elevations. Development of a consistent statewide projection for use across multiple state-level decision contexts would avoid sending confusing signals to regional and local officials and interest groups, simplify the effort required to comply with the guidelines and requirements of different state agencies, and send a clear signal to these constituencies about credible projections for use in local regional and local decision making. Use of a consistent statewide projection across regional and local jurisdictions would promote inter-jurisdictional policy coordination such as currently practiced in defining special flood hazard areas under FEMA. A number of state, regional, and local entities have already begun sea level rise adaptation initiatives, some of which are using sea level rise projections that differ on one or more dimension. Examples include Broward, Lee, and Levy Counties, the cities of Punta Gorda and Satellite Beach, the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact, the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Differences in one or more projection dimensions might be better for different decision contexts. 3.3 Geographic Scale and Spatial Resolution and Accuracy The geographic scales of maps used for the three elements of adaptation planning (visualization, vulnerability assessment, and analyzing adaptation alternatives) range from statewide (typically about 1:250,000), to regional (1:100,000), county and city (1:24,000) and, potentially, to the neighborhood or project scale (1:1,200). The corresponding demands for horizontal spatial resolution also vary. 68

79 For awareness building, planners may employ online simulation tools that allow the user to zoom to various geographic scales. See for example, the description in Appendix 2 of the NOAA Coastal Services Center s Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer. Planners also may use digital or paper maps of their planning jurisdictions to illustrate areas that may be inundated by future sea level rise. These applications do not require high levels of spatial resolution or accuracy because they do not involve developing formal policies for specific areas or adaptation measures for specific natural or capital assets. Figure 3-1 depicts an image from the NOAA Impacts Viewer for 2 feet of sea level rise in the Tampa Bay area. Figure 3-2 displays the map of priority planning areas for sea level rise included in the Broward County comprehensive plan which serves to raise awareness of the areas of the county where more detailed vulnerability assessment and adaptation alternatives analysis may be appropriate. Figure 3-1. NOAA Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer depiction of 2 feet of sea level rise in Tampa Bay area. Source: NOAA CSC (2013). 69

80 Planners typically use vulnerability assessments to identify specific natural or capital assets that may be at risk for one or more time horizons and two or more sea level projection scenarios. For these applications, and for analyzing alternative adaptation strategies for reducing that vulnerability, planners need sea level rise inundation maps with the highest practical levels of spatial resolution and vertical and horizontal accuracy. Spatial resolution and horizontal accuracy are determined by the digital elevation model (DEM) upon which the inundation layer is based. Vertical accuracy is a function of elevation data upon which the DEM is based. Figure 3-2. Broward County Comprehensive Plan map of priority planning areas for sea level rise. Source: Broward County Commission (2012). Florida is fortunate to have very high vertical and horizontal accuracy LiDAR data compiled by the State Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) as part of the state s 2006 initiative to update its hurricane evacuation studies (Florida Senate, 2010; South Florida Regional Planning Council, 2013). These data meet specifications developed for publicly funded projects in Florida by a coalition of state and federal agencies including among others, FDEM, Florida Water Management Districts (WMDs), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District (FDEM, 2008). The vertical accuracy of that 70

81 data is at least 0.6 foot (0.18 meter) and the horizontal accuracy is at least 3.8 feet (1.15 meters) (FDEM, 2008, p. 6). However, FDEM has no program for ongoing collection of up-to-date LiDAR. The best sources for the most current LiDAR data are the state s WMDs (Butgereit, 2013b). High resolution DEMs can present practical problems with computer processing time when mapping large geographic areas such as an entire state. Thus the GeoPlan Center at the University of Florida has recently compiled a state-wide digital elevation model (DEM) with a horizontal resolution of 16.4 feet (5 meters) 1 for use in mapping sea level rise inundation for transportation facility planning at the FDOT district level (Thomas, 2013). The highest quality DEMs, with resolutions of 5 feet (1.5 meters), are available from the state s water management districts, mostly off-line because of the very large file sizes (Butgereit, 2013b). Many of the WMDs also have DEMs available on line with resolutions of 10 to 25 feet (3 to 7.6 meters). In another application, the Tampa Bay Estuary Program constructed a 33-foot (10-meter) DEM from FDEM LiDAR as input to the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM v ) to determine coastal habitat conversions and shoreline modifications in the Tampa Bay watershed due to future sea level rise (Sherwood & Greening, 2012, p. 8). Coastal DEMs used in the NOAA Coastal Services Center s Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer have a vertical accuracy of 0.6 foot (0.18 meter) (NOAA CSM 2012b). They cannot be downloaded, but are available upon request from the CSC. Presumably the associated metadata defines the horizontal resolution of the DEMs (see Appendix 2 for more detail). FDEM also maintains a state mosaic of the highest-resolution DEMs available in the state (Butergeit, 2013b). The State of Florida clearly has the high quality data required to prepare the DEMs and inundation maps that local, regional, and state agencies need for all three modes of sea level rise adaptation planning. However, as we detail in Section 1, not all government agencies in the state have the technology, staff, and fiscal resources to produce and analyze their own sea level rise inundation maps and vulnerability assessments. In Section 2 we examine the institutional capacities available to meet those needs as well as the specific tools available to generate local sea level rise projections and apply them to vulnerability assessment and the analysis of adaptation alternatives. 1 Each grid cell represents a square on the ground measuring 5 meters by 5 meters. 71

82 3.3.1 Pros and Cons of Consistent Scale Resolution and Accuracy The vertical accuracy of LiDAR elevation data should meet the standards defined in the specifications maintained by FDEM (2008) pursuant to the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy. We have demonstrated, however, that different modes of sea level rise adaptation planning require different levels of spatial resolution and horizontal accuracy. Some guidance on appropriate scale is warranted, such as the standard admonition in the Florida Geographic Data Library s metadata (FGDL, 2013). However, a single statewide GIS layer representing sea level rise inundation areas or the effects of sea level rise on storm surge zones or special flood hazard areas will not suffice. While there may be valid arguments for statewide consistency for some of the other projection dimensions, specifications for spatial resolution and horizontal accuracy should fit the application. Statewide consistency may make sense, however, within specific contexts, for example: FDEM development of new storm surge maps that account for sea level rise, FDEM guidance for accounting for sea level rise in local mitigation strategies, FDOT guidance to MPOs for accounting for sea level rise in developing long-range transportation plans, Division of Community Planning guidance for preparing adaptation action area maps for local comprehensive plans. 3.4 Tide Gauge Station Tide gauges measure so-called relative sea level rise, which is a function of both changes in the elevation of the sea s surface due to increased volume of water in the world s oceans (eustatic sea level rise) and vertical movement of the land upon which the tide gauge sits due to subsidence or tectonic movement of the earth s crust (see Figure 3-3). Eustatic sea level rise experienced at any particular location is primarily the result of expansion of sea water volume as heat is transferred from the atmosphere to the oceans and increased inflow of water from melting glaciers and polar ice sheets. Regional eustatic sea level rise may differ from global average eustatic sea level rise due to distance from melting glaciers, differential expansion rates due to the salinity and temperature of local surface waters, and the effects of wind and currents on heat transfer between the atmosphere and the oceans (Bindoff et al., 2007). 72

83 Accurate estimates of future local sea levels should account for local vertical land movement and regional eustatic sea level change. Tide station data offer the best records of measured local changes in sea level. Florida has 14 tide stations with sufficiently long records to use for estimating future rates of sea level rise per the Corps of Engineers criterion of 40 years (USACE, 2011). As shown in Figure 3-4, historic trends of relative sea level rise in the state vary from 0.75 mm/yr at Panama City to 2.78 mm/yr at Vaca Key. Parris et al. (2012, p. 9) report that eustatic sea level in the Gulf of Mexico has been rising faster than [the] global trend over the past 60 years. This may be the result of multi-decadal variability or large basin oceanographic effects given that the Gulf of Mexico Figure 3-3. Causes of relative sea level change. is a large, shallow, semienclosed basin. Source: Takle (1997). Ideally, sea level rise projections for any given area should be based on the nearest tide station on the assumption that vertical land movement at a location along the coast will be most similar to the nearest station. That assumption may not always be true, but has to suffice in the absence of more site-specific geologic information. As the scale of analysis moves from local to regional to statewide, the issue of tide station consistency emerges. The GeoPlan center has approached this issue for developing sea level rise projections for FDOT districts by calculating an area-weighted average 2 where there are multiple tide stations on the same coast within a district (see districts 1, 3, 6 and 7 in Figure 3-4) (Thomas, 2013, pp. 15ff). In the case of FDOT District 2, which extends 2 With an area-weighted approach, the planning area, e.g. an FDOT district, is divided into subareas centered around each tide station. The projection assigned to the district is a weighted sum of the projections from each of the tide stations within the district. The weight for each tide station is based on the proportion of the district area surrounding that station. 73

84 Figure 3-4. Florida tide stations and FDOT districts. Source: Figure 3, Thomas et al. (2013). to both the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, the GeoPlan Center has split the district following county boundaries. Since the point of reference for sea level rise projections is typically some location along the coast rather than within the interior of a county or region, there may be merit to using a distance-weighted average, rather than area-weighted 3. Another approach for developing regional or statewide projections is to mosaic separate inundation layers for coastal areas proximate to each tide station. This approach is feasible for producing individual projection products but is not likely to be feasible for user interfaces such as the GeoPlan Center s Sketch Planning Tool (see Section 2 and Appendix 2) Pros and Cons of Consistent Tide Station Reference The most accurate approach for using tide station references is to use data from the closest tide station with an adequate record to develop sea level rise projections. Under certain decision contexts, use of a single consistent statewide estimate of relative sea level by some means of averaging data across the state s multiple tide stations may be necessary where a state agency feels compelled to apply a single statewide projection. Doing so will result in under- and over-projections of future sea level for specific locations, but that level of error may be acceptable in certain planning contexts. However, the general principal should be to refer to the closest station. 3 With a distance-weighted approach, the weight assigned to each tide station is the proportion of the total shoreline within the district that is closest to that station. This could be based on the Florida County Boundaries with Detailed Shoreline.shp polygon (FGDL, 2013). 74

85 3.5 Tidal Datum A tidal datum is a standard elevation defined by a certain phase of the tide that is used as a point of reference for measuring local seawater levels (NOAA, 2013). Many sea level rise projections are based on Mean Sea Level (MSL) datum 4. However, planners may wish to use an alternative tidal datum depending on the context. A number of analysts use or advocate using Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) 5 because such projections reflect the flooding likely on the highest daily tide (see for example NOAA CSC, 2012, p. 7; Titus, 2009). The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact elected to use MHHW as the tidal datum for its sea level rise inundation scenarios (NOAA NOS, 2010, p. 121) Pros and Cons of Consistent Tidal Datum The choice of tidal datum should reflect the sea level rise impacts of concern. Thus, where a state agency elects to provide or require a consistent projection from program participants or permit applicants, they also should specify the tidal datum that serves as the base elevation reference for the projection. Where coastal flooding or erosion is of concern, using the MHHW datum rather than the MSL datum will provide a more accurate estimate of exposure and associated vulnerability. 3.6 Projection Method As we document in Section 1, adaptation planners at various levels of government use future sea level projections in three major ways: (1) awareness building and education, (2) vulnerability assessment, and (3) assessing adaptation alternatives. As we detail below, the substantial uncertainties that continue to attend future projections, both for global average eustatic sea level and local relative sea level, warrant the use of scenarios that span a plausible range of future sea level elevations. However, the required spatial accuracy (How high the water will be and where?) and temporal precision (When?) vary with the application. We consider the spatial resolution and accuracy of the mapping needed for these applications in Section 3.3. Here we summarize the state of the science of sea level rise projection and describe the major methods of sea level projection that planners are using in the United States. We compare their strengths and 4 Mean sea level datum = the arithmetic mean of hourly heights observed over the National Tidal Datum Epoch (NOAA, 2013). 5 Mean Higher High Water = the average of the higher high water height of each tidal day observed over the National Tidal Datum Epoch (NOAA, 2013). 75

86 weaknesses in the context of the three principal coastal resiliency planning applications. We then examine the spatial accuracy and temporal precision tradeoffs of alternative methods of projecting sea level rise. For initial awareness building, especially in settings where climate change remains viewed with strong skepticism by many of the planner s constituents, projections based solely on the long-term historic trend of local relative sea level, as measured by the nearest tide gauge, may suffice. That trend can be illustrated by a graph accompanied by one or more maps that show the approximate areas that would be inundated for various projection time horizons. Such applications do not require high spatial accuracy or temporal precision. Where constituents are receptive to considering the effects of climate change on sea level rise, such scenarios can be based on global eustatic sea level projections that do not also account for regional and local differences from global averages. Vulnerability assessments typically are used to identify geographic areas where natural or capital assets may be at risk for one or a few plan horizons and two or three sea level projection scenarios, e.g. low, medium, and high. For these applications, planners only need estimates of future sea level elevations for a few specific time points, e.g and 2100, but vulnerability assessments require much higher vertical and horizontal spatial accuracy. That accuracy can be moderate where the application involves depicting areas likely to be exposed to future sea level inundation at the scale of a future land use map. Where planners use vulnerability assessment to identify specific capital or natural assets that may be at risk, they need optimal spatial accuracy that reflects regional and local conditions that differ from global averages, including vertical land movement relative to sea level. Adaptation alternative assessment requires the greatest levels of spatial accuracy and temporal precision because planners are typically assessing the benefits and costs of two or more options for adapting to changing sea levels over the design life of a specific new or existing asset and/or adaptation measure. Planners need optimal vertical and horizontal accuracy for inundation projections, so that they can assess benefits and costs as accurately as possible. They also need to be able to estimate the local relative sea level at a specific start time, e.g. the time of construction or adaptation initiation, and a specific end point, e.g. the end of the design life The State of the Science of Sea Level Rise Prediction The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 report), estimated that the long-term annual rate of 76

87 global mean eustatic sea level rise over the 20th century has been about 1.7 mm/yr (± 0.5 mm/yr) (Bindoff et al., 2007, p. 410). The National Research Council (NRC) committee recently convened to estimate future sea level rise for the Pacific Coast of the continental U.S. (NRC, 2012, p. 27) reports that other recent analyses of global tide gauge data since 1900 have yielded similar estimates, namely Church and White (2011) and Shum and Kuo (2011). According to the IPCC AR4 report (Bindoff et al., 2007, pp ), analyses of data from more recent years indicate that the rate has increased and may be accelerating, averaging 1.8 mm/yr (± 0.5 mm/yr) between 1961 and 2003 and 3.1 mm/yr (± 0.7 mm/yr) for satellite data between 1993 and The 2012 NRC committee notes (p. 27) that the historical record of observed sea level change includes periods of both acceleration and deceleration, but observe that other studies have yielded estimates similar to those of the IPCC with long-term ( years) rates of about 1.8 mm yr-1 [mm/yr] estimated from tide gages, and recent (post-1990) rates of about 3.2 mm yr-1 estimated from satellite altimetry and tide gages (pp. 30; 32). Citing Willis et al. (2010), and Shum and Kuo (2011), they suggest that the higher rates measured since 1990 may be due to inter-annual or longer variations in the ocean associated with the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, the North Atlantic Oscillation, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and other climate patterns (p. 28). The 2012 NRC committee (pp. 27; 32) calculates that substantial acceleration, resulting in increases of 3 to 4 times the post measured rates of sea level rise, is required for global eustatic sea levels to reach 1 meter above 1990 levels by While the apparent increased rate may be due to a combination of factors (Parris et al., 2012, p. 6), more rapid ice sheet melting seems to be playing a major role (Grinsted et al., 2010; Hansen & Sato, 2011; Pfeffer et al., 2008; Steffen et al., 2008; Vermeer & Rahmstorf, 2009). Until recently, scientists estimated that thermal expansion was the dominant driver of global eustatic sea level rise (see for example Meehl et al., 2007). Citing Church et al. (2011), the 2012 NRC committee reports that land ice melt accounted for about 65 percent of global sea-level rise for (NRC, 2012, p. 53). A recent collaboration of 47 scientists, who reconciled ice melt data obtained using several methods, has demonstrated that the combined melting rate of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets has increased by a factor of three since the early 1990s (Shepherd et al., 2012). Nonetheless, significant uncertainty remains, and scientists are unable to fully explain how and why the ice sheets are melting more rapidly (Steffen et al., 2008). Some uncertainties remain about how rapidly heat from a warming 77

88 atmosphere will be thoroughly mixed through the breadths and depths of the oceans. In addition, the rate of acceleration will be affected by future rates of global emissions of greenhouse gases and the timing and levels of emission mitigation initiatives (Schaeffer et al., 2012). However, we cannot assign empirically-based probabilities to alternative scenarios of future emissions of greenhouse gases (IPCC, 2000, p. 9). It also is not clear if the increased melting of the ice sheets is solely attributable to inter-annual and multi-decadal climate patterns Alternative Sea Level Projection Methods Adaptation planners have used several approaches to projecting future sea levels for their communities. Each has its strengths, weaknesses, and uncertainties. Many methods and models have been developed. We review here those that have been used most recently in sea level rise adaptation planning. For a broader review, see Berry et al. (2012). The most straightforward approach is to use data from the nearest NOAA tide station and assume that the long-term linear trend, the socalled historic trend, will continue into the future. See for example Figure 3-5 which illustrates the historic trend for the period 1914 to 2006 for the NOAA tide station at Cedar Key. Some users favor projections based on tide gauge trend data because it is directly measured, local data that does not rely Figure 3-5. Mean monthly sea level trend, Cedar Key, Florida, Source: NOAA CO-OPS (2013). 78

89 on climate models about which some planners and/or their constituents may still be skeptical. The principal weakness, however, is that climate change is projected to increase the rate of eustatic sea level rise, and as documented above, there is evidence that such an increase is already occurring although the causal linkages to global climate change are not fully understood. Thus while substantial uncertainties remain, where the rate of sea level rise is accelerating, fitting a straight trend line to long-term tide gauge data underestimates future sea levels and risks under-estimating future vulnerability resulting in under-adapting. Numerous scientists have attempted to estimate future levels of global eustatic sea level relative to a specified base year for an array of different plausible global warming scenarios. A National Research Council committee convened in 1987 to examine the engineering implications of sea level rise, summarized the state of knowledge at that time (NRC, 1987). Beginning in 1990 and continuing at intervals of five to six years (1995, 2001, 2007), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) produced a series of climate change assessment reports that synthesize the available science. The IPCC reports analyze historic sea level change patterns and provide projections based on an array of future greenhouse gas emission scenarios and the best available models of global climate and glacier and ice sheet growth and melting. In the interlude between the first and second IPCC assessments, USEPA scientist James Titus and coauthor Vijay Narayanan published a novel assessment of future sea level rise in which they conducted Monte Carlo simulations 6 of future climate and sea level rise based on parameter estimates derived from the extant literature at that time and Delphi panels 7 of climatologists and glaciologists (Titus & Narayanan, 6 Monte Carlo simulation performs risk analysis by building models of possible results by substituting a range of values a probability distribution for any factor that has inherent uncertainty. It then calculates results over and over, each time using a different set of random values from the probability functions. Depending upon the number of uncertainties and the ranges specified for them, a Monte Carlo simulation could involve thousands or tens of thousands of recalculations before it is complete. Monte Carlo simulation produces distributions of possible outcome values. ( com/risk/monte_carlo_simulation.asp) 7 In Delphi decision groups, a series of questionnaires, surveys, etc. are sent to selected respondents (the Delphi group) through a facilitator who oversees responses of their panel of experts. The group does not meet face-to-face. All communication is normally in writing (letters or ). Members of the groups are selected because they are experts or they have relevant information. The responses are collected and analyzed to determine conflicting viewpoints on each point. The process continues in order to work towards synthesis and building consensus. ( com/~donclark/perform/delphi_process.html) 79

90 1995). The authors of the IPCC s 2007 AR4 fourth assessment report (Meehl et al., 2007) took a conservative stance in accounting for melting of the ice sheets because of high uncertainty due to the constraints to linking extant ice sheet models with global climate models (NRC, 2012, p. 85). A number of researchers have subsequently published studies that apply alternative methods of estimating ice sheet contributions to global eustatic sea level rise. As summarized in the recent NRC committee study (2012, pp ), some of these studies project the effects of future ice sheet melting by extrapolating from recent mass balance observations of ice mass loss rates (see for example Meier et al., 2007). Others have devised semi-empirical models based on mathematical approximations of the relationship between past observed sea levels and global temperatures (Grinsted et al., 2009; Horton, 2008; Jevrejeva et al., 2010; Rahmstorf, 2007; Vermeer & Rahmstorf, 2009). The 2012 NRC committee notes (pp ) that the semi-empirical estimates exceed those of the IPCC AR4 by a factor of two or three, however, the highest projections derived from the semi-empirical approaches may exceed the physical constraints to ice sheet melting documented by Pfeffer et al. (2008). Neither approach fully accounts for the observed and likely future changing dynamics of ice sheet melt behavior (NRC, 2012, pp. 86; 88). Most recently, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) assembled a panel of experts under the lead of NOAA scientist, Adam Parris, to prepare a synthesis of the scientific literature on global eustatic sea level rise and to develop scenarios for use in the National Climate Assessment (Parris et al., 2012). Their eustatic sea level rise estimates reflect the existing literature rather than any new analyses. Working at about the same time, the 2012 NRC committee devised its own set of global eustatic projections using a combination of climate modeling to estimate the effects of temperature on ocean density and mass balance extrapolation to estimate the contributions from ice sheet melting. Table 3-1 summarizes the global eustatic sea level rise projections from the studies enumerated here. Vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning based solely on global eustatic sea level rise scenarios will under- or over-estimate local relative sea level rise because they will not account for local vertical land movement and regional differences from global average eustatic rise. Approaches developed by the National Research Council (1987), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (Titus & Narayanan, 1995), Warren Pinnacle Consulting (Clough et al., 2010), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, 2011), and a more recent NRC committee (2012) adjust global eustatic sea level projections to take account of local conditions. 80

91 All of these studies and methodological approaches described above provide projections for the year 2100, although the benchmark years vary. Some also produce projections for nearer-term end points. Titus and Narayanan include projections for the year 2200 relative to Because of underlying uncertainties, most of these analyses include a range of projections based on a mix of emission scenarios and model estimates. Many also provide graphs of one or more projection curves from which a planner can estimate global eustatic sea levels for intervening time horizons (Horton et al., 2008; Jevrejeva et al., 2010; NRC, 1987; NRC, 2012; Parris et al., 2012; Rahmstorf, 2007; Titus & Narayanan, 1995; USACE, 2013; Vermeer & Rahmstorf, 2009). Some include tables of projection estimates for multiple time horizons (NRC, 2012; Titus & Narayanan, 1995; Table global eustatic sea level rise projections. *The official IPCC AR4 sea level projection range is 0.18 to 0.59 meter by 2100; however they also included an estimate with scaled-up ice sheet melting of 0.76 meter (Meehl et al., 2007). USACE, 2013). Several also include equations that planners can use to produce projections for specific time intervals or that are imbedded in user tools for producing projections (Clough et el., 2010; NRC, 1987; USACE, 2011; USACE, 2013). Scenarios based on one or a few time point projections may not meet the needs of adaptation planning. For example, designs for new capital facilities and infrastructure or for modifying existing structures, require more precise estimates of how high sea level will be at an array of points in time. For these applications, planners need projection curves, the associated tables, and/or the underlying equations. In the following sections we provide overviews of the major eustatic and relative sea level rise projection approaches currently being used. Section 2 provides information about the institutions through which users can access tools that use these approaches, while Appendix 2 provides more detail on specific analytic tools. 81

92 National Research Council Analysis of Engineering Implications of SLR (1987) Prior to the IPCC s first assessment report, a National Research Council committee (NRC, 1987) developed three projection curves to bracket what the committee apparently considered at that time to be a reasonable range of possible levels of eustatic global sea level rise by 2100 relative to While the committee members cited estimates ranging from 0.25 to 3.5 meters, they specified curves for 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 meters, apparently based primarily on the work of Robins (1986) and Gornitz et al. (1982). They employed the following equation to generate curves tied to those three endpoints: E(t) = et + bt 2 Where E(t) = eustatic global mean sea level at time t e = estimate of long term average annual global eustatic sea level rise in m/yr b = coefficient required to draw the curve to the specified 2100 endpoint The committee assigned a value of meter (1.2 mm/yr) to e, which they represented as the average over the preceding century (p. 29). The committee did not, however, explain how they calculated that value. They also did not generate the functional form of the equation by fitting historic sea level rise data or modeling projected change. They simply maintain that inclusion of the bt 2 parameter appears generally consistent with anticipated future sea levels (p. 28). Thus the shapes of the NRC curves drawn between 1986 and 2100, and the specific values generated from them between those endpoints, are simply artifacts of the estimated 2100 values and the functional form chosen by the committee. They do not represent an empirical approximation of the rate of change in sea level rise due to global warming. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2011) has adapted this projection method to develop local relative sea level rise projections (see below) USEPA Probability of Sea Level Rise (1995) Titus and Narayanan (1995), in their USEPA study, The Probability of Sea Level Rise, report probabilistic projections of global eustatic sea level rise for six time horizons relative to 1990: 2025, 2050, 2075, 2100, 2150, and They based their projections on greenhouse gas and sulfate emission scenarios described in a supplement to the IPCC s First Assessment Report (IPCC, 1992) and a simplified model they developed that incorporated 82

93 35 major variables representing radiative forcing, global atmospheric warming, thermal expansion of the oceans, and melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and glaciers. They derived probability distributions for each parameter from the available scientific literature, supplemented by Delphi panels of experts, and then conducted a Monte Carlo experiment using 10,000 simulations (pp. 2; ). The authors also present a method for applying their results to estimate future local relative sea level rise. Titus and Narayanan calculate normalized global eustatic projections (normalized(t)) that represent the extent to which the greenhouse contribution by a particular year exceeds the contribution that would be expected by merely extrapolating the estimated historic greenhouse contribution (p. 144). Using these values (see Table 3-2), planners can use the following formula to predict local relative sea level at time t: local(t) = normalized(t) + (t 1990) X trend Where local(t) = local relative sea level at time t normalized(t) = estimate of long term average annual global eustatic sea level rise in m/yr trend = local historic relative sea level trend measured by tide gauge Table 3-2. Normalized sea level projections compared with 1990 levels (cm). Source: Table 9-1, Titus and Narayanan (1995, p. 145). 83

94 Aside from the experimental nature of the Delphic Monte Carlo approach used to predict future sea levels (Parris et al., 2012, p. 5), the principal shortcoming of this method is that the assumed climate change effects on sea level rise that underlie the normalized trend estimates are based on the state of knowledge and climate modeling science in the mid 1990s IPCC Assessment Reports (2001 and 2007) The IPCC s third assessment report (TAR) produced projections of global eustatic sea level rise for 2100 relative to These range from 0.11 to 0.77 meter for 35 different SRES greenhouse gas emission scenarios analyzed with seven different atmosphere-ocean general circulation models (AOGCMs) (Church et al., 2001, p. 670). Figure 3-6 depicts the projection curves from the TAR with distinct curves for each of six representative SRES scenarios. 8 The authors estimate that the annual rate of global eustatic sea level rise will increase from a 20th century average of 1.0 to 2.0 mm/yr to 2.2 to 8.8 mm/yr by 2100 (pp ). Figure 3-6. IPCC Third Assessment Report sea level rise projection curves. Source: Figure 11.12, Church et al. (2001, p. 671). The authors of the IPCC s fourth assessment report analyzed the same six illustrative SRES emission scenarios with an ensemble of general circulation models to develop projections of 2100 ( ) rates of sea level rise and average total increases in global eustatic sea level relative to 1990 ( ) (Meehl et al., 2007, pp ). Based on what they estimated to 8 The region in dark shading shows the range of the average of AOGCMs for all 35 SRES scenarios. The region in light shading shows the range of all AOGCMs for all 35 scenarios. The region delimited by the outermost lines shows the range of all AOGCMs and scenarios including uncertainty in landice changes, permafrost changes and sediment deposition. Note that this range does not allow for uncertainty relating to ice-dynamical changes in the West Antarctic ice sheet. (Church et al., 2001, p. 671). 84

95 be current rates of melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, Meehl et al. (2007) estimate that the rate of average annual global sea level rise will range from 1.5 to 9.7 mm/yr by They added 3.9 mm/yr to the upper bound estimate to account for scaled-up ice sheet melting resulting in a worst-case high estimate of 13.6 mm/yr. Their projections for increased global average sea level by 2100 range from 0.18 to 0.76 meter, including the adjustment for scaled-up ice sheet melting. The AR4 report provides only these 2100 endpoint projections; the authors did not produce projection curves or point estimates for intermediate time horizons as had been done for the TAR Semi-Empirical Projections (2007; 2009) The so-called semi-empirical approach to projecting future sea level rise effects of climate change is based on the observed relationship between sea-level change and global temperature change, and takes no account of the individual contributions to sea-level rise or their physical constraints (NRC, 2012, p. 83). The most frequently cited post AR4 semi-empirical sea level rise projection work is that completed by Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009). We include it here because we have encountered several sea level rise adaptation analyses in which the authors have included the Vermeer and Rahmstorf global eustatic projections. Vermeer and Rahmstorf s approach builds on an earlier approximation by Rahmstorf (2007). We present here a synopsis of the two approaches drawn from NRC (2012, pp ): Early semi-empirical models assumed a linear relationship between global temperature and sea level rise... but subsequent refinements have included corrections for the time-response characteristics of sea level to temperature forcing. A frequently cited semi-empirical model to project future sea-level rise was developed by Rahmstorf (2007), who related rising sea level to global near-surface air temperature as follows: dh/dt = a (T(t) -T 0 ) where H is the sea level, T is the mean global temperature, T 0 is the baseline temperature at which sea level is stable, and a is the sealevel sensitivity, which measures how much the rate of sea-level rise accelerates per unit change in global temperature. The model postulates that if the temperature rises above T 0, sea level will rise indefinitely at a rate determined by the magnitude of the temperature rise, so a linear rise in temperature with time leads to a quadratic change in sea level. The unknown parameters a and T 0 are determined from global sea-level reconstructions... and [archived] global temperature data. Rahmstorf (2007) found that the parameter a is 3.4 mm yr-1/ C. Projecting the 85

96 equation forward using the IPCC... [SRES] scenarios for temperature change yielded a rise in sea level between 0.38 m and 1.2 m by Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009) included an extra term b to allow sea level to respond directly to temperature change: ds/dt = a (T -T 0 ) + b dt/dt. To gain confidence in the model, the authors calibrated the a and b coefficients with temperature data from 1880 to 2000, then verified the model over a 1,000-year time frame using sea-level proxy data for the past millennium. With this model and the IPCC... [SRES] emission scenarios, Vermeer and Rahmstorf... projected that sea level would rise between 0.81 m and 1.79 m by Figure 3-7 depicts the Vermeer and Rahmstorf projections for three of the SRES scenarios. Figure 3-7. Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009) sea level rise scenario curves. Source: Figure 6, Vermeer & Rahmstorf (2009, p. 5). 86

97 SLAMM: Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (2010) The Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) employs the method first introduced by Barth and Titus (1984) which allows the user to start with a global eustatic time point projection for a specified model projection year (TModel) and adjust for local deviation from the historic global trend: Where LocalSLRTModel = projected local relative sea level rise for the current model year (m) GlobalSLR TModel = projected global eustatic sea level rise for the current model year (m) HistoricSLR Local = site specific historic sea level trend change (mm/yr) HistoricSLR Global = global historic sea level trend change (1.7 mm/ yr) Users may choose from a variety of methods for estimating future sea level rise (GlobalSLR TModel ) based on a series of 2100 end points (Clough et al., 2010, pp. 5-8). These include eustatic sea level rise curves based on the IPCC s Third Assessment Report (TAR) for a variety of SRES scenarios (Church et al., 2001), eustatic curves for three pre-specified 2100 sea level elevations: 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 meters, and a eustatic curve for a user-specified 2100 sea level elevation. Curves for options b and c are created by scaling up (or down) the TAR SRES A1B maximum projection curve (Clough et al., 2010, p. 5). This approach is more flexible than that used by the U.S. Corps of Engineers (see Section ) because users can select any 2100 end point. The underlying curve functional forms are also grounded in peer-reviewed emission and climate change models. Figure 3-8 illustrates scaling up to the 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 meter 2100 projections from the TAR SRES A1B maximum curve. 87

98 Figure 3-8. SLAMM scale-up from SRES A1B maximum projection curve. Source: Figure 1, Clough et al. (2010, p. 6) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sea Level Change Considerations for Civil Works (2011) One of the most widely used sets of sea level rise projections are those available from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2013). The Corps (2011) derives its projection method from the 1987 NRC methodology with two modifications: (1) they alter the equations for the NRC low curve I (0.5 meter) and high curve III (1.5 meters) to adjust the benchmark to 1992 mean sea level, and (2) they substitute the value of 1.7 mm/year for the longterm average annual rate of global eustatic sea level rise (e) as estimated in the IPCC s AR4 report (Bindoff et al., 2007, p. 410). Doing so results in the following equation: E(t 2 ) E(t 1 ) = (t 2 t 1 ) + b(t 2 2 t 12 ) Where t 1 = the time period (in years) between 1992 and the current year t 2 = the time period (in years) between 1992 and the year of interest 88

99 To adjust for local vertical land movement, the Corps (2011, p. C-2) subtracts the global or regional mean eustatic sea level trend from the mean local relative sea level trend in the same manner as SLAMM. For details see the Excel SLR Curve Calculator at The adjustment can be represented as follows, using notation similar to that of Rosati and Kraus (2009): RSL(t 2 ) RSL(t 1 ) = (e + M)(t 2 t 1 ) + b(t 2 2 t 12 ) Where RSL(t n ) = total relative sea level at time n M = local subsidence or uplift rate (mean local relative sea level trend minus mean regional eustatic sea level trend) The Corps acknowledges that a number of researchers have generated sea level rise projections subsequent to the AR4 report that exceed the 1987 NRC high projection of 1.5 meters (e.g. Jevrejeva et al., 2010; Vermeer & Rahmstorf, 2009; Pfeffer et al., 2008). While the Corps states that 2.0 meters is a credible upper-bound for 21st century global mean sea level rise, their methodology remains grounded on the NRC high projection upper bound of 1.5 meters (2011, p. B-11). The Corps does not plan to make any changes to its projection method in the next iteration of its guidance (Landers, 2013) NOAA Guidance for the National Climate Assessment (2012) At the request of the National Climate Assessment Development and Advisory Committee (NCADAC), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) assembled a panel of experts under the lead of NOAA scientist, Adam Parris, to prepare a synthesis of the scientific literature on global sea level rise and to develop scenarios for use in the National Climate Assessment (NCA). Parris et al. (2012) formulated four 2100 global eustatic sea level rise scenarios which the authors suggest should be applied in the context of the user s level of risk averseness: 1. Lowest: 0.2 m 2. Intermediate-low: 0.5 m 3. Intermediate-high: 1.2 m 4. Highest: 2.0 m The authors produced curves for scenarios 1 through 3 using the same quadratic equations and base year (1992) as the Corps of Engineers (Parris et al., p. 14). Thus the functional form derives from that developed by the 89

100 1987 NRC committee. Referring to Meehl et al. (2007) and Pfeffer et al. (2008), they explain (p. 12) that the highest scenario curve is derived from a combination of estimated ocean warming from the IPCC AR4 global SLR projections and a calculation of the maximum possible glacier and ice sheet loss by the end of the century. Citing Grinsted et al. (2009), Jevrejeva et al. (2010), Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009), and Horton et al. (2008), they report that their intermediate-high scenario curve is based on an average of the high end of semi-empirical, global SLR projections. They generated the intermediate-low scenario curve from the upper end of IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) global SLR projections resulting from climate models using the B1 emissions scenarios. This curve reflects limited accounting of ice sheet melting. Parris et al. also developed a lowest scenario based on a linear extrapolation of the historical SLR rate derived from tide gauge records beginning in 1900 (1.7 mm/yr). The Corps includes these so-called NOAA curves with their online Sea Level Change Calculator (USACE, 2013). The NOAA lowest curve corresponds to the Corps historic trend curve, and the NOAA intermediatelow is equivalent to the Corps intermediate curve I. Figure 3-9 presents the NOAA curves. Figure 3-9. NOAA sea level rise scenario curves. Source: Figure 10, Parris et al. (2012, p. 15). 90

101 NRC Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington (2012) The 2012 NRC committee was tasked with developing projections of total global eustatic sea-level rise for the years 2030, 2050, and They estimated sea level rise from thermal expansion of the oceans for these three time horizons by fitting quadratic equations to model projections prepared by Pardaens et al. (2010) for the A1B SRES scenario (NRC, 2012, p. 88). They estimated the contributions from land ice (glaciers and ice sheets) by extrapolating ice mass balance estimates developed by other researchers with an additional dynamic component. They generated low, intermediate, and high curves with 2100 estimates of 0.50, 0.83, and 1.40 meters (see Figure 3-10). Figure NRC committee global eustatic sea level rise projection curves. Source: Figure 5.5, NRC (2012, p. 93) The Tradeoffs Among Alternative Projection Methods Projection method consistency is one of the most important policy choices because it involves judgments about the credibility of the estimates that are used for adaptation. As shown in Table 3-3, applying different methods will generate different answers both for the 2100 endpoint and for nearer-term time horizon estimates for those methods that provide such values. We recommend that adaptation planners consider the following in assessing alternative projection methods: Projection methods grounded in the state of the science five or more years ago are likely to under-estimate the contributions of melting ice sheets to global eustatic sea level rise. 91

102 Table 3-3. Comparison of major sea level rise projection methods. Vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning based solely on global eustatic sea level rise projection scenarios are likely to underor over-estimate local relative sea level rise because they will not account for local vertical land movement and regional differences from global average eustatic rise. The NOAA tide gauge trend lines and the USEPA, USACE, and SLAMM projection methods all provide estimates of local relative sea level rise. While the use of tide gauge trend data may be attractive where planning constituencies are skeptical about climate change altogether and/or unconvinced that the rate of sea level rise is accelerating and will continue to do so, projections based on straight-line historic trends risk under-estimating future vulnerability and underadapting. 92

103 The nearer-term projections between the projection benchmark (1990, 1992, 2000) and the projection end point (typically 2100) reflect the functional form used to produce projection curves. These vary from purely empirical trend lines fit to observed data (tide gauge trend), to climate-model and semi-empirical projections for plausible future emission scenarios (IPCC TAR, IPCC AR4, Vermeer & Rhamstorf (2009), SLAMM, NRC (2012)), to Monte Carlo simulation with expert opinion (USEPA), and to pure expert opinion (NRC, 1987) as embodied in the USACE (2011) and NOAA (Parris et al., 2012)) projection curves The Pros and Cons of Consistent Sea Level Rise Projection Methods Most of the generic pros and cons outlined in Section 3.2 apply to the projection method dimension. Those that are most important include the following: Multi-jurisdictional consistency will be important for similar initiatives, especially when regulated or funded by higher level government so that the needs and circumstances of individual applicants or participants can be directly compared. Consistency across state policies and programs will reduce confusion at lower levels of government concerning the credibility of alternative methods. Consistency across state policies and programs also will minimize and simplify the effort required of applicants and participants engaged in related planning and decision making contexts, e.g. preparation of local comprehensive plans, mitigation strategies, and post-disaster redevelopment plans as well as MPO long-range transportation plans and regional hurricane evacuation studies. Statewide consistency may promote efficient use of state resources where a single tool using common methods can be maintained by a single entity. As noted in Section 3.2, one of the constraints to selecting a single statewide projection method is that a number of state, regional, and local entities have already begun sea level rise adaptation initiatives. Another constraint is that the primary tools that are available, i.e. the Corps s curve calculator and SLAMM, are designed for different purposes and are maintained by non-state entities. 93

104 3.7 Projection Estimate A number of the approaches taken to develop sea level rise projections produce multiple estimates in an effort to bracket a reasonable range of plausible values. While selecting a single projection estimate offers the benefits of simplicity, most experts recommend that planners consider a range of projection estimates because of the underlying uncertainties (NRC, 1987; Parris et al., 2012; USACE, 2011): Uncertainties about what future global greenhouse gas emissions will be, which depend on many factors ranging from rates of population growth and economic development to future energy source mix and greenhouse gas mitigation policies; Uncertainties about how the climate system will behave which are reflected in substantial variation among the global climate models in the predicted impacts of different greenhouse gas atmospheric concentrations on atmospheric and ocean temperatures; Figure USACE and NOAA projection curves for the Key West tide station. Source: USACE (2013). 94

105 Limits to our ability to reduce that behavior to a simple formula for producing sea level rise projections which reflects significant gaps in the ability of contemporary models to reproduce recent observed rates of global eustatic sea level rise, due substantially to the lack of effective models of ice sheet melting. As shown in Figure 3-11, planners who use the U.S. Army Corps online Sea Level Change Calculator tool (USACE, 2013) can consider multiple projection curves generated by both the Corps projection method and the NOAA method (Parris et al., 2012) Pros and Cons of Consistent Sea Level Rise Projection Estimates As with the other projection dimensions, multi-jurisdictional and multiagency consistency may be worthwhile for similar initiatives, especially when regulated or funded by higher level government. In the absence of a need for such consistency, the driving factor for choosing one or more projection estimates ought to be the risk posture of the planner and/or her/his constituency (Deyle et al., 2013): To what extent are they willing to accept the potential for either over- or under-estimating how high sea level will be at any particular point in time? 3.8 Time Horizon When? is one of the three key questions planners seek to address through the use of sea level rise projections, i.e. How high will the water be, where, and when? Most organizations frame their plans within an explicit time horizon. Where plans incorporate sea level rise projection scenarios, planners will want to use projection time horizons that provide the most useful information for the planning and related decision making contexts. However, where the state seeks to provide guidance for such planning, the consistency issue arises once again Plan Time Horizon Contexts for Sea Level Rise Projections Section 1 provides an overview of the decision contexts within which planners may want to consider the effects of accelerating sea level rise on plan goals and objectives and specific projects and policies. These include local comprehensive plans and capital improvement plans, water and sewer infrastructure plans, long-range transportation plans, local mitigation strategies, the state hazard mitigation plan, and local post disaster 95

106 redevelopment plans, as well as several regional and state-level vulnerability assessments that do not fall within the domains of formal planning processes, e.g. the SWFRPC s climate change vulnerability assessment for the Charlotte Harbor estuary, FFWCC s initiative to assess the vulnerability of coastal wetlands, and FDOT s assessment of bridge vulnerability to wave loading. As documented by Deyle et al. (2013), Florida law requires that local comprehensive plans cover at least a 10-year period. However, many communities have elected to extend their planning horizons further to 20, 30, and even 40 years. State statutes also authorize local governments to employ multiple plan horizons within their comprehensive plans. Most elements within the local comprehensive plan typically default to the adopted overall plan horizon. The Capital Improvements Element (CIE), however, considers the need and location for public facilities in a particular jurisdiction and must cover a minimum 5-year planning period. The statutes also require coordination between a local government CIE and any applicable metropolitan planning organization s (MPO) transportation improvement program (typically 5 years) and long range transportation plan (at least 20 years). Some MPOs incorporate planning horizons longer than this minimum, such as 50-years, for higher-level study and visioning of the regions they serve. The Infrastructure Element of a local comprehensive plan addresses the provision of future potable water, drainage, sanitary sewer, and solid waste services, as well as aquifer recharge protection. While the statutes do not require the element to deviate from the standard overall comprehensive plan horizon, the plan is required to coordinate with any applicable water management district s regional water supply plan for which the current plan horizon is 20 years. The Infrastructure Element also must analyze the opportunities for replacing or expanding existing wastewater treatment facilities for which capacity analyses must be updated at least every 10 years. As we document in Section 1, some Florida communities have begun to consider the implications of accelerating rates of sea level rise in their local mitigation strategies (LMS) and post-disaster redevelopment plans (PDRPs) with a particular focus on how sea level rise will modify the boundaries of coastal special flood hazard areas and storm surge zones. While these plans typically do not have formal plan horizons, standard updates for these plans occur every five years (Florida Department of Community Affairs, 2010). The State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP), which is analogous to the local mitigation strategy, also has no formal plan horizon. Federal law currently requires SHMP updates every three years (FDEM, 2013b). 96

107 3.8.2 Defining Optimal Sea Level Rise Projection Time Horizons Drawing from planning theory and practice we can identify three factors to consider in defining time horizons for sea level rise projection scenarios: (a) ability to predict future states of the key variables that affect the plan s goals and objectives, within the bounds of acceptable levels of uncertainty (Florida Senate Committee on Community Affairs, 2009; Kelly, 2010; Kent, 1964), (b) the length of time to implement policies designed to effect those goals and objectives, such as major infrastructure development (Kelly, 2010), and (c) the length of time over which policies will impact plan goals (Hopkins, 2001; Knapp et al., 1998). In practice, planners may have to make tradeoffs among these factors in choosing sea level rise projection time horizons Predictability Comprehensive planners have generally keyed plan horizons to the predictability and stability of population and economic forecasts (Kent, 1964, p. 96) resulting in 10 to 20-year plans. As we detail above in Section 3.7, with sea level rise adaptation planning, the principal uncertainties associated with projection scenarios result from three primary sources: (1) uncertainties about what future global greenhouse gas emissions will be, (2) uncertainties about how the climate system will behave, and (3) limits to our ability to reduce that behavior to a simple formula for producing sea level rise projections. As illustrated in Figure 3-12, projection ranges expand substantially with longer time horizons. Planners and their constituents who have low tolerance for uncertainty may, therefore, favor shorter projection time horizons on the order of 20 to 30 years Time to Implement The time to implement certain strategies can be another determining factor for an appropriate time horizon for a planning element. Shorter projection horizons may be sufficient where policies or projects can be implemented quickly and where the key projection question is How high will sea level (or coastal flooding) be once the program is started or the structure is built? A longer projection horizon may be appropriate for a long-range development project such as constructing a new highway corridor, or for a long-range area plan. 97

108 Length of Impact The length of time over which projects or adaptation strategies will impact the environment and the community may argue for a longer sea level rise projection time horizon than might otherwise be chosen based on predictability or implementation time. The capital costs of major infrastructure components constitute sunk costs that are typically amortized over the design lives of the structures. Decisions to site such facilities in any given location should reflect assessments of vulnerability, and the potential need for adaption, for at least those design lives. Thus, for example, the plan horizon for sea level rise adaptation policies for wastewater treatment and water supply treatment facilities ought to be on the order of at least 30 years, while those for bridges ought to cover more like 75 to 100 years (Deyle et al., 2006; OEA, 2011). Hopkins (2001, pp. 77; 201) argues that such investments, along with associated linear infrastructure such as transportation arterials, trunk sewers, and water mains, commit a community to urban development patterns that will persist for 100 years or more. Thus, while the plan horizon for defining demand for land and public facilities and infrastructure may still be constrained by the predictability and stability of population and economic forecasts (Florida Senate Committee on Community Affairs, 2009, p. 1), the vulnerability of land use and infrastructure and facilities to be developed over the next 10 to 20 years should be assessed against future climate conditions that extend over the time that the resulting urban landscape is likely to persist. Applying these principles to adaptation planning for sea level rise, we join a number of others in endorsing a multiple-scenario approach (NRC, 1987; Parris et al., 2012; USACE, 2011). We suggest three projection scenario time horizons for vulnerability assessments and analyses of adaptation alternatives: (1) near-term: a time horizon within which major infrastructure initiatives are likely to be completed, e.g years, or the time horizon used for the FLUE derived from predictability of population and economic change; (2) mid-term: a time horizon that extends for at least as long as the design life of typical structural protection adaptation strategies such as seawalls, e.g. 50 years; and (3) long-term: a time horizon that encompasses the impacts of land use commitments of urban development patterns, e.g. 100 years or more. 98

109 We stop short of endorsing the Titus and Narayanan (1995) logic for very long time horizons such as 200 years, primarily due to the very wide range of uncertainty in projections for that time horizon. The recent reconciliation of data from different satellite methods of measuring Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet mass change has begun to reduce that uncertainty (Shepherd et al., 2012). It will be further narrowed as additional data are collected. Uncertainty remains, however, on the robustness of the semiempirical prediction methods that are being used to circumvent the gaps in the physics-based models (Schaeffer et al., 2012). Coastal communities will have to decide for themselves how much uncertainty they can tolerate. We would posit, however, that the ever widening ranges beyond 100 years will limit the utility of such projections over the near term (see Figure 3-12). Figure Relative sea level rise scenarios for south Florida. Source: Figure 3, Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (2011, p. 13). 99

110 3.8.3 Pros and Cons of Consistent Time Horizons Normative planning theory argues strongly for adopting sea level rise projection time horizons that vary with the attributes of the policies and actions being assessed and that reflect the planning constituency s tolerance for uncertainty. Many authorities also endorse using multiple scenarios to bracket the range of uncertainties over time. Scenarios based on one projection endpoint (e.g. 2100) or a few time points (e.g. 2030, 2050, and 2100) may not meet the needs in all adaptation planning contexts. The optimal intervals for near-term projections also may vary. For these applications, planners need projection curves, the associated tables, and/or the underlying equations. Recognition of these principles and practicalities argues for a substantial degree of context-specific autonomy in setting time horizons for sea level rise projections used for vulnerability assessment and analysis of adaptation alternatives and against consistency of projection time horizons across different state agencies and programs. Where, however, a local government initiative requires funding or regulatory approval from a higher level of government, the higher-level agency may dictate use of a uniform time horizon to facilitate comparison among applicants projects and/or because the agency has made a technical determination about one or both of the other criteria, i.e. length of the project implementation period or the length of the project impact period. Other agencies, however, advocate using sea level rise projection time horizons that correspond with the design life of an adaptation project. See for example the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers circular for civil works projects (USACE, 2011). Guidance from the Northeast Region of the NOAA Restoration Center on tidal wetland habitat restoration projects allows shorter assessment horizons for wetland restoration projects with design lives less than 50 years (NOAA RCNR, 2011, p. 11). 3.9 State of Practice in Florida As we note in Section 3.2, the fact that a number of local, regional, and state entities have already undertaken sea level rise vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning and that they use an array of projection approaches may constrain efforts to seek consistency. This section explores the state of practice on sea level rise projections in Florida (see Table 3-4 form overview) 100

111 Table 3-4. Use of sea level rise projections in Florida. *VA = vulnerability assessment 101

112 3.9.1 Projection Method The Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council has prepared vulnerability assessments for Charlotte Harbor (Beever et al., 2009a) and Lee County (Beever et al., 2010a) using the relative sea level projection method developed by the USEPA (Titus & Narayanan, 1995), as well as eustatic projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Meehl et al., 2007), and local NOAA sea level rise measurements (Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level, 2013). Those vulnerability assessments served as the basis for adaptation plans the RPC has developed for the City of Punta Gorda and Lee County (Beever et al. 2009b; 2010b) and also will be used for planned initiatives with Sarasota County and the City of Bonita Springs. Six Florida RPCs (East Central Florida, Northeast Florida, South Florida, Southwest Florida, Tampa Bay, and Treasure Coast) also used the USEPA method in a set of parallel analyses of possible sea level rise adaptation scenarios (see for example Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, 2006; Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, 2005). State and regional agencies in other states completed similar studies (Titus et al., 2009). More recently, Ocean Engineering Associates used the USEPA method to account for future sea level rise in a wave loading vulnerability assessment of bridges in Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties (Ocean Engineering Associates, 2008) The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact, in their Unified Sea Level Rise Projection (2011), employed the relative sea level projection methods detailed by the Corps of Engineers (USACE, 2009). Broward County followed the Compact s approach in developing their comprehensive plan map of priority planning areas for sea level rise (see Figure 3-2). The GeoPlan Center at the University of Florida also has incorporated the Corps method in the Sketch Planning Tool it is developing for use in the State Department of Transportation s ETDM process (see Section 2 and Appendix 2). Bergh (2009) used global eustatic sea level rise projection estimates derived from the IPCCs AR4 assessment (Meehl et al., 2007) and Rahmstorf (2007) for a vulnerability assessment of the Florida Keys. In a sea level rise vulnerability assessment and adaptation plan for the City of Satellite Beach, the R.W. Parkinson firm (2010) drew from the global eustatic sea level rise projection estimates of Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009). SLAMM is the sea level rise projection method of choice for vulnerability assessments of coastal wetlands. It has been used by a number of regional and state agencies including the Tampa Bay Estuary Program (Sherwood 102

113 & Greening, 2012) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, as well as The Nature Conservancy (Geselbracht et al., 2010), and others. As described in more detail in Section 2, the Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve has initiated a three-year project to assess the vulnerability of coastal wetlands in the area using SLAMM (GTM NERR, 2013). One of the project team members reports that they also are making use of the Corps of Engineers Sea Level Change Calculator (Frank, 2013) Projection Estimate and Time Horizon Several of the vulnerability assessments and adaptation plans developed for Florida communities have used the year 2100 as the basis for defining sea level rise projection scenarios. Parkinson (2010, pp. 5-6) created inundation scenarios for a series of 1-foot increments up to a 2100 projection of 6 feet (1.8 meters) above mean sea level relative to 2010 for the Satellite Beach vulnerability assessment and adaptation plan. Drawing from the IPCC s TAR (Church et al., 2001) and AR4 assessments (Meehl et al., 2007), Frazier et al. (2008, p. 214) defined 2100 projection scenarios of 0.30 and 0.90 meter for their storm surge plus sea level rise vulnerability analysis for Sarasota County. In his vulnerability assessment of the Florida Keys, Bergh (2009) used five 2100 global eustatic sea level rise projection estimates: 0.18, 0.35, 0.59, 1.00, and 1.40 meters. Others have employed multiple time horizons to define possible future scenarios. For example, in his assessment of the vulnerability of the Florida Keys to climate change, Hoegh Guldberg (2010) defines four time horizons relative to 2010: 2035, 2050, 2075, and He applies sea level rise projections derived from Bergh (2009). Harrington and Walton (2008) estimate property damage from coastal storms resulting from the effects of climate change on tropical cyclone intensity and sea level for two time horizons for Dade, Duval, and Escambia counties: 2030 and They derive their low-end sea level rise projections from local tide gauge historical trends with ranges of 0.07 to 0.09 meter by 2030 and 0.25 to 0.34 meter by They base their high-end projections on the IPCC s TAR report (Church et al., 2001): 0.10 to 0.65 meter by For its climate change vulnerability assessments for species of concern, including the effects of sea level rise, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission ran the SLAMM model for projections of 1 meter by 2100 (high) and the IPCC s AR4 projection for the A1FI scenario (low). They ran the model for a 2060 time horizon (50 years) which is recommended for wetland vulnerability assessments by NOAA s Office 103

114 of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (NOAA OCRM, 2012) and NOAA s Northeast Region Restoration Center (2011). The time horizon for the Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve SLAMM analysis project is 60 years. The Tampa Bay Estuary Program (Sherwood & Greening, 2012, p. 8) used SLAMM to determine coastal habitat conversions and shoreline modifications in the Tampa Bay watershed due to future sea level rise by 2100 relative to They modeled both fixed projection estimates (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 meters) and projections based on the IPCC SRES scenarios. The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) elected to use a 50-year time horizon (2060) for its analysis of the effect of sea level rise on water resources because of the higher levels of uncertainty in longer-range projections. They derived a projection range of 5 to 20 inches (0.13 to 0.51 meter) for 2060 relative to 1990 drawing from multiple sources (2009, pp. 7-8). The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (2011), which includes members from the SFWMD, took a similar approach, developing sea level rise projections out to 100 years following the USACE method (2009). The group chose to use only the 20 and 50-year time horizons which yielded projections of 3 to 7 inches ( meter) and 9 to 24 inches ( meter) respectively (p. 7). They declined to endorse projections beyond 2060 (p. 13) because of the high levels of uncertainty and wide range of sea level rise projections (Berry et al. 2012, pp. 1-2). Broward County, one of the Compact members, recently adopted a climate change element for its comprehensive plan. Policy of that element states that the county shall designate areas that are at increased risk of flooding due to, or exacerbated by, sea level rise over the next 50 years within the Broward County Land Use Plan Priority Planning Areas for Sea Level Rise Map, and work to make these areas more climate resilient by discouraging density increases and encouraging the use of adaptation and mitigation strategies (Broward County Commission, 2013). The map (see Figure 3-2) indicates that sea level is projected to rise to a height of 2 feet as soon as Recognizing that highway infrastructure has a design life of 50 to 100 years, a research team at Florida Atlantic University led by Leonard Berry, who served as a member of the SFRCCC, recommends in a 2012 report to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), that the agency conduct vulnerability assessments for 20, 50, and 90-year plan horizons (Berry et al., 2012, p. 65). While Berry and his coauthors emphasize the 20 and 50- year plan horizons, they include the 2100, 90-year sea level rise projection 104

115 to emphasize the importance of incorporating the impacts of SLR and associated storm surge in the planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of transportation infrastructure while including a recommended margin of safety approach to adaptive management (p. 14). They endorse the projections developed by the Compact, and suggest, in addition, a 2100 estimate of 36 inches (0.91 meter) based on the USACE (2009), intermediate projection curve (p. 14). The Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) includes multiple time horizons in its sea level rise vulnerability assessments for southwest Florida and Charlotte Harbor (Beever et al., 2009a, p. 47) and Lee County (Beever et al., 2010a): 2025, 2050, 2075, 2100, 2150, and For the associated projection estimates based the methodology of Titus and Narayanan (1995) and the global eustatic sea level rise projections of the IPCC s AR4 (Meehl etl., 2007) see Table 8 in Beever at el. (2009a, p. 47). Beever et al. extend the time horizon beyond 100 years based on following Titus and Narayanan who justify doing so for both technical and policy reasons. On the technical side, they argue that melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets will have an increasing impact on sea level rise after On the policy side, they argue that the impact of urban development extends well beyond 100 years in many cases, and, therefore, projections should be extended even further to 150 and 200 years. The SWFRPC, and several of the other RPCs, completed earlier sea level rise projection analyses following the Titus and Narayanan approach. See, for example, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (2006). The upper bound of the projection range for Tampa Bay was estimated to be as much as 10 feet (3.05 meter) of sea level rise by 2200 using the Titus and Narayanan method. Ocean Engineering Associates (2008) also used the Titus and Narayanan projection method in a recent bridge scour study for FDOT. Of seven post-disaster redevelopment plans (PDRPs) developed as part of a state pilot program (FDEM, 2013c), only two explicitly take sea level rise into account Sarasota County and Manatee County. Sarasota County (2013) draws on the vulnerability assessments conducted by Frazier, Yarnal, and Wood (2008). Citing the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (2006) study, the Manatee PDRP indicates that sea levels could rise 10 feet over the next 200 years (Manatee County, 2010). What is clear from our analysis of adaptation planning practice in Florida is that a range of projection methods, estimates, and time horizons are being used by local, regional, and state planning agencies and their consultants. There is little evidence of consistency across levels of government or between agencies at the same level of government. This fact will make developing 105

116 consistent standards more complicated when such standards make sense or would be useful Summary/Synthesis The central question of this report is when, if at all, does it make sense to adopt statewide consistent sea level rise projection methods, estimates, time horizons, tidal datum parameters, tide station data and geographic scale and spatial resolution for use in awareness building, vulnerability assessment, and assessing adaptation alternatives. This section provides a summary of our findings on each of these points. Adopting one or more fully consistent statewide sea level rise projections faces two main constraints. First, as clarified in the previous section, a number of state, regional, and local entities have already begun sea level rise adaptation initiatives, some of which are using sea level rise projections that differ on one or more dimension. Moreover, differences in one or more projection dimensions may be driven in part by different decision contexts. The argument for statewide consistency is most compelling for the choice of sea level rise projection method because this choice constitutes a judgment on what comprises the best available science and because the methods of calculating projections differ sufficiently to yield different estimates over the near term (e.g years) as well as for longer-term time horizons. Thus, the choice of method may influence the accuracy of the projections. The functional forms of equations used to produce projection curves range from purely empirical trend lines fit to observed data (tide gauge trend), to climate-model and semi-empirical projections for plausible future emission scenarios, to Monte Carlo simulation with expert opinion, and to pure expert opinion. Those projection methods grounded in the state of the science five or more years ago are likely to under-estimate the contributions of melting ice sheets to global eustatic sea level rise. While vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning based solely on global eustatic sea level rise projection scenarios are likely to under- or over-estimate local relative sea level rise because they will not account for local vertical land movement and regional differences from global average eustatic rise. The NOAA tide gauge trend lines and the USEPA, USACE, and SLAMM projection methods address this concern as they all provide estimates of local relative sea level rise. However, these methods differ on other dimensions and the projections based on straight-line historic trend fits to tide gauge data risk under-estimating future vulnerability and underadapting where the local rate of sea level rise is accelerating. 106

117 The choice of projection method may also be linked to the tools available for producing projections; in particular, the SLAMM model is the predominant choice for coastal wetland vulnerability assessments, while other tools and methods are used for assessing vulnerability of the built environment. Embedded investments in software or applications of certain tools to particular planning contexts may pre-determine what projection methods are even available for use. Thus, while it is compelling to imagine all agencies in the state operating with a unified projection method, we find that the challenges to making such a decision would be significant. Optimal choices for the other projection dimensions vary with the decision context making them less amenable to statewide consistency. The optimal geographic scale and spatial (horizontal and vertical) resolution and accuracy required for sea level rise projections vary with the planning application, increasing as one progresses from awareness building, to vulnerability assessment, to assessing adaptation alternatives. A single statewide scale and resolution would likely hinder decision making capabilities or tax computing power depending on the chosen scale and resolution. In terms of tide station choice, as a general rule, the most accurate relative sea level rise projections are those based on the nearest tide gauge station. Estimates for regions or the entire state require some form of weighted averaging of sea level rise rates from multiple stations. This approach runs the risk of over or under-estimating sea level rise impacts for a specific location. Different tidal datums may be more appropriate for some decision contexts than others, e.g. use of the Mean Higher High Water datum for coastal flooding projections. A statewide standard may not be equally useful in all cases. Most experts recommend that planners consider a range of projection estimates (high, medium or low) because of the underlying uncertainties. While such a range of estimates might make sense in most circumstances, the choice of what estimates to use is likely to be a reflection of the decision maker s risk posture relative to the possibilities of under- or over-adapting. Finally, normative planning theory argues strongly for adopting sea level rise projection time horizons that vary with the attributes of the policies and actions being assessed and that reflect the planning constituency s tolerance for uncertainty. Many authorities also endorse using multiple scenarios to bracket the range of uncertainties over time. Scenarios based on one projection endpoint (e.g. 2100) or a few time points (e.g. 2030, 2050, 107

118 and 2100) may not meet the needs in all adaptation planning contexts. The optimal intervals for near-term projections also may vary. For these applications, planners need projection curves, the associated tables, and/or the underlying equations. A statewide consistent set of time horizons may miss important intervals depending on the application of the inundation scenarios being developed References Cited Barth, M.C. & Titus, J.G. (Eds) Greenhouse effect and sea level rise: A challenge for this generation. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Cobb, D., Utley, J., & Beever, L.B. (2009a). Comprehensive Southwest Florida/Charlotte Harbor climate change vulnerability assessment. Ft. Myers, FL: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Retrieved from Natural_Resources/Ecosystem_Services/Vulnerability_Assessment_ Final.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Cobb, D., Utley, J., Hutchinson, D., Gibbons, J., Abimbola, M., Beever, L.B., & Ott, J. (2009b). Adaptation plan for the City of Punta Gorda. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council and Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program, Technical Report Retrieved from Resources/Ecosystem_Services/Punta_Gorda_Adaptation_Plan.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Cobb, D., Utley, J., Hutchinson, D. (2010a). Lee County climate change vulnerability assessment. Ft. Myers, FL: Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council and Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program. Retrieved from gov/dept/sustainability/documents/lee%20county%20climate%20 Change%20Vulnerability%20Assessment%20Final%20201.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Trescott, D., Utley, J., Hutchinson, D., Walker, T., & Cobb, D. (2010b). Lee County climate change resiliency strategy. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Retrieved from _Services/Lee_ County_Climate_Change_Resiliency_Strategy.pdf. Beever, J.W., Gray, W., Beever, L.B., Cobb, D., & Walker, T. (2011). Climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation opportunities for salt marsh types in southwest Florida. 379 pp. Retrieved from swfrpc.org/content/natural_resources/ecosystem_services/salt%20 Marsh%20Study%202012%20FINAL%20reduced.pdf. 108

119 Berry, L., Arockiasamy, M., Bloetscher, F., Kaisar, E., Rodriguez-Seda, J., Scarlatos, P., Teegavarapu, R., & Hernandez Hammer, N.M. (2012). Development of a methodology for the assessment of sea level rise impacts on Florida s transportation modes and infrastructure. Retrieved from Summary_PL/FDOT_BDK79_977-01_rpt.pdf. Bergh, C. (2009). Initial estimates of the ecological and economic consequences of sea level rise on the Florida Keys through the year The Nature Conservancy, Sugarloaf Key, FL. August. frrp.org/slr.htm. Bindoff, N.L., Willebrand, J., Artale, V., Cazenave, A., Gregory, J., Gulev, S., Hanawa, K., Le Quéré, C., Levitus, S., Nojiri, Y., Shum, C.K., Talley, L.D., & Unnikrishnan, A. (2007). Observations: Oceanic climate change and sea level. In S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, & H. L. Miller (Eds.), Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (pp ). Retrieved from Broward County Commission. (2013). Comprehensive plan climate change element. Ordinance Number Retrieved from broward.org/planningandredevelopment/comprehensiveplanning/ Documents/ClimateChangeElement.pdf. Church, J.A., Gregory, J.M., et al. (2001). Changes in sea level. In: Houghton, J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D.J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P.J., Dai, X., Maskell, K., & Johnson, C.A. (Eds.), Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the third assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (pp ). Retrieved from Church, J.A., & White, N.J. (2011). Sea-level rise from the late 19th to the early 21st century. Surveys in Geophysics, 32, Church, J.A., White, N.J., Konikow, L.F., Domingues, C.M., Cogley, J.G., Rignot, E., Gregory, J.M., van den Broeke, M.R., Monaghan, A.J., & Velicogna, I. (2011). Revisiting the Earth s sealevel and energy budgets from 1961 to 2008, Geophysical Research Letters, 38, L DOI: /2011GL

120 Clough, J.S., Park, R.A. Fuller, R. (2010). SLAMM 6 beta technical documentation. Release beta. Retrieved from com/prof/slamm6/slamm6_technical_documentation.pdf. Deyle, R.E., Bailey, K.C. & Matheny, A. (2006). Adaptive response planning to sea level rise in Florida and implications for comprehensive and public-facilities planning. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Planning and Development Lab Department of Urban and Regional Planning Florida State University. Deyle, R., Butler, W., & Stevens, L. (2013). Planning time frames for coastal hazards and sea level rise. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Planning and Development Lab Department of Urban and Regional Planning Florida State University. Flaxman, M. & Vargas-Moreno, J.C. (2011). Considering climate change in Florida s state wildlife action planning: A spatial resilience planning approach. Retrieved from ConsideringClimateChange-WildlifeActionPlan.pdf. Florida Department of Community Affairs. (2010). Post-disaster redevelopment planning: A guide for Florida communities. Retrieved from Disaster%20Redevelopment%20Planning%20Guidebook%20Lo.pdf. Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). (2008). Florida GIS baseline specifications for orthophotography and LiDAR. V 1.2. Retrieved from Documents/BaselineSpecifications_1.2.pdf. Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). (2013a). LiDAR. Retrieved from Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). (2013b). State of Florida enhanced hazard mitigation plan. Retrieved from Section%201.0%20and%20TOC%20(final)%20-%20Prerequisite.pdf. Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) (2013c). Post-disaster redevelopment planning. Retrieved from org/recovery/individualassistance/pdredevelopmentplan/tools.htm. Florida Geographic Data Library (FGDL). (2013). FGDL metadata explorer. Retrieved from 110

121 Florida Senate. (2010). Florida s current evacuation and emergency shelter plans. Interim Report Retrieved from gov/committees/interimreports/2011/ ms.pdf. Florida Senate Committee on Community Affairs. (2009). Population need as a criteria for changes to a local government s future land use map. Interim Report Retrieved from gov/data/publications/2010/senate/reports/interim_reports/pdf/ ca.pdf. Frank, K. (2013). Personal communication, June 17, University of Florida. Frazier, T., Wood, N., & Yarnal, B. (2008). Current & future vulnerability of Sarasota County, Florida to hurricane storm surge & sea level rise. In Wallendorf, L., Ewing, L., Jones, C., & Jaffe, B. (Eds.), Solutions to coastal disaster congress 2008, pp Retrieved from org/doi/pdf/ /40968%28312%2919. Geselbracht, L., Freeman, K., Kelly, E., Gordon, D., & Putz, F.E. (2011). Retrospective and prospective model simulations of sea level rise impacts on Gulf of Mexico coastal marshes and forests in Waccasassa Bay, Florida. Climatic Change. DOI /s y. Gornitz, V., Lebedeff, S., & Hansen, J. (1982). Global sea level trends in the past century. Science, 215, Grinsted, A., Moore, J.C., & Jevrejeva, S. (2010). Reconstructing sea level from paleo and projected temperatures 200 to 2100 AD. Climate Dynamics, 34, Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve (GTM NERR). (2013). Planning for Sea Level Rise in the Matanzas Basin. Retrieved from Hansen, J.E. & Sato, M. (2011). Paleoclimate implications for human-made climate change. Retrieved December 29, 2011 from arxiv/papers/1105/ pdf. Harrington, J., & Walton, T.L. (2008). Climate change in coastal areas in Florida: Sea level rise estimation and economic analysis to year Retrieved from documents/fsu%208%2014%202008%20final.pdf. 111

122 Hoegh Guldberg, H. (2010). Climate change and the Florida Keys. Retrieved from pdfs/climateflkeys_main.pdf Hopkins, L.D. (2001). Urban development: The logic of making plans. Washington, DC: Island Press. Horton, R., Herweijer, C., Rosenzweig, C., Liu, J., Gornitz, V., & Ruane, A.C. (2008). Sea level rise projections for current generation CGCMs based on the semi-empirical method. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L DOI: /2007GL Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (1992). Climate change 1992: The supplementary report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment. Retrieved from data/publications_ipcc_supplementary_report_1992_wg1.shtml#. UfvEPL7D-9I. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2000). Summary for policymakers: Emission scenarios. A special report of IPCC Working Group III. Retrieved from sres-en.pdf. Jevrejeva, S., Moore, J.C., & Grinsted, A. (2010). How will sea level respond to changes in natural and anthropogenic forcings by 2100? Geophysical Research Letters, 37, L Kelly, E.D. (2010). Community planning: An introduction to the comprehensive plan. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Island Press. Kent, T.J. (1964). The urban general plan. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing. Knaap, G.J., Hopkins, L.D., & Donaghy, K.P. (1988). Do plans matter? A game-theoretic model for examining the logic and effects of land use planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 18(1), Landers, W. (2013). Personal communication, August 2. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District. Manatee County. (2010). Manatee County post disaster redevelopment plan. Retrieved from departments/building-and-development-ser vices/planning/ comprehensive-planning-section/hazard-mitigation.html#jump3. 112

123 Meehl, G.A., Stocker, T.F., Collins, W.D., Friedlingstein, P., Gaye, A.T., Gregory, J.M., Kitoh, A., Knutti, R., Murphy, J.M., Noda, A., Raper, S.C.B., Watterson, I.G., Weaver, A.J., & Zhao, Z.-C. (2007). Global climate projections. In Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M., & Miller, H.L. (Eds.), Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (pp ). Retrieved from publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10.html. Meier, M., Dyurgerov, M.B., Rick, U.K., O Neel, S., Pfeffer, W.T., Anderson, R.S., Anderson, S.P., & Glazovsky, A.F. (2007). Glaciers dominate eustatic sea-level rise in the 21st century, Science, 317, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2013). Tidal datums. Retrieved from options.html. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (NOAA CO-OPS). (2013). Sea levels online. Retrieved from sltrends.shtml. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2013). Sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts viewer. Retrieved from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2012). Incorporating sea level change scenarios at the local level. Retrieved from docs/incorporating_sea_level_change_scenarios_at_the_local_ Level.pdf. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service (NOAA NOS). (2010). Technical considerations for use of geospatial data in sea level change mapping and assessment. Retrieved from Document.pdf. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (NOAA OCRM). (2012). Voluntary step-by-step guide for considering potential climate change effects on coastal and estuarine land conservation projects. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from docs/guidecelpapp.pdf. 113

124 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Restoration Center Northeast Region (NOAA RCNR). (2011). Planning for sea level rise in the northeast: Considerations for the implementation of tidal wetland habitat restoration projects. Workshop report. Retrieved from National Research Council (NRC). (1987). Responding to changes in sea level: Engineering implications. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council (NRC). (2012). Sea-level rise for the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, present, and future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Ocean Engineering Associates (OEA). (2008). Bridge scour evaluation for Monroe and Miami-Dade Counties. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Transportation. Pardaens, A.K., Gregory, J.M., & Lowe, J.A. (2010). A model study of factors influencing projections of sea level over the twenty-first century. Climate Dynamics, 36, Parkinson, R.W. (2010). Municipal adaptation to sea-level rise: City of Satellite Beach, Florida. Melbourne, FL: RWParkinson Consulting, Inc. Retrieved from CRE_Final_Report.pdf. Parris, A., Bromirski, P., Burkett, V., Cayan, D., Culver, M., Hall, J., Horton, R., Knuuti, K., Moss, R., Obeysekera, J., Sallenger, A., & Weiss, J. (2012). Global sea level rise scenarios for the US National Climate Assessment. NOAA Tech Memo OAR CPO-1. Retrieved from sites/cpo/reports/2012/noaa_slr_r3.pdf. Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level. (2013). Pfeffer, W. T., Harper, J. T. & O Neel, S. (2008). Kinematic constraints on glacier contributions to 21st-century sea-level rise. Science, 321, DOI: /science Rahmstorf, S. (2007). A semi-empirical approach to projecting future sealevel rise. Science, 315, Robin, G. de Q. (1986). Changing sea level. In Greenhouse effect, climatic change, and ecosystems. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Sarasota County. (2013). Post-disaster redevelopment planning. Retrieved from 114

125 Schaeffer, M., Hare, W., Rahmstorf, S., & Vermeer, M. (2012). Long-term sea-level rise implied by 1.5oC and 2oC warming levels. Nature Climate Change. DOI: / NCLIMATE1584. Shepherd, A., et al. (2012). A reconciled estimate of ice-sheet mass balance. Science, 338, Sherwood, E. & Greening, H. (2012). Critical coastal habitat vulnerability assessment for the Tampa Bay estuary: Projected changes to habitats due to sea level rise and climate change. St. Petersburg, FL: Tampa Bay Estuary Program. Retrieved from TBEP_TECH_PUBS/2012/TBEP_03_12_Updated_Vulnerability_ Assessment_ pdf. Shum, C., & Kuo, C. (2011). Observation and geophysical causes of present-day sea level rise. In R. Lal, M. Sivakumar, S.M.A. Faiz, A.H.M. Mustafizur-Rahman, and K.R. Islam, (Eds.), Climate change and food security in South Asia, pp Springer. South Florida Regional Planning Council.( 2013). Statewide regional evacuation study program. Retrieved from htm. South Florida Water Management District, Interdepartmental Climate Change Group (SFWMD). (2009). Climate change and water management in South Florida. Retrieved from sealevelriselibrary/documents/doc_mgr/447/south%20florida%20 Water_Management_&_CC_-_SFWMD_2009.pdf. Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCC). (2011). A unified sea level rise projection for southeast Florida. Retrieved from themes/summit/pdf/sea%20level%20rise.pdf. Steffen, K., Clark, P. U., Cogley, J. G., Holland, D., Marshall, S., Rignot, E., & Thomas, R. (2008). Rapid changes in glaciers and ice sheets and their impacts on sea level. In J. P. McGeehin (Ed.) Abrupt climate change, Synthesis and Assessment Product 3.4, (pp ). Retrieved from Takle, E.S. (1997). Sea level rise. Retrieved from gcp/sealevel/images/11.gif. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. (2006). Sea level rise in the Tampa Bay region. Retrieved from 115

126 sea_level_rise/tampa%20bay%20-%20sea%20level%20rise%20 Project%20Draft%20Report%20without%20maps.pdf. Thomas, A. (2013). Personal communication, June 13. University of Florida GeoPlan Center. Thomas, A., Pierre-Jean, R., Watkins, R. & Cahill, M. (2013). Development of a GIS tool for the preliminary assessment of the effects of predicted sea level and tidal change on transportation infrastructure. Transportation Research Board, 92nd Annual Meeting, January 13-17, Washington, D.C. #P Retrieved from docs/92_trb_annual_meeting/development%20of%20a%20gis%20 Tool%20for%20the%20Preliminary%20Assessment%20of%20the%20 Effects%20of%20Predicted%20Sea%20Level.pdf. Titus, J.G. (Ed.). (2009). Coastal sensitivity to sea-level rise: A focus on the mid-atlantic region. Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.1. Retrived from Titus, J.G., Hudgens, D.E., Trescott, D.L., Craghan, M., Nuckols, W.H., Hershner, C.H., Kassakian, J.M., Linn, C.J., Merritt, P.G., McCue, T.M., O Connell, J.F., Tanski, J., & Wang, J. (2009). State and local governments plan for development of most land vulnerable to rising sea level along the US Atlantic coast. Environmental Research Letters, 4. DOI: / /4/4/ Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. (2005). Sea level rise in the Treasure Coast region. Retrieved from projects/tcrpc%20slr%20report% pdf. Titus, J.G. & Narayanan, V.K. (1995). The probability of sea level rise. EPA 230-R Retrieved from United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2009). Sea-level change considerations for civil works programs. EC Retrieved from 211_1Jul2009.pdf. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2011). Sea-level change considerations for civil works programs. EC Retrieved from EC Nov2011.pdf. 116

127 United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2013). Sea level change curves. Vermeer, M. & Rahmstorf, S. (2009). Global sea level linked to global temperature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(51), DOI: / pnas Willis, J.K., Chambers, D.P., Kuo, C.-Y., & Shum, C.K. (2010). Global sea level rise: Recent progress and challenges for the decade to come, Oceanography, 23,

128 118

129 Section 4: Summary and Recommendations 4.1 Introduction This section summarizes the findings of the Florida Planning and Development Lab (FPDL) research team concerning use of sea level rise projections in local, regional, and state adaptation planning in the state; the needs and capacities of the government organizations engaged in such planning, the institutional capacities available to meet those needs. We also provide recommendations regarding the development and use of sea level rise projections and scenarios that are consistent in local, regional, and state planning efforts in Florida. 4.2 Decision Context and Needs of Projection Information Users The decision contexts within which governments in Florida are using sea level rise projections are influenced by a range of factors including agency missions and planning objectives; opportunities and guidance received from other levels of government; perceptions and attitudes about the science, uncertainties, threats, and politics of climate change and sea level rise; and how far along a given community or agency is in the process of considering the implications of sea level rise. Based on our research, including interviews and focus groups with local, regional, and state agency personnel, we define a range of levels of engagement of the sea level rise issue: What sea level rise? We don t talk about that around here. We have other things to worry about. Just tell us what we have to do. We re ready to roll but we could use some help. We re on it. We re here to help. Those who are engaged in sea level rise adaptation planning have a range of informational and technical needs that reflect their level of engagement 119

130 as well as their capacities to produce and analyze sea level rise projection information. These needs span the following spectrum: Show me the scenarios - Provider offers visualization tool for inundation scenarios for awareness building I need a map - Provider develops paper maps of 1 or more preset scenarios (pre-determined year, tide gauge station, tidal datum, projection method, and projection estimate) and users utilize the maps for planning purposes (awareness building, vulnerability assessment, or adaptation) I need shapefiles - Provider develops GIS shapefiles showing inundation for one or more pre-set scenarios and users work with the shapefiles for planning purposes Help me make scenarios - Provider develops digital elevation models (DEMs) and/or projections and provides technical assistance for producing shapefiles from them Give me the tools and I ll make the scenarios - Provider develops DEMs and/or sea level rise projections so that users can produce inundation shapefiles Give me the basics, some instructions and I ll make the tools - Provider delivers LiDAR data and/or projection curve equations and technical assistance for producing DEMs and/or projections from them Give me the basics, I ll take it from there - Provider delivers LiDAR data and/or projection curve equations and the user develops their own DEMs and/or projections themselves. Users of sea level rise projection and scenario information have increasingly complex technical needs as they move from visualization exercises for awareness building, to vulnerability assessments, and to strategy development for sea level rise adaptation. They move from needing online visualization tools for awareness building, to spatial data to use in GIS overlay analysis for vulnerability assessments, to alternatives analysis across a range of SLR scenarios to develop strategy for sea level rise adaptation. There is no uniform way to categorize local, regional, and state planning entities in Florida in terms of their range of needs and uses. Each entity is context dependent. However, local governments and agencies with lower planning capacities tend to have higher technical assistance and data needs than higher-capacity planning organizations. Higher-capacity planning entities tend to be able to conduct more complex analyses and be further along the spectrum of uses as many of these entities have completed vulnerability 120

131 assessments and some are engaging in adaptation planning. Several regional planning councils (RPCs) and water management districts (WMDs) have been active in developing sea level rise vulnerability assessments with local governments in their respective regions and in contributing to other regionwide assessment efforts in partnership with each other, federal agencies, National Estuarine Research Reserves, National Estuary Programs, and private entities. Likewise, several state agencies have been major actors in sea level rise adaptation planning efforts, particularly the State Department of Transportation (FDOT) and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 4.3 Institutional Capacity of Projection Information Producers Regional, state, and federal agencies, as well as various private organizations, have contributed extensive resources to producing planning products, providing technical support, and undertaking analyses to assist other agencies and levels of government in sea level rise adaptation planning efforts. Key findings on institutional capacity include: A range of visualization tools provide a way to educate and build awareness about sea level rise. Existing tools include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration s (NOAA) Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer and Climate Central s Surging Seas. Other tools are in development, including the promising FDOT Sketch Planning Tool. RPCs and WMDs are the repositories for some of the best LiDAR data and digital elevation models (DEMs) in the state. LiDAR data and DEMs can also be accessed from NOAA, the FDOT Sketch Planning Tool, and the State Division of Emergency Management (FDEM). Projection data can be obtained and specified for local conditions and inputs from NOAA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). It can also be obtained from other regional entities such as RPCs and the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact. These locally relevant projections are essential for sea level rise planning going forward. Projection data also are embedded in some tools including the FDOT Sketch Planning Tool and SLAMM. GIS shapefiles of inundation scenarios are available for download from several of the existing tools, including the FDOT Sketch Planning tool and Climate Central s Surging Seas. Shapefiles of inundation scenarios or technical support to develop them can be 121

132 obtained from a range of agencies including NOAA, RPCs, WMDs and regional collaborations. Storm surge zones and Special Flood Hazard Areas are often left out of existing tools which rely on a bathtub model for sea level rise scenarios. Exceptions to this rule include the USACE online calculator and the Federal Emergency Management Agency s Risk Map initiative. These data will be essential for hazards mapping that takes sea level rise into account. Several RPCs and WMDs have been particularly adept at assisting local governments in scenario development and vulnerability assessments when funding is available. These agencies are technically sophisticated and have a range of planning capacities and services to offer to local communities. They are likely to play a strong role in local and regional adaptation planning efforts. NOAA has been a major player in providing technical and planning assistance as well as funding to a range of sea level rise planning activities in the state. It will continue to be a prominent and important partner. Regional collaborations such as the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact have proven to be quite effective in generating synergies among agencies at all levels of government enhancing capacities to undertake sea level rise vulnerability assessments and engage in adaptation planning. 4.4 Sea Level Rise Projection Approaches and the Question of Consistency Sea level rise projection methods vary significantly across a range of dimensions including (1) geographic scale and spatial resolution and accuracy, (2) tide gauge station, (3) tidal datum, (4) projection method, (5) projection estimate, and (6) time horizon. Our findings across these dimensions include the following: Adopting one or more fully consistent statewide sea level rise projections faces two main constraints: o A number of state, regional, and local entities have already begun sea level rise adaptation initiatives, some of which are using sea level rise projections that differ on one or more dimension. 122

133 o Differences in one or more projection dimensions are likely to be better for different decision contexts. The argument for statewide consistency is most compelling for the choice of sea level rise projection method because this choice constitutes a judgment on what comprises the best available science o o o o o o o The methods differ sufficiently to yield different estimates over the near term (e.g years) as well as for longer-term time horizons. The functional forms of equations used to produce projection curves range from purely empirical trend lines fit to observed data (tide gauge trend), to climate-model and semi-empirical projections for plausible future emission scenarios, to Monte Carlo simulation with expert opinion, and to pure expert opinion. Projection methods grounded in the state of the science five or more years ago are likely to under-estimate the contributions of melting ice sheets to global eustatic sea level rise. Vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning based solely on global eustatic sea level rise projection scenarios are likely to under- or over-estimate local relative sea level rise because they will not account for local vertical land movement and regional differences from global average eustatic rise. The NOAA tide gauge trend lines and the USEPA, USACE, and SLAMM projection methods all provide estimates of local relative sea level rise. Projections based on straight-line historic trend fits to tide gauge data risk under-estimating future vulnerability and underadapting where the local rate of sea level rise is accelerating. Choice of projection method, however, is linked to the tools available for producing projections; in particular, the SLAMM model is the predominant choice for coastal wetland vulnerability assessments, while other tools and methods are used for assessing vulnerability of the built environment Optimal choices for the other projection dimensions vary with the decision context: o The optimal geographic scale and spatial (horizontal and vertical) resolution and accuracy required for sea level rise projections vary with the planning application, increasing as one 123

134 o o o o progresses from awareness building, to vulnerability assessment, to assessing adaptation alternatives. As a general rule, the most accurate relative sea level rise projections are those based on the nearest tide gauge station; estimates for regions or the entire state require some form of weighted averaging of sea level rise rates from multiple stations. Different tidal datums may be more appropriate for some decision contexts, e.g. use of the Mean Higher High Water datum for coastal flooding projections. Most experts recommend that planners consider a range of projection estimates because of the underlying uncertainties; the choice will be a reflection of the decision maker s risk posture relative to the possibilities of under- or over-adapting. Normative planning theory argues strongly for adopting sea level rise projection time horizons that vary with the attributes of the policies and actions being assessed and that reflect the planning constituency s tolerance for uncertainty. Many authorities also endorse using multiple scenarios to bracket the range of uncertainties over time. Scenarios based on one projection endpoint (e.g. 2100) or a few time points (e.g. 2030, 2050, and 2100) may not meet the needs in all adaptation planning contexts. The optimal intervals for near-term projections also may vary. For these applications, planners need projection curves, the associated tables, and/or the underlying equations. 4.5 Recommendations 1. Decision context should guide choice of scale, resolution, and accuracy; tidal datum; and time horizon. Different scales of sea level rise adaptation planning require different levels of spatial resolution and horizontal accuracy. Choice of tidal datum should reflect the nature of the sea level rise impact of concern. Projection time horizons should reflect the user s tolerance for uncertainty, the implementation time for the actions being considered, and the impact time or design life of the policies or initiatives being assessed. Statewide consistency on these projection dimensions is warranted where a state funding or regulatory program requires equal treatment of all applicants or participants. 2. Use relative sea level rise projections from the closest tide station. Vulnerability assessments to be used for local hazard mitigation 124

135 planning and sea level rise adaptation planning require the highest possible accuracy. Assessments based on global eustatic sea level rise projections risk under- or over-estimating actual future sea levels at any particular location. Projections that account for regional trends in eustatic sea level rise and local vertical land movement can be obtained using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers online Sea Level Change Calculator, the FDOT Planning Sketch Tool, the Climate Central Surging Seas online tool, and the SLAMM model for analyzing the effects of sea level rise on coastal wetlands. Regional and statewide projections that encompass larger areas require some form of spatially valid data averaging. However, the resulting projections will not be as accurate as those based on the nearest tide station. 3. Projection method should be based on the most up-to-date science available. The global eustatic sea level rise projections used to estimate future local relative sea level rise should ideally reflect the latest science. Mediating among the competing scientifically credible predictions is, however, a challenge. We recommend relying on expert consensus judgments such as those developed for the National Climate Assessment and those forthcoming from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Users must accept, however, that the science will continue to evolve and that universal agreement amongst all scientists is unlikely over the foreseeable future. 4. Projection estimate choice should reflect planning constituency risk posture. In the absence of a compelling need for statewide consistency, the choice to base vulnerability assessments and adaptation alternative evaluations on different projection estimates, e.g. high, medium, or low, ought to be made by the relevant constituency. We join many other scientists and practitioners in encouraging adaptation planners to use a range of projection estimates to enable assessing the sensitivity of vulnerability or adaptation findings to the choice of projection estimate. 5. State inter-agency consistency for projection method and estimate is desirable to minimize confusion at regional and local levels. We recommend that an effort be made to generate consensus among state agencies on projection methods and estimates to be applied to all state policies and programs. Such consistency will encourage comparable sea level rise estimates among local jurisdictions and enable equitable distribution of funding and services. Moreover, consistency at the state level will facilitate delivering a more uniform 125

136 narrative about the risks and vulnerabilities associated with sea level rise to decision makers and the public. 6. Develop a single sea level rise projection tool that can meet most coastal adaptation planning needs. A single state-sponsored initiative to develop and maintain such a tool will be more efficient than multiple initiatives with overlapping applications. Doing so also will facilitate implementing recommendation #6. The Sketch Planning Tool being developed by the GeoPlan Center for FDOT has excellent potential for serving as such a tool. We recommend that FDOT consider incorporating the NOAA projection curves in the tool as well as developing applications for estimating the effects of different sea level rise scenarios on tropical cyclone storm surge boundaries and the boundaries of coastal Special Flood Hazard Areas (1% annual flood). We also suggest continuing to enhance the flexibility of the tool to allow users to select among a range of options that would be applicable to their decision context. Investment in this tool will require funding for ongoing maintenance as well as updates to reflect changing scientific understanding and improved projection methods. However, a central repository for such information would increase efficiency. 7. Continue to rely on SLAMM for coastal wetland adaptation planning. The Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model remains the tool of choice for assessing the vulnerability of coastal wetlands to sea level rise. It also can be used to produce inundation scenarios, but does not have the versatility of the FDOT Sketch Planning Tool. Both tools offer sufficient user flexibility to enable applying the same sea level rise projection methods and estimates to the separate adaptation domains for which the tools are best suited. 8. Develop guidance and training for using these tools. Coastal adaptation planners at all levels of government in Florida would benefit from technical assistance guidance that lays out the steps for conducting sea level rise vulnerability assessments, including much of the information contained in this report about data sources, projection tools, projection alternatives, and the implications of those alternatives. Workshops designed around use of specific tools, especially the NOAA online Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer and the FDOT Sketch Planning Tool, would rapidly advance the capabilities of many local governments in the state and some of the RPCs. We do not recommend promoting use of the Climate Central Surging Seas tool at this time for uses other than visualization and awareness building because of its limited spatial resolution and vertical accuracy (see Appendix 2). 126

137 Appendix 1: Methods of Data Collection The FPDL Research Team conducted interviews and focus groups with officials throughout the state to determine needs and capacities for integrating sea level rise projections and scenarios into planning efforts. Government officials with responsibility for long range planning, hazard mitigation, or related functions were interviewed. A1-1 Organizations Sampled Local Governments Broward County City of Fort Lauderdale City of Naples Escambia County Flagler County Franklin County Gulf County Hillsborough County Nassau County Palm Beach County Pinellas County St. Johns County St. Lucie County Volusia County Wakulla County Regional Planning Councils Apalachee Regional Planning Council East Central Regional Planning Council North Central Regional Planning Council Northeast Florida Regional Council Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Water Management Districts Northwest Water Management District Southwest Water Management District 127

138 St. John s River Water Management District Suwanee Water Management District State Agencies Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Department of Health Florida Department of Transportation Florida Division of Emergency Management Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission A1-2 Focus Groups The FPDL Research Team hosted four webinar focus groups. Three of the focus groups focused on obtaining local government input from both cities and counties. The fourth focus group included planners working within Regional Planning Councils. The FPDL Research Team selected a sample of coastal local governments in Florida, which range in size and capacity, to include in the study. The local government focus group webinars were generally divided into low, medium, and high planning capacity groups. The FPDL Research Team invited both long range planning and emergency management planning staff members from each identified local government. The FPDL Research Team utilized the State Hazard Mitigation Plan Advisory Team (SHMPAT) and Community Resiliency Focus Group rosters to identify potential candidates for participation in the focus groups. Where no person was identified off of these two lists, the directors of the planning departments or regional planning council were selected. The Florida Division of Emergency Management s LMS Chair List was also used to identify LMS chairs and coordinators to invite from county governments. Invitations to the focus group webinars were sent out using with an included RSVP link. The included a brief description of our project, an attached list of basic questions that would be asked during the focus group, an informed consent form, and a clause requesting that the recipient of the forward the to agency staff that may be able to best answer the FPDL Research Team s questions. Therefore, the initial recipient of the invitation was not necessarily the staff member in attendance at the focus group. The focus group webinars were held with technical assistance from the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity staff. Each webinar began with a brief description by the FPDL Research Team about the project 128

139 followed by a guided discussion. The FPDL Research Team asked clarifying and follow-up questions when determined necessary. The focus group interview guide was utilized by the FPDL Research Team during each focus group. 1. Local Governments: What planning issues are your community/ agency currently addressing or might your community/ agency address in the next five years where changing sea level rise is or will be a concern? Regional Planning Councils: What planning issues are local governments in your region addressing where changing sea level rise is or will be a concern? 2. Local Governments: What information about sea level rise is your community/ agency using or might need to get access to address these concerns? Regional Planning Councils: What information about sea level rise is the RPC using or might need to access to help local governments address these concerns? 3. Have you done or might you do any formal assessment of vulnerability to sea level rise? If so, please describe what you have done or what plans you have for conducting this work. 4. What capacities do your community/ agency have to be able to produce or work with sea level rise projections for planning purposes? 5. What else would you like to share about the opportunities and constraints of integrating sea level rise vulnerability and adaptation into your planning context? Following the formal discussion, the FPDL Research Team allotted time at the end of the focus groups for open discussion among participants. A1-3 Telephone Interviews The FPDL Research Team utilized telephone interviews to obtain input from water management districts and state agencies as well as a few local government agencies and regional planning councils where staff were unable to participate in a scheduled focus group. Most of the agency contacts were obtained from the SHMPAT and Community Resiliency Focus Group Rosters or were obtained by referral from the FPDL Research Team s professional contacts. The FPDL Research Team initially contacted potential 129

140 interviewees via , which included a brief description of the project, the list of interview questions, an IRB consent form, and the same forwarding clause included in the focus group invitations. The interview guide for water management districts and state agencies is included below: 1. To what extent is your community/agency currently concerned about sea level rise? o If positive response, move to questions 2-5 o If negative response, then move to follow up question What is holding your agency/community back? What are the barriers or constraints do you think? What sort of issues do you think your community/agency might confront related to sea level rise in the future? If positive response, move to questions 4-5. If negative response: It sounds like your community/agency doesn t see sea level rise as a significant concern. Can you say a little more about that perspective? 2. What planning questions are you currently addressing where changing sea level rise has been a concern? 3. What information about sea level rise have you used to address this concern? o o o o o o What format would you need to be able to use it? At what mapping scale do you think you would want to use this information? What sources of SLR projection estimates do you use? Are you conducting a formal assessment of vulnerability to sea level rise? If so, please describe? What capacity do you have in house to develop or use SLR scenarios and projections? If knowledgeable, move to institutional capacity question list If not knowledgeable, ask follow up: Who can we talk to who would know more about your agency s capacity? What agencies or organizations do you turn to for obtaining the necessary information or for developing SLR scenarios? 130

141 o Are you considering any specific adaptation alternatives or strategies? Such as? 4. What planning questions might you address in the next five years for which you would want information about sea level rise? 5. What information about sea level rise would you need to answer those questions? o o o o o o What format would you need to be able to use it? At what mapping scale do you think you would want to use this information? What sources of SLR projection estimates might you turn to? Do you think you would need to conduct a formal assessment of vulnerability to sea level rise to address the concerns you have identified? If so, please describe? What agencies or organizations might you turn to for obtaining the necessary information or for developing SLR scenarios? Are there specific adaptation strategies that you think your community/agency might consider? Such as? Institutional Capacity Prompts 1. To what extent do you have expertise and necessary resources in house to develop SLR projections or mapping for assessing vulnerability to sea level rise inundation and coastal flooding? 2. To what extent do you rely on other agencies for expertise, data or information to develop or use SLR projections or mapping for assessing vulnerability? Which agencies do you turn to? 3. What levels of funding have you devoted to developing or using SLR projections and mapping to enhance your SLR planning capabilities? The FPDL Research Team recorded all telephone interviews and focus groups. Handwritten logs of interviews were also maintained by the FPDL Research Team. In addition to interviewing agency staff members, the FPDL Research Team supplemented data collection utilizing broader academic, governmental, and professional literature, as well as participation in related webinars and events hosted by other agencies. 131

142 132

143 Appendix 2: Sea Level Rise Adaptation Planning Analytic Tools and Resources A2-1 Climate Central Surging Seas Climate Central s Surging Seas includes a web-based visualization tool (Climate Central, 2013d) similar to NOAA s sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts viewer (NOAA CSC, 2103), but with greater utility. Users can depict scenarios of sea level rise plus storm surge 1 for one-foot height intervals from 1 to 10 feet above local mean high water relative to 2009 (Strauss, Tebaldi, & Ziemlinski, 2102, pp. 4; 12). Decade balloons mark 55 tide stations for which there is at least a 1-in-6 chance of the selected water level occurring at least once during the time interval relative to Surging Seas 2.0 will include Risk Finder, an interactive data toolkit that shows populations, infrastructure, and assets exposed to coastal flooding (defined as mean high water) aggravated by sea level rise (Climate Central, 2013a; Strauss, Tebaldi, et al., 2102). Current sea level rise inundation scenarios are based on the global eustatic sea level rise projections published by Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED) maintained by the U.S. Geological Survey (Climate Central, 2013b and 2013c). The horizontal resolution of the coastal data is 1/3 arc second or about 10 meters, while the overall absolute vertical accuracy is 1.89 meters (root mean square error) (Strauss, Ziemlinski, et al. 2012a). The 2.0 upgrade assesses exposure of countless infrastructure and other elements from airports to road miles, from schools to hospitals to wastewater treatment plants in order to allow users to tabulate and tally vulnerability by zip code, legislative districts, agency districts, planning districts, and other administrative units, from local through state through federal levels (Climate Central, 2013a). 1 Apparently Climate Central uses the term storm surge to represent the historic 1 percent annual coastal flood (Strauss, Tebaldi, & Ziemlinski, 2102, p. 4). 2 Their odds calculations assume that 90 percent of global sea level rise since 1880 has resulted from global warming (Strauss, Tebaldi, & Ziemlinski, 2102, p. 12). 133

144 Strauss, Tebaldi, and Ziemlinski (2102, p. 6) describe their methods as follows: To analyze future high water levels from sea level rise plus storm surge and tides, we studied 55 water level gauges around the US. We combined local factors, such as sinking land, and global future sea level rise estimates, to make local sea level rise projections at each site. We then used historic patterns of local extreme water levels to forecast future probabilities of extremes assuming the same patterns continue, but augmented by the projected local sea level rise. Our analysis also included developing confidence intervals around best estimates. SurgingSeas.org/FloodAnalysis provides more detail. To estimate how global warming shifts the odds of high storm surges, we computed extreme event probabilities in a hypothetical world with no warminginduced sea level rise, past or future, and then compared the results with our first calculations including warming. We retained local sea level change from vertical land movement in the no-warming scenario. Based on a review of scientific literature, we assumed that 10% of the global average sea level rise observed since 1880 came from factors other than warming, and so also retained this 10% of global rise in the no-warming scenario. The tool also takes into account social vulnerability to identify threatened communities and populations. The data underlying the tool will be downloadable and the tool will be able to generate interactive maps, tables, and figures as well as risk timelines and other tools for assessing vulnerability to sea level rise. A2-2 COAST Damage Assessment Tool The Coastal Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Tool (COAST) is a Global Mapper SDK software product that predicts damages from varying amounts of sea level rise and storms of various intensities and evaluates relative benefits and costs of response strategies (New England Environmental Finance Center, 2013). It uses tide gauge data and locally derived data on vulnerable assets (real estate, economic activity, infrastructure, natural resources, human health, others) and candidate adaptation actions wherever possible. The user can create a specific exceedance curve attaching probability of occurrence to water-level rise for a given climate change scenario over a certain time period. Multiple climate change and adaptation scenarios, each with multiple time periods, will be possible (e.g., 2010, 2040, 2070, and 134

145 2100). The COAST tool calculates the expected value (EV) of the damages for that climate change scenario and cumulative damages over the time period leading up to the event (Blue Marble Geographics, 2013). Users enter their own data, including the following (Blue Marble Geographics, 2013, pp. 3-4): DEM vector layers of assets to be assessed depth-damage functions that define... the percentage of the assets value that... [are] lost for each increment in flood depth for each asset type tabular data for storm surge heights and probabilities (recurrence intervals) tabular eustatic sea level rise curve data annual average rate of sea level rise for the nearest tide station tidal datum A tutorial data set apparently includes eustatic sea level rise projections derived from Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009). It is not clear how local tide gauge data are used in the tool to derive inundation surfaces (Blue Marble Geographics, 2013, p. 14; Kirshen et al., 2012; Merrill et al., 2012). COAST output is in the form of [KML] files compatible with Google Earth, and tables showing cumulative expected damages for the selected vulnerable asset under the adaptation scenarios stakeholders have developed, that allow cost benefit analysis of candidate adaptation actions.... (New England Environmental Finance Center, 2013). KML files can be converted to shapefiles in ArcGIS. Specific outputs include the following (Blue Marble Geographics, 2013, p. 4): A KML layer showing the flooded area and the calculated damages for the defined flooding scenario. The assets will be extruded to indicate the relative amount of damages. A KML layer showing the flooded area and calculated damages based only on Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) and the rise in sea level for the scenario. Again, the assets will be extruded to show the relative damage amounts. An Excel spreadsheet containing the cumulative expected damages for the base no action scenario, and for each specified adaptation. 135

146 A2-3 Coastal Resilience Network Flood Scenario Decision Support Tools The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is the lead in a collaborative initiative to develop an array of online visualization decision support tools for community assessment of coastal vulnerability that may be useful to Florida coastal communities and regional and state agencies. Scheduled to be launched sometime during summer 2013, the network website ( coastalresilience.org/tools/decision-support-tools/plugins) describes them as follows: The decision support tools for Coastal Resilience include a visualization platform where ecological, social, and economic information can be viewed alongside sea level rise and storm surge scenarios in specific geographies. In addition, a modular, configurable plugin architecture allows specific geographies to have tools designed specifically for geoprocessing and display. These cater to the needs of stakeholders, policies and planning processes. Plugins can be used to simplify complex relationships or models, convey a specific ecological or social concept, or used to compare different future condition scenarios. The individual plugins include the following: coastal defense, community planning, flood scenarios, future habitats, habitat explorer, restoration explorer, and risk explorer. Similar to the NOAA sea level rise viewer, users of the coastal resilience tool cannot produce digital output. For the flood scenario plugin, the network has mapped several sea level rise scenarios for New York and Connecticut based on the IPCC s emission scenarios and local storm surge data. At present sea level rise data for Florida are only available for the Charlotte Harbor estuary area ( coastalresilience.org/). A2-4 FDOT/GeoPlan Sea Level Scenario Sketch Planning Tool As described in Section 1, the GeoPlan Center at the University of Florida is working with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to develop a sea level scenario Sketch Planning Tool (leo.ags.geoplan.ufl. edu/slr/) that can be integrated into the state s Environmental Screening Tool (EST) internet application for its Environmental Efficient Transportation Decision Making process (ETDM) (Thomas, Watkins, & Cahill, 2013). This online tool should be ready for use sometime in August 2103 (Cahill, 2013a). 136

147 The sea level scenario Sketch Planning Tool enables users to view map images online that depict sea level inundation scenarios for three sea level rise projection ranges, three time horizons (2040, 2060, and 2100), and four tidal datums (MLLW, MLW, MHW, or MHHW) 3. The user can lay these scenarios over an array of transportation infrastructure layers from the state s Roadway Characteristics Inventory (RCI) and Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) and a variety of base maps. The user also can run an animated time-lapse that illustrates how inundation boundaries may change over time. Users will be able to download the base maps, infrastructure layers, and inundation scenario layers, as well as the underlying statewide digital elevation model (DEM) (Thomas, 2013). Thus more advanced users can use the DEMs and layers to create their own inundation scenarios and conduct their own vulnerability assessments for other capital and natural assets. Thomas at el. (2013) report that the Sketch Planning Tool incorporates decadal sea level rise projections based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers guidance for incorporating the effects of projected future sea level change in planning, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining Corps projects (USACE, 2011) as described above in Chapter 3. According to Watkins (2013), the tool incorporates the Corp s Excel SLR Curve Calculator available at The GeoPlan Center is designing the tool for use at the FDOT region scale (Thomas, Watkins, & Cahill, 2013). Thus they developed the base DEM for constructing the sea level inundation layers with a horizontal resolution of 5 meters, i.e. the grid cells are 5 m x 5 m. The vertical resolution varies depending on the accuracy of the LiDAR data upon which individual sections of the statewide DEM are based. For coastal areas, the vertical resolution is approximately 10 inches. Where a district includes more than one NOAA tide station, the GeoPlan Center will calculate an area weighted average for the annual average relative sea level rise input variable (Thomas et al., 2013). The GeoPlan Center will calculate separate tide station averages for the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of District 2 (see Figure A2-1). The Center is also creating a user interface for its Inundation Surface Calculator which will enable users to create their own inundation surfaces. The primary inputs to the calculator are (1) tide station feature layer (which contains the stations and their sea level change projections by decade and tidal datum), (2) a DEM, and (3) a data layer of oceans and rivers. The outputs are (1) a bathtub inundation surface, (2) a refined inundation 3 MLLW = Mean Lower Low Water MLW = Mean Low Water MHW = Mean High Water MHHW = Mean Higher High Water 137

148 surface with hydrologic connectivity filter run that shows only areas below sea level that are hydrologically connected to the ocean, and (3) a depth of inundation surface. Figure A2-1. FDOT districts and NOAA tide stations. Source: Figure 3, Thomas et al. (2013, p. 14). The GeoPlan Center will continue to update the online Sketch Planning Tool to reflect any changes in the Corps of Engineers guidance (Thomas, 2013). They also could incorporate other projection curves/ tables, e.g. the NOAA (2012) curves (see discussion in Chapter 3) and time horizons (with increments as little as five years). The center can produce higher-resolution DEMs, e.g. 1-meter grid cells, for larger-scale analyses and can readily add other data layers to supplement the RCI and SIS infrastructure layers. The Inundation Surface Calculator will enable users to use their own DEMs as inputs. FDOT also is interested in incorporating layers that depict the effects of higher sea levels on storm surge boundaries (Cahill, 2013a). However, any additional enhancements will require additional funding. A2-5 InVEST Coastal Vulnerability Model The InVEST Coastal Vulnerability model estimates how modifications of the biological and physical environment (i.e. direct and indirect removal of natural habitats for coastal development) can affect... exposure to storminduced erosion and flooding (inundation) while taking sea level rise into account (The Natural Capital Project, 2012b). The output is in the form of a vulnerability index which can be used to show where coastal populations are threatened. 138

149 Model inputs include: population distribution, local coastal geomorphology, locations of natural habitats (e.g., sea grass, kelp, wetlands, etc.), rates of net sea-level change, a depth contour that can be used as an indicator for surge level, a DEM representing the topography of the coastal area, and values for the highest observed wind speed and wave power. The model creates population and exposure index maps using spatial representations of seven bio-geophysical variables: geomorphology, relief, natural habitats, net sea level change, wind exposure, wave exposure, and a depth contour that can be used to estimate surge potential. Users must generate their own estimates of net sea level change based on local relative sea level rise. The authors recommend following the method described by Gornitz (1990). The outputs are shoreline maps, with a coarse spatial resolution defined by the user of 250 meters or more, that depict a number of indices and rankings of input variables. Users can create other maps to suit their needs. A2-6 NOAA Coastal Services Center A2-6.1 Coastal Inundation Mapping Resources The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration s Coastal Services Center (CSC) recently published a basic introduction to mapping coastal inundation from sea level rise (NOAA CSC, 2102a). The CSC also will offer, upon request, a two-day instructor-led coastal inundation mapping course described as follows: [A] combination of lectures and hands-on exercises to give students a better understanding of coastal inundation issues and mapping 139

150 methods using a geographic information system [ArcGIS 10 or 10.1]. The course is designed for certified floodplain managers and county, state, and municipal officials, including planners, emergency managers, and coastal resource managers. Lecture topics include the different types of coastal inundation, the applications and limitations of various types of inundation products, elevation data sets and datums, and the spatial methods used to map flood areas in coastal environments. In hands-on GIS exercises, students connect to Web map services, access elevation data, convert between vertical datums, create and manage digital elevation models, map inundation model output, develop inundation zones, and map sea level rise using modeled tidal surfaces. Details about the course and on-site host responsibilities, costs, and site requirements are available at inundationmap. A2-6.2 Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer The CSC also hosts an online Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer ( The tool can be used to depict coastal inundation from one-foot sea level increments at intervals between 1 and 6 feet above mean higher high water (MHHW) level 4. Users also can display layers that depict the confidence level of projected inundation areas, social and economic vulnerability index scores, coastal marsh loss and migration, and shallow coastal flooding areas. Users can obtain the underlying DEMs used in the viewer as well as the layer files, but they cannot produce digital data or image outputs (NOAA CSC, 2012b). A2-6.3 Sea Level Rise Tool for Sandy Recovery NOAA, in partnership with FEMA and the Corps of Engineers, has created a set of coastal flood map services for the areas of New York and New Jersey impacted by Hurricane Sandy to assist in post-disaster redevelopment planning (NOAA, 2013). The maps display the best available FEMA special flood hazard areas (SFHA) combined with four sea level rise scenarios for 2050 and 2100 (lowest, intermediate-low, intermediate-high, and highest) developed by the NOAA-led interagency for a report prepared as input to 4 The inundation maps are created by subtracting the NOAA VDATUM MHHW surface from the digital elevation model.... The NOAA VDatum model converts elevation data between tidal, orthometric, and ellipsoidal vertical datums, allowing users to establish a common reference system for all elevation datasets. VDatum is based on a hydrodynamic model to convert between tidal and orthometric datums (NOAA CSC, pp. 3; 6-7). 140

151 the National Climate Assessment (Parris et al., 2012) (see discussion in Section of this document). This is the first such visualization tool that allows users to see how future sea levels will affect special flood hazard area boundaries. A2-7 SLAMM: Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model Park et al. (1986) developed the first Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) with EPA funding in the mid 1980s. The current model, version 6.0.1, was last modified in 2010 (Clough et al., 2010). The Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model (SLAMM) simulates changes in the area and habitat type of tidal marshes in response to long-term changes in sea level (Warren Pinnacle Consulting, 2013). The model simulates five processes associated with sea level rise: inundation and associated salt boundary migration, sediment erosion, barrier island overwash, soil saturation from rising ground water elevation, and sediment accretion. Required input data include a DEM, NOAA tidal data, Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory data, and estimates of local subsidence and isostatic adjustment. Model outputs include tabular data and Microsoft Word and raster maps of tidal marsh changes for the projected time period (Clough & Larson, 2010, p. 13) (see for example Figure A2-2). Local relative sea level can be estimated in one of two ways (Clough et al., 2010, p. 4): Relative sea level change is computed for each site for each time step; it is the sum of the historic eustatic trend, the site-specific rate of change of elevation due to subsidence and isostatic Figure A2-2. SLAMM 2100 projection for Florida Bay. Source: Adapted from Clough (2010). 141

152 adjustment, and the accelerated rise depending on the scenario chosen (Titus et al. 1991, IPCC, 2001). Alternatively, local SLR can be estimated as a function of eustatic trends and a spatial map of land uplift or subsidence. The algorithm for option (a) is as follows (Clough, 2010): Users may choose from a variety of options for estimating future sea level rise based on a series of 2100 end points (Clough et al., 2010, pp. 5-8). These include eustatic sea level rise curves based on the IPCC s Third Assessment Report (TAR) for a variety of SRES scenarios (Houghton et al., 2001), eustatic curves for three pre-specified 2100 sea level elevations: 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 meters, and a eustatic curve for a user-specified 2100 sea level elevation. Curves for options b and c are created by scaling up (or down) the TAR SRES A1B maximum projection curve. SLAMM designers added options b and c to the model to accommodate evolving understanding of the effects of ice sheet melting on sea level rise and the higher 2100 estimates that have been published since 2001 including Pfeffer et al. (2008), Grinsted et al. (2009), and Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009). A2-8 USACE Sea Level Change Calculator The Corps of Engineers recently mounted a web-based interface (USACE, 2013) where users can generate relative sea level change curves and tabular data in five-year intervals for a selected project start year and NOAA tide station reference, following the Corps s EC protocol (USACE, 2011) detailed above in Chapter 3. Output includes projections based on the NRC (1987) intermediate (1.0 m by 2100 relative to 1992) and high (1.5 m) curves plus a historic trend projection based on the tide gauge record for the selected tide station. Users also may choose to produce curves and tabular output online based on global esutatic sea level change curves developed by NOAA for the National Climate Assessment (Parris et al., 142

153 2012). These include 2100 end points of 2.0, 1.2, 0.5, and 0.2 meters relative to 1992 (see Chapter 3). A new addition to the online tool is a field for the base flood elevation (BFE) of an area. The calculator simply adds the BFE to the calculated sea level rise projections. To use this feature appropriately, a user would have to make separate calculations for each special flood hazard area based on its BFE. Users of the web interface may download an Excel version of the calculator that produces graphical and tabular output in both feet and meters based on the Corps s methodology. See Figure A2-3 for sample output. However, the NOAA curves are not included in the Corps s Excel spreadsheet. Figure A2-3. USACE sea level change projections, Cedar Key, Florida tide station. Source: USACE (2013). A2-9 References Cited Blue Marble Geographics. (2013). Coastal Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Tool (COAST) tutorial. Retrieved from COAST-download.php. Cahill, M. (2013a). Personal communication, June 13. Florida Department of Transportation. 143

154 Cahill, M. (2013b). Personal communication, June 25. Florida Department of Transportation. Climate Central (2013d). Surging seas. Retrieved from climatecentral.org/surgingseas/. Clough, J.S. (2010). The SLAMM model (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model). Retrieved from SLAMM_Presentation.ppt. Clough, J.S. & Larson, E.C. (2010). SLAMM beta, users manual. Retrieved from Users_Manual.pdf. Clough, J.S., Park, R.A. Fuller, R. (2010). SLAMM 6 beta technical documentation. Release beta. Retrieved from com/prof/slamm6/slamm6_technical_documentation.pdf. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (2006). Efficient transportation decision making while protecting the environment. Retrieved from delivery_stream/etdm_article.pdf. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (2013a). What is Environmental Screening Tool (EST)? Retrieved from fla-etat.org/est/. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). (2013b). FDOT Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) process overview. Retrieved from Gornitz, V. (1990). Vulnerability of the east coast, U.S.A. to future sea level rise. Journal of Coastal Research, 9. Grinsted, A., Moore, J.C., & Jevrejeva, S. (2009). Reconstructing sea level from paleo and projected temperatures 200 to 2100AD. Climate Dynamics. DOI: /s Houghton, J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D.J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P.J., Dai, X., Maskell, K., & Johnson, C.A. (eds.). (2001). Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: Cambridge University Press. ICF International. (2008). Integrating climate change into the transportation planning process. Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved from 144

155 adaptation/resources_and_publications/integrating_climate_change/ climatechange.pdf. Houghton, J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D.J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P.J., Dai, X., Maskell, K., & Johnson, C.A. (Eds.). (2001). Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the third assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (pp ). Retrieved from ipcc_tar/. Kirshen, P., Merrill, S., Slovinsky, P., & Richardson, N. (2012). Simplified method for scenario-based risk assessment adaptation planning in the coastal zone. Climatic Change, 113, DOI /s z. Merrill, S., Kirshen, P., Yakovleff, D., Lloyd, S., Keeley, C., & Hill, B. (2012). COAST in Action: 2012 Projects from New Hampshire and Maine. New England Environmental Finance Center Series Report # Retrieved from pdf. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2013). Sea level rise planning tool - New Jersey and New York State (Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester Counties). Retrieved from noaa.gov/home/item.html?id=3097fc32e98f490cbacc e9. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2012a). Mapping coastal inundation primer. Retrieved from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (NOAA CSC). (2012b). Frequent questions: Digital coast sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts viewer. Retrieved from gov/digitalcoast/_/pdf/slrviewerfaq.pdf. New England Environmental Finance Center. (2013). COAST v.1.0. Retrieved from Park, R.A., Armentano, T.V., & Cloonan, C.L. (1986). Predicting the effects of sea level rise on coastal wetlands. In J.G. Titus (ed.), Effects of changes in stratospheric ozone and global climate, Vol. 4: Sea level rise, pp Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Parris, A., Bromirski, P., Burkett, V., Cayan, D., Culver, M., Hall, J., Horton, R., Knuuti, K., Moss, R., Obeysekera, J., Sallenger, A., & Weiss, J. (2012). Global sea level rise scenarios for the US National Climate Assessment. 145

156 NOAA Tech Memo OAR CPO-1. Retrieved from sites/cpo/reports/2012/noaa_slr_r3.pdf. Pfeffer, W. T., Harper, J. T. & O Neel, S. (2008). Kinematic constraints on glacier contributions to 21st-century sea-level rise. Science, 321, DOI: /science Rosati, J. & Kraus, N. (2009). Sea level rise and consequences for navigable coastal inlets. Shore and Beach, 77(4): 2-7. Rosenzweig, C. & Solecki, W. (Eds.). (2013). Climate risk information 2013: Observations, climate change projections, and maps. New York: New York City Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved from information_2013_report.pdf. Strauss, B.H., Tebaldi, C., & Ziemlinski, R. (2012). Surging seas: Sea level rise, storms & global warming s threat to the US coast. Retrieved from Strauss, B.H., Ziemlinski, R., Weiss, J.L., & Overpeck, J.T. (2012). Tidally adjusted estimates of topographic vulnerability to sea level rise and flooding for the contiguous United States. Environmental Research Letters, 7, doi: / /7/1/ The Natural Capital Project. (2012b). Coastal vulnerability model. InVEST documentation. Retrieved from edu/~dataportal/invest-releases/documentation/current_release/ coastal_vulnerability.html. Thomas, A. (2013). Personal communication, June 13. University of Florida GeoPlan Center. Thomas, A., Pierre-Jean, R., Watkins, R. & Cahill, M. (2013). Development of a GIS tool for the preliminary assessment of the effects of predicted sea level and tidal change on transportation infrastructure. Transportation Research Board, 92nd Annual Meeting, January 13-17, Washington, D.C. #P Retrieved from docs/92_trb_annual_meeting/development%20of%20a%20gis%20 Tool%20for%20the%20Preliminary%20Assessment%20of%20the%20 Effects%20of%20Predicted%20Sea%20Level.pdf. Titus, J.G., Park, R.A., Leatherman, S.P., Weggel, J. R., Greene, M.S., Mausel, P.W., Trehan, M.S., Brown, S. Grant, C. & Yohe, G.W. (1991). Greenhouse 146

157 effect and sea level rise: Loss of land and the cost of holding back the sea. Coastal Management, 19, United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2011). Sea-level change considerations for civil works programs. EC usace.army.mil/toolbox/library/ecs/ec nov2011.pdf. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2013). Sea level change curves. Vermeer, M. & Rahmstorf, S. (2009). Global sea level linked to global temperature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(51), DOI: / pnas Warren Pinnacle Consulting. (2013). SLAMM: Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model. Retrieved from Watkins, R. (2013). Personal communication, June 26. University of Florida GeoPlan Center. 147

158 148