minimum technical standards (mts) final report of … · duval county, florida – lidar and...

MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS (MTS) Final Report of Specific Purpose Aerial Photography and Lidar Survey, Digital

Terrain Model and Contours for Duval County, Florida

2007 Ground Control Surveying, Aerial Photography, Lidar, Photogrammetric Breakline Compilation, Contours and Color Orthophotography of Duval County,

Florida

Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. City of Jacksonville Contract No. 6354-12

Dated March 7, 2007

Prepared by:

The Sanborn Map Company, Inc. 1935 Jamboree Dr. # 100

Colorado Springs, CO 80920

For

Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. 8381 Dix Ellis Trail, Suite 400

Jacksonville, FL 32556

Duval County, Florida – Lidar and Orthophotography Survey 1 - 81

Final Report of Ground Control Surveying, Aerial Photography, Lidar, Photogrammetric Breakline Compilation, Contours and Color Orthophotography

for Duval County, Florida

Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. City of Jacksonville Contract No. 6354-12

Dated March 7, 2007

For: Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc.

8381 Dix Ellis Trail, Suite 400 Jacksonville, FL 32556

By: The Sanborn Map Company, Inc.

1935 Jamboree Drive, Suite 100 Colorado Springs, CO 80920

Prepared by: Gary Eaton, PSM, PLS, CP

Florida Professional Surveyor and Mapper No. LS6319


Table of Contents

Type of Survey: Specific Purpose Survey ...................................................................................... 3 Name of Company .......................................................................................................................... 3 Name of Responsible Surveyor ...................................................................................................... 3 Orthophotography Survey Area...................................................................................................... 3 Map Reference ................................................................................................................................ 3 Scope of Work and Equipment and Software................................................................................. 4 Summary of Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar.......................................... 5 Acronyms and Definitions .............................................................................................................. 8 Ground Control Surveying.............................................................................................................. 9 AGPS/INS Aerial Photography .................................................................................................... 11 Fully Analytical Aerial Triangulation........................................................................................... 11 Terrestrial Lidar ............................................................................................................................ 12 Photogrammetric DTM Production and Contour Generation Methodology…………………….15 Color Orthophotography............................................................................................................... 16 Orthophotography Horizontal Accuracy Testing.......................................................................... 16 References..................................................................................................................................... 16 General Notes and Florida Surveyor's Seal .................................................................................. 18 List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 19

Appendix A: Aerial Photography Flight Diagram, Orthophoto Tiling Footprint and Orthophoto QA/QC Checkpoint Location Map........................................................................ 20 Appendix B: Lidar Flight Diagram, Lidar Tiling Footprint and Lidar QA/QC Checkpoint Location Map............................................................................................................................ 21 Appendix C: Aerial Photography Mission Flight Logs ............................................................ 22 Appendix D: Lidar Mission Flight Logs................................................................................... 24 Appendix E: Ground Control Surveying Coordinate Listing ................................................... 31 Appendix F: Aerial Sensor Certificate of Calibration (first 6 pages) ....................................... 36 Appendix G: Lidar Sensor Certificate of Calibration ............................................................... 42 Appendix H: Analytical Triangulation Summary Statistical Report ........................................ 61 Appendix I: Orthophotography Horizontal Accuracy Assessment Report............................... 62 Appendix J: Lidar Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report ....................................................... 63 Appendix K: Contour Mapping Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report .................................. 66 Appendix L: Listing of Orthophotography Tiles in Geo-TIF and MrSID Formats.................. 68 Appendix M: Listing of Lidar Tiles in LAS Format................................................................. 73 Appendix N: Listing of Digital Breakline Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format .................... 78 Appendix O: Listing of Contour Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format................................... 79 Appendix P: Listing of Lidar Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format........................................ 79 Appendix Q: Listing of Ortho Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format ...................................... 79 Appendix R: Listing of Metadata Files in ArcGIS XML Format............................................. 80 Appendix S: Listing of Digital Files included on the Hard Drive, which is a part of this Report.................................................................................................................................................... 81


Report of Lidar Digital Terrain Model, Breaklines, Contours and Orthophotography for Duval County, Florida

Type of Survey: Specific Purpose Survey This Minimum Technical Standards (MTS) report of a Specific Purpose Survey pertains to Photogrammetric Mapping Control Surveying, Digital Aerial Photography and Terrestrial Lidar acquisition, Color Orthophotography processing, Digital Terrain Model compilation and Contour generation performed in 2007, of 1054 - 5000’ x 5000’ tiles within Duval County, Florida and border counties. The deliverables were prepared under Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. Contract No. 6354-12 Dated March 7, 2007 with the City of Jacksonville, Florida. Included with this scope of work were additional requirements as outlined in Appendix A of the contract, which is a modified version of FDEM Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar version 0.9.

Purpose and Objective The primary purpose of this survey was for updating and upgrading the City of Jacksonville Master Stormwater Management Plan and floodplain maps under Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. Contract No. 6354-12 dated March 7, 2007 with the City of Jacksonville, Florida. The project objective was to delivery color orthophotography, lidar classified datasets, photogrammetrically compiled breaklines, two-foot contour interval mapping and project metadata conforming to a modified version of the FDEM Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar, version 0.9 dated 10/17/06. The project area for the lidar classified data, Digital Terrain Model compilation and contour mapping was the county boundary plus 200 feet. The project area for the color orthophotography was complete tile coverage of the county boundary plus a 200 feet buffer.

Source Data The orthophotography and lidar tile footprint was provided on July 9, 2007 and referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83/HARN, East Zone, US Survey Foot.

Name of Company The Sanborn Map Company, Inc. 1935 Jamboree Dr. # 100 Colorado Springs, CO 80920

Name of Responsible Surveyor Gary Eaton, PSM, PLS, CP Florida Professional Surveyor and Mapper (PSM) No. LS6319

Surveying Area The project area for this MTS report encompasses approximately 774 square mile within Duval County and small adjoining areas around the perimeter of the county Map Reference There are no hardcopy map sheets for this project.


Scope of Work Ground control surveying was performed in March, April and June 2007 and included recovering and targeting National Geodetic Survey control stations, establishing photo-identifiable photogrammetric mapping control points and establishing lidar QA/QC check point ground control surveying to support the identified accuracy specifications. The lidar QA/QC check point surveying took into consideration that the dominant land cover of Duval County was urban areas. The ground control surveying project coordinate listing is included in Appendix E. Digital aerial photography and terrestrial lidar aerial missions were conducted in March 2007 utilizing certified and calibrated sensors configured with airborne GPS and Inertial Navigation System technology. NGS control station HERLPORT (PID BC2492) was utilized as the ground base station during the aerial missions. Six NGS CORS were utilized in the airborne GPS and Inertial Navigation System technology post processing as base stations to QC the computed aerial photography photo center parameters. The aerial photography missions flight diagram and project coverage footprint graphic for this deliverable area is included in Appendix A. The lidar missions flight diagram and project coverage footprint graphic for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix B.

Color digital orthophotography was developed at one-foot resolution of the 945.18 square mile project area and delivered in the FDEM 5,000’ x 5,000’ modular tiling scheme geo-referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83/HARN, East Zone, US Survey Foot. Ortho grade DEM data was created at a 50 foot grid interval from the preliminary processed lidar bare earth data. The listing of orthophotography tiles for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix L.

Digital Terrain Modeling consisting of photogrammetrically compiled break lines and lidar bare earth DEM points were developed for the county boundary plus a 200 foot buffer. Two-foot interval contour mapping was developed utilizing the photogrammetrically compiled break lines and lidar bare earth DEM points for the county boundary plus a 200 foot buffer. The listing of digital breakline files in ArcGIS geodatabase format for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix N. The listing of digital contour files in ArcGIS geodatabase format for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix O.

Lidar mass point data was delivered in LAS 1.1 format for the county boundary plus a 200 foot buffer. The lidar mass point data was delivered in the FDEM 5,000’ x 5,000’ modular tiling scheme geo-referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83/HARN, East Zone, NAVD 88 and the unit of measurement was the US Survey Foot. The listing of lidar tiles in LAS format for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix M.

Equipment and Software The ground control surveying was performed entirely utilizing Trimble dual frequency GPS receivers, eGPS Solutions System and Trimble Geomatics Office software. Trimble 5700 and R8 GPS units were used in the field data collection process.

The digital aerial photography was acquired utilizing the Intergraph DMC digital mapping camera, serial number DMC01-044. Z/I Mission software was utilized for flight planning and Z/I PPS software was utilized to post process and QC the raw digital imagery.

The terrestrial lidar point data was acquired utilizing the Optech 3100 sensor, serial number 06SEN187. Mission planning was performed utilizing Optech mission planning software. Lidar post processing was performed utilizing Optech Realm and TerraSolid TerraScan and Terramodeler software.

The Analytical Aerial Triangulation processing was completed utilizing Intergraph ImageStation Automated Triangulation (ISAT) software and Intergraph SSK softcopy photogrammetric workstations.


The color orthophotography imagery was developed utilizing Intergraph OrthoPro software. Source data utilized to create the color orthophoto imagery formatted into FDEM’s 5,000’ x 5,000’ modular tiling scheme included the raw aerial imagery, the Analytical Aerial Triangulation results and the ortho grade DEM data. The ortho grade DEM data was created by creating a 50 foot point grid from the preliminary lidar bare earth data utilizing Global Mapper software.

The DTM break lines were created photogrammetrically utilizing Intergraph SSK softcopy photogrammetric workstations operating in the MicroStation environment. Source data utilized to create the breaklines included the raw aerial imagery, the Analytical Aerial Triangulation results and the lidar bare earth data.

The cartographic edit and contour generation was performed utilizing AutoCAD, MAP-Editor and Terramodel software. The quality control, topology and qualitative accuracy assessment of the Digital Terrain Model point, break line data and contours were performed utilizing ArcGIS and PLTS software.

Summary of Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar The photogrammetric mapping control must be adequate to support the identified accuracy specifications. A survey report that documents and certifies the procedures and accuracies of the horizontal and vertical control, aircraft positing systems and aerial triangulation used in the photogrammetric mapping project shall be submitted. The horizontal and vertical control shall be based on direct ties to National Geodetic Survey control stations, National Spatial Reference System (NSRS). The horizontal control shall reference the North American Datum of 1983/High Accuracy Reference Network (NAD 83/HARN). The vertical control shall reference the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) using Geoid03 to convert ellipsoidal heights to orthometric heights The Florida Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar requires the aerial photography be collected using an approved aerial sensor at a nominal ground sampling resolution of 0.9 feet and a sun angle of 30 degrees or greater. The orthophotography shall meet a verified horizontal accuracy of 7.6 feet at the 95% confidence level (4.4 feet RMSE) as specified in the FGDC Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Part 3: National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part3/index_html). A minimum of 20 independently surveyed image checkpoints will be used for horizontal accuracy testing and control acceptance for every 500-square-mile subset of the project area. Check points shall be distributed so that points are spaced at intervals of at least 10% of the diagonal distance across the dataset and at least 20% of the points are located in each quadrant of the dataset. Correction for "building lean" in urban areas is not required. The orthophotography is referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, 1983/HARN and the appropriate zone; as indicated above, the data are delivered in the East Zone of the Florida State Plane Coordinate System. The unit of measurement is the US Survey Feet. The vertical datum is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Geoid03 was used to convert ellipsoidal heights to orthometric heights. The Project Specifications required the Lidar data to be collected using an approved sensor with a maximum field of view (FOV) of 20˚ on either side of nadir, with maximum post spacing of 4 feet in unobscured areas for random point data and with vertical root mean square error (RMSEz) ≤ 0.30 ft and Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) ≤ 0.60 ft at the 95% confidence level in open terrain (bare-earth and low grass); this accuracy is equivalent to 1 ft contours in open terrain when tested in accordance with the National Map Accuracy Standard (NMAS). In other land cover categories (brush lands and low trees, forested areas fully covered by trees, and urban areas), the Florida GIS Baseline Specifications required

http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part3/index_html�


the Lidar data’s RMSEz to be ≤ 0.61 ft with Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) and Consolidated Vertical Accuracy (CVA) ≤ 1.19 ft at the 95% confidence level. This accuracy is equivalent to 2 ft contours when tested in accordance with the NMAS. Obscured vegetated areas are to be defined for areas where the vertical data may not meet the data accuracy requirements due to heavy vegetation. The digital orthophotography deliverables includes geo-referenced uncompressed TIF color images, MrSID 20:1 compressed color images, the DEM utilized in the orthophotography generation and the Orthophoto Geodatabase conforming to Baseline Specifications in Appendix A – Orthophotography Specifications – of the Florida Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar, version 0.9 dated 10/17/06, but modified by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. Contract No. 6354-12 Dated March 7, 2007 with the City of Jacksonville, Florida. The official State Plane Coordinate System tiling scheme was provided by FDEM for the East Zone. The aerial photography missions flight diagram, project coverage footprint and orthophoto QA/QC checkpoint location graphic for this deliverable area is included in Appendix A. The terrestrial Lidar deliverables include mass points, breaklines and contours produced to a modified Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and Lidar in Appendix B of the Florida GIS Baseline Specifications Draft Release version 0.09 dated 10/17/06. The official State Plane Coordinate System tiling scheme was downloaded from the FDEM website for the East Zone. The lidar missions flight diagram, project coverage footprint and lidar QA/QC checkpoint location graphic for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix B. This terrestrial Lidar mass points, delivered to LAS 1.1 specifications, including the following LAS classification codes:

• Class 1 = Unclassified, and used for all other features that do not fit into the Classes 2, 7, 9, or 12, including vegetation, buildings, etc.

• Class 2 = Ground, includes accurate LiDAR points in overlapping flight lines

• Class 7 = Noise, includes LiDAR points in overlapping flight lines

• Class 9 = Water, includes LiDAR points in overlapping flight lines

• Class 12 = Overlap, including areas of overlapping flight lines which have been deliberately removed from Class 1 because of their reduced accuracy.

A total of 151 QA/QC check points were surveyed and a total of 121 QA/QC check points were utilized in the lidar vertical accuracy assessment. As designed, a number of surveyed check points were around the perimeter of the project area and utilized in the lidar post processing classification process but fell outside of the lidar delivery area and therefore were not included in the lidar vertical accuracy assessment reporting. The 121 QA/QC check points provided an even distribution of points across the project area with a greater number of check points concentrated within the predominant land covers, which are categories 1 and 4. The 121 QA/QC check points were distributed over the following four land cover categories:

• Category 1 = bare-earth and low grass – 37 check points

• Category 2 = brush lands and low trees – 19 check points

• Category 3 = forested areas fully covered by trees – 15 check points

• Category 4 = urban areas – 48 check points The following vertical accuracy guidelines were specified by the Florida Baseline Specifications:

• In category 1, the RMSEz must be ≤ 0.30 ft (Accuracyz ≤ 0.60 ft at the 95% confidence level); Accuracyz in Category 1 refers to Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) which defines how


accurate the elevation data are when not complicated by asphalt or vegetation that may cause elevations to be either lower or higher than the bare earth terrain. This is equivalent to the accuracy expected of 1 ft contours in non-vegetated terrain.

• In category 2, the RMSEz must be ≤ 0.61 ft (Accuracyz ≤ 1.19 ft at the 95% confidence level); Accuracyz in Category 2 refers to Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) in brush lands and low trees and defines how accurate the elevation data are when complicated by such vegetation that frequently causes elevations to be lower or higher than the bare earth terrain. This is equivalent to the accuracy expected of 2 ft contours in such terrain.

• In category 3, the RMSEz must be ≤ 0.61 ft (Accuracyz ≤ 1.19 ft at the 95% confidence level); Accuracyz in Category 3 refers to Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) in forested areas fully covered by trees and defines how accurate the elevation data are when complicated by such vegetation that frequently causes elevations to be lower or higher than the bare earth terrain. This is equivalent to the accuracy expected of 2 ft contours in such terrain.

• In category 4, the RMSEz must be ≤ 0.61 ft (Accuracyz ≤ 1.19 ft at the 95% confidence level); Accuracyz in Category 4 refers to Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) in urban areas typically paved with asphalt and defines how accurate the elevation data are when complicated by asphalt that frequently causes elevations to be lower than the bare earth terrain. This is equivalent to the accuracy expected of 2 ft contours in such terrain.

• In all land cover categories combined, the RMSEz must be ≤ 0.61 ft (Accuracyz ≤ 1.19 ft at the 95% confidence level); Accuracyz in all categories combined refers to Consolidated Vertical Accuracy (CVA).

• The terms FVA, SVA and CVA are explained in Chapter 3, Accuracy Standards & Guidelines, of “Digital Elevation Model Technologies and Applications: The DEM Users Manual,” published by the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS), January, 2007.

The photogrammetrically compiled DTM break line compilation deliverable consists of eight types of break lines:

1. Closed water body features

2. Linear hydrographic features

3. Coastal shorelines

4. Road features

5. Soft features

6. Obscured vegetated areas

7. Island features

8. Overpasses and bridges The 1”=200’ scale two-foot contour interval mapping delivery consisted of lidar bare earth mass points and photogrameetrically compiled break lines utilizing the March 2007 aerial photography conforming to National Map Accuracy Standards for 2-ft contour interval mapping at 1”=200’ scale. Two-foot contours within obscured vegetated areas are attributed as such and are not required to meet National Map Accuracy Standards. Additionally, 1-ft supplemental contours were delivered for graphical purposes.


Acronyms and Definitions Accuracyr Horizontal (radial) accuracy at the 95% confidence level, defined by the NSSDA Accuracyz Vertical accuracy at the 95% confidence level, defined by the NSSDA AGPS/INS Airborne GPS/Inertial Navigation System ASFPM Association of State Floodplain Managers ASPRS American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing CFM Certified Floodplain Manager (ASFPM) CMAS Circular Map Accuracy Standard, defined by the NMAS CP Certified Photogrammetrist (ASPRS) CVA Consolidated Vertical Accuracy, defined by the NDEP and ASPRS DEM Digital Elevation Model (gridded DTM) DTM Digital Terrain Model (mass points and breaklines to map the bare earth terrain) DSM Digital Surface Model (top reflective surface, includes treetops and rooftops) E East FDEM Florida Division of Emergency Management FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FGDC Federal Geographic Data Committee FOV Field of View FVA Fundamental Vertical Accuracy, defined by the NDEP and ASPRS GIS Geographic Information System Surveyor LAS Lidar data format as defined by ASPRS Lidar Light Detection and Ranging H Height HARN High Accuracy Reference Network (NAD 83/2007) MHHW Mean Higher High Water MHW Mean High Water, defines official shoreline in Florida MLLW Mean Lower Low Water MLW Mean Low Water MSL Mean Sea Level N North NAD 83 North American Datum of 1983 NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NDEP National Digital Elevation Program NGS National Geodetic Survey NMAS National Map Accuracy Standard NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NSSDA National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy NSRS National Spatial Reference System OPUS Online Positioning Service Pt-id Photo- control point identifier PID Permanent IDentifier (six character alpha/numeric) PS Photogrammetric Surveyor PSM Professional Surveyor and Mapper (Florida) QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control RMSEr Horizontal (radial) Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) computed from RMSEx and RMSEy RMSEx Horizontal Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) in the x-dimension (Easting) RMSEy Horizontal Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) in the y-dimension (Northing) RMSEz Vertical Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) in the z-dimension (Elevation) RTK Real Time Kenematic


Std. Dev. Standard Deviation SVA Supplemental Vertical Accuracy, defined by the NDEP and ASPRS TIN Triangulated Irregular Network VMAS Vertical Map Accuracy Standard, defined by the NMAS

Ground Control Surveying Previous surveying experience utilizing the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) published control network and CORS stations in northern and eastern Florida indicated the existing NGS published control network was adequate to support the identified accuracy specifications and no additional high order geodetic surveying networks were established. Photogrammetric Mapping Control Surveying Sanborn completed the Photogrammetric Mapping Control Surveying for the Duval County, Florida project area on June 4, 2007. The Photogrammetric Mapping Control Surveying utilized to control the March 17 and 18, 2007 aerial photography was performed during the week of March 12, 2007 and consisted of recovering and targeting the following twenty-eight (28) NGS published control stations.


Orthophotography and Lidar Checkpoint Ground Control Surveying Sanborn performed the orthophotography and lidar checkpoint ground control surveying during the weeks of April 3 and June 4, 2007. Trimble dual frequency R8 and 5700 GPS surveying equipment was utilizing to field collect GPS data in Real Time Kinematic (RTK) mode utilizing eGPS Solutions System’s integrated Trimble’s Virtual Reference System (VRS). Trimble VRS is an integrated system consisting of GPS hardware, software and communication links. The links utilize data from permanent reference stations to model errors throughout the coverage area. This model is used to synthesize virtual reference stations near the user’s location which then provide a localized set of standard format correction messages to the roving GPS dual frequency receivers. GPS observation data from a set of fixed reference stations is continuously transmitted to the Trimble VRS central server. At the central server, the network processor performs integrity checks on all GPS observables. For every station occupied, quality checks are performed on the data, outliers are rejected and cycle slips are corrected. The Trimble GPS units were equipped with Zephyr compact domes and kept at a constant height of instrument (HI). Field system calibration checks were performed by occupying NGS published control stations and comparing the VRS solution computed coordinate values to the NGS published Florida State Plane Coordinate, NAD 83/HARN and NAVD 88 coordinate values. The results of the VRS software computed positions of the occupied NGS control stations were found to be within the identified project accuracy specifications. Following are the results of the VRS system field checking process. NGS HERLPORT (PID BC2492) VRS fixed XYZ N2,162,750.40’ E401,275.19’ Elevation 83.65’ NGS published NAD 83/2007 and NAVD 88 N 2,162,750.40’ E 401,275.19’ Elevation 83.65’ NGS HERLPORT AZ MK (PID BC2509) VRS computed N2,161,793.25’ E399,233.89’ Elevation 72.59’ NGS published NAD 83/2007 and NAVD 88 N2,161,793.27’ E399,233.90’ Elevation 72.59’ NGS E 571 (PID DG6650) VRS computed N2,134,706.59’ E324,809.07’ Elevation 144.85’ NGS published NAVD 88 elevation 144.85’ vertical order - second order class I NGS G 483 (PID DE6906) VRS computed N483,2135576.16’ E466463.75’ Elevation 25.90’ NGS published NAVD 88 elevation 25.90’ vertical order - second order class I NGS FLGPS 27 Reset (PID DF7120) VRS computed N 2,227,033.19’ E 412,714.11’ Elevation 24.63’ NGS published NAD 83/2007 and NAVD 88 N 2,227,033.29’ E 412,714.04’ Elevation 24.8’ NGS FERNPORT AZ MK PID BC2502 NGS software Computed N2,283,125.97’ E511,163.70’ EL11.99’ NGS Published NAD 83/2007 N2,283,125.98' E511,163.69' EL 12.00' NGS A 570 (PID DG5908) VRS computed N2,083,745.78, E379,530.93’ Elevation 19.39’ NGS published NAVD 88 19.41’ vertical order - second order class I The Ground Control coordinate listing referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83/HARN East Zone and NAVD 88 is included in Appendix E.


AGPS/INS Digital Aerial Photography Digital aerial photography consisting of 22 flight lines and 1246 exposures were acquired on March 17 and 18, 2007 for the orthophotography 897.65 square mile project area. The aerial photography flight logs are included in Appendix C. During the digital aerial photography missions, NGS control station HERLPORT (PID BC2492) was occupied with a Trimble 4000SSI (S/N 3603A14192) dual frequency GPS receiver collecting data at one second intervals. NGS published Florida State Plane Coordinates, East Zone, NAD 83/2007 for NGS station HERLPORT (PID BC2492) are 2,162,750.40’ E401,275.19’ El 83.65’. In addition to the ASGPS/INS base station, the following NGS CORS one-second data was download for each flight date and utilized in the post processing task to QC the AGPS/INS solution. NGS PID CORS Designation DE6007 Jacksonville CORS ARP DE6352 Jacksonville 1 CORS ARP DE6005 Gainesville CORS ARP DF5773 Ormond Beach CORS ARP DG9757 Deland CORS ARP DE6012 Plataka CORS ARP Sanborn’s Intergraph DMC serial number 01-044 was utilized to collect the aerial photography at the nominal altitude of 9,000 feet above mean terrain. The Intergraph DMC was equipped with the Applanix Inertial Navigation System collecting data at 200 kHz and the Navajo N278RC aircraft was equipped with a dual frequency GPS receiver collecting data at one second intervals. The aerial photography flight logs are listed at Appendix C. The digital aerial photography missions were conducted in an east-west heading. The aerial photography photo centers and tile coverage by flight date is included in Appendix A. The Calibration Certificate for the Intergraph Digital Mapping Camera (DMC), DMC Serial Number: DMC01-044 is included in Appendix F. Only the first 6 pages of the 70 page document are included.

Fully Analytical Aerial Triangulation The digital AGPS/INS aerial photography was processed with Intergraph ImageStation Softcopy Automatic Triangulation (ISAT) software to constrain the digital aerial imagery to the Applanix POSPAC software computed X, Y, Z, kappa, phi and omega photo center parameters and the photogrammetric mapping survey control points. The simultaneous bundle adjustment consisting of 1246 APGS/INS controlled photo center exposures constrained to twenty (60) ground control points yielded an sigma naught of 4.1 microns (0.308 feet), which is within the identified accuracy specifications and tolerance. 28 of the 60 ground control points were targeted NGS published control stations, 21 ground control points were photo-identifiable points and 11 NGS non-targeted control stations were utilized as only vertical control. Following are the XYZ residuals for the ground control points utilized to control the AGPS/INS assisted aerial photography acquired at 9,000 feet above mean terrain elevation on October 12 and December 17, 2007. The summary statistical report of the final adjusted Analytical Triangulation solution is included in Appendix H.


Terrestrial Lidar Lidar aerial mission consisting of 82 flight lines in an east-west heading were conducted on March 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17, 2007. During the lidar missions, NGS control station HERLPORT (PID BC2492) was occupied with a Trimble 4000SSI (S/N 3603A14192) dual frequency GPS receiver collecting data at one second intervals. NGS published Florida State Plane Coordinates, East Zone, NAD 83/2007 for NGS station HERLPORT (PID BC2492) are N2,162,750.40’ E401,275.19’ El 83.65’. The lidar mission flight logs are included in Appendix D. In addition to the ASGPS/INS base station an eccentric point was set at the Herlong Airport and the following NGS CORS one-second data was download for each flight date and utilized in the post processing task to QC the AGPS/INS solution. NGS PID CORS Designation DE6007 Jacksonville CORS ARP DE6352 Jacksonville 1 CORS ARP DE6005 Gainesville CORS ARP DF5773 Ormond Beach CORS ARP DG9757 Deland CORS ARP DE6012 Plataka CORS ARP

The terrestrial lidar point data was acquired in March 2007 utilizing the Optech 3100 sensor, serial number 06SEN187. Mission planning was performed utilizing Optech mission planning software. Lidar post processing was performed utilizing Optech Realm and TerraSolid TerraScan and Terramodeler software. The lidar senor certificate of calibration is listed at Appendix G.

Lidar mass point data was delivered in LAS 1.1 format for the county boundary plus a 200 foot buffer. The lidar mass point data was delivered in the FDEM 5,000’ x 5,000’ modular tiling scheme geo-referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83/HARN, East Zone, NAVD 88 and the unit of measurement was the US Survey Foot. The listing of lidar tiles in LAS format for this deliverable area is listed at Appendix M. Lidar Vertical Accuracy Testing Sanborn performed the lidar vertical accuracy assessments for the Duval County project area in accordance with ASPRS Guidelines, Vertical Accuracy Reporting for Lidar Data, May 24, 2004, and Section 1.5 of the Guidelines for Digital Elevation Data, published by the National Digital Elevation Program (NDEP), May 10, 2004. These guidelines call for the determination of Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) and optional determination of Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) and Consolidated Vertical Accuracy (CVA).

Sanborn performed the vertical accuracy assessment in four land cover categories, comparing Lidar derived elevations against the GPS surveyed ground QA/QC checkpoints described above in the Ground Surveying section. The Lidar Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report is included in Appendix J.

The four land cover categories tested were: 1. Bare-earth and low grass 2. Brush lands and low trees 3. Forested areas fully covered by trees 4. Urban areas

Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) was determined with QA/QC checkpoints located only in open terrain (grass, dirt, sand) where there is a very high probability that the Lidar sensor detected the bare-


earth ground surface, and where errors are expected to follow a normal error distribution. With a normal error distribution, the FVA at the 95 percent confidence level is computed as the vertical root mean square error (RMSEz) of the checkpoints x 1.9600. The FVA is the same as Accuracyz at the 95% confidence level (for open terrain), as specified in Appendix 3-A of the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy, FGDC-STD-007.3-1998, see http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part3/chapter3. For FDEM, the FVA standard is .60 feet, corresponding to an RMSEz of 0.30 feet or 9.25 cm, the accuracy expected from 1-foot contours.

Consolidated Vertical Accuracy (CVA) was determined with all checkpoints, representing open terrain and other land cover categories combined. Because elevation errors often vary based on the height and density of vegetation and structures, a normal distribution of error cannot be assumed, and RMSEz cannot be used to calculate the 95 percent confidence level. Instead, a nonparametric testing method, based on the 95th percentile, is used to determine CVA at the 95 percent confidence level. NDEP guidelines state that errors larger than the 95th percentile should be documented in the quality control report and project metadata. For FDEM, the CVA specification for all classes should be less than or equal to 1.19 feet.

Supplemental Vertical Accuracy (SVA) was determined separately for each individual land cover category, recognizing that the LiDAR sensor and post-processing may not have mapped the bare-earth ground surface, and that errors may not follow a normal error distribution. For each land cover category, the SVA at the 95 percent confidence level equals the 95th percentile error for all checkpoints in that particular land cover category. For FDEM’s specification, the SVA should be equal to or less than 1.19 feet. The SVA is reported below for each of the four land cover categories analyzed in this report.

The primary quality control (QC) steps were as follows:

1. Sanborn acquired the raw lidar data and performed post-processing to derive the bare-earth digital terrain model (DTM). Sanborn performed in-house quality assurance of the data following professional best practices and monitoring each technical phase of data processing.

2. Ground QA/QC checkpoints were established ad described above in the Ground Surveying section.

3. Sanborn created a listong of the horizontal coordinates and orthometric heights for all surveyed QA/QC checkpoints, classified by land cover category. A triangulated irregular network (TIN) was created from the bare-earth Lidar points and an interpolated z-value for the 121 checkpoints at the ground surveyed point locations.

4. The Lidar derived elevations were compared to the surveyed orthometric heights and computed descriptive statistics, as well as FVA, CVA, and SVA, according to NDEP specifications.

The Lidar Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report is included in Appendix J. Lidar Data Processing Methodology Lidar post processing was performed utilizing Optech Realm and TerraSolid TerraScan and Terramodeler software. The preliminary lidar bare earth data was utilized to create a 50 foot grid ortho DEM in order to expedite the orthophotography processing work.

The processed lidar bare earth data was divided into manageable file sizes for use in the photogrammetric breakline compilation process. During the lidar bare earth the photogrammetric breakline compilation process, the lidar bare earth mass points were reviewed in stereo utilizing the March 2007 aerial photography. Lidar mass points found to be mis-classified or exceeding the vertical accuracy tolerance were reported to the lidar processing group for review and reprocessing if necessary. Following the lidar processing methods utilized for this project.

http://www.fdgc.gov/standards/status/sub1_3.html�

http://www.fdgc.gov/standards/status/sub1_3.html�


Photogrammetric DTM Production and Contour Generation Methodology The DTM break lines were collected by photogrammetric methods under the supervision of an ASPRS Certified Photogrammetrist utilizing Intergraph SSK softcopy photogrammetric workstations operating in the MicroStation environment. Source data utilized to create the 3D breaklines included the March 2007 digital aerial photography, the exterior orientation parameters from the Analytical Aerial Triangulation and the lidar bare earth data.

The stereoscopic compilation of 3D breaklines consisted of capturing of following eight types of breaklines:

• Closed water body features • Linear hydrographic features • Coastal shorelines • Road features • Soft features • Obscured vegetated areas • Island features • Overpasses and bridges

The cartographic edit and contour generation was performed under the supervision of Professional GISPs utilizing AutoCAD, MAP-Editor and Terramodel software. The quality control, topology and qualitative accuracy assessment of the Digital Terrain Model point, break line data and contours were performed utilizing ArcGIS and PLTS software. The DTM break lines were created photogrammetrically utilizing Intergraph SSK softcopy photogrammetric workstations operating in the MicroStation environment. Source data utilized to create the breaklines included the raw aerial imagery, the Analytical Aerial Triangulation results and the lidar bare earth data.

The cartographic edit and contour generation was performed utilizing AutoCAD, MAP-Editor and Terramodel software. The quality control, topology and qualitative accuracy assessment of the Digital Terrain Model point, break line data and contours were performed utilizing ArcGIS and PLTS software. Contour Qualitative Assessments Once the cartographic edit of the stereoscopically compiled break lines, lidar bare earth mass points and contours was completed, a series of data topology validation was performed. Sanborn vertified the following utilizing ArcGIS and PLTS software:

1. Contours must not overlap 2. Contours must not intersect 3. Contours must not have dangles (except at project boundary) 4. Contours must not self-overlap 5. Contours must not self-intersect

After the topology validation was complete, Sanborn checked the elevation attribute of each contour to ensure NULL values are not included and that elevation ranges seemed logical relational to the LiDAR data. Sanborn also used the color orthophotography in the contour mapping review process. Lastly, Sanborn loaded the contour data into ArcGIS and performed a qualitative review of the contour data. The Contour Mapping Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report is included in Appendix K.


Color Orthophotography The digital aerial photography, analytical triangulation results and 50 foot grid ortho grade DEM was utilized to create the color orthophotography images at a one-foot pixel resolution. Intergraph Terrain Analyst software was utilized to create a surface model (TIN) and Intergraph OrthoPro software was utilized to rectify the aerial photography to the surface model. The color digital orthophotography was processed to 24 bit RGB geo-referenced uncompressed geo-TIF images formatted to the FDEM 5,000’ X 5,000’ modular tiling scheme and referenced to the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83/HARN, East Zone and the unit of measurement was the US Survey Foot. The color digital orthophotography were developed as uncompressed geo-referenced TIF format and converted to MrSID 20:1 ratio compressed format utilizing LidardTech software. The listing of delivered orthophotography tiles delivered in as geo-referenced TIF and 20:1 compressed MrSID tiles is included in Appendix I.

Orthophotography Horizontal Accuracy Testing Sanborn performed a horizontal accuracy assessment for the 1054 color orthophotography tiles in the Florida East Zone. Thirty-one (31) accuracy assessment ground surveyed checkpoints were utilized in the orthophotography horizontal assessment process. The Orthophotography horizontal accuracy assessment report is included in Appendix I.

References ASPRS, 2007, Digital Elevation Model Technologies and Applications: The DEM Users Manual, 2nd edition, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, MD. ASPRS, 2004, ASPRS Guidelines, Vertical Accuracy Reporting for Lidar Data, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, MD, May 24, 2004, http://www.asprs.org/society/ committees/lidar/downloads/Vertical_Accuracy_Reporting_for_Lidar_Data.pdf. Bureau of the Budget, 1947, National Map Accuracy Standards, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. FDEM, 2006, Florida GIS, Baseline Specifications for Orthophotography and LiDAR, Appendix B, Terrestrial LiDAR Specifications, Florida Division of Emergency Management, Tallahassee, FL, October, 2006. FEMA, 2004, Appendix A, Guidance for Aerial Mapping and Surveying, to “Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners,” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. FGCC, 1984, Standards and Specifications for Geodetic Control Networks, Federal Geodetic Control Committee, Silver Spring, ,MD, reprinted August 1993. FGCC, 1988, Geometric Geodetic Accuracy Standards and Specifications for Using GPS Relative Positioning Techniques, Federal Geodetic Control Committee, Silver Spring, MD, reprinted with corrections, August, 1989.

http://www.asprs.org/society/�


FGDC, 1998a, Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Part I: Reporting Methodology, Federal Geographic Data Committee, c/o USGS, Reston, VA, http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/. FGDC, 1998b, Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Part 2, Standards for Geodetic Networks, Federal Geographic Data Committee, c/o USGS, Reston, VA, http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/ FGDC, 1998b, Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Part 3, National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy, Federal Geographic Data Committee, c/o USGS, Reston, VA, http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/ FGDC, 1998d, Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM), Federal Geographic Data Committee, c/o USGS, Reston, VA, www.fgdc.gov/metadata/contstan.html. NDEP, 2004, Guidelines for Digital Elevation Data, Version 1.0, National Digital Elevation Program, May 10, 2004, http://www.ndep.gov/ NOAA, 1997, Guidelines for Establishing GPS-Derived Ellipsoid Heights (Standards: 2 cm and 5 cm), NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NGS-58, November, 1997. NRC, 2007, Elevation Data for Floodplain Mapping, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.

http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/�



http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/contstan.html�

http://www.ndep.gov/�


General Notes

This report is incomplete without the external hard drives of the following digital orthophotography mapping data:

• Color orthophotography tiles in uncompressed geo-TIF and MrSID compressed formats, as listed at Appendix G

• Orthophotography Metadata files in ArcGIS XML format, as listed at Appendix H THIS REPORT IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE. Florida Surveyor and Mapper in Responsible Charge of Orthophotography: Gary Eaton, PSM, PLS, CP Professional Surveyor and Mapper License #LS6319 Signed: ________________________________ Date: ________________ Seal:


List of Appendices Appendix A: Aerial Photography Flight Diagram, Orthophoto Tiling Footprint and Ortho QA/QC Checkpoint Location Map Appendix B: Terrestrial Lidar Flight Diagram, Orthophoto Tiling Footprint and Ortho QA/QC Checkpoint Location Map Appendix C: Aerial Photography Mission Flight Logs Appendix D: Lidar Mission Flight Logs Appendix E: Ground Control Surveying Coordinate Listing Appendix F: Aerial Sensor Certificate of Calibration (first 6 pages) Appendix G: Lidar Sensor Certificate of Calibration Appendix H: Analytical Triangulation Summary Statistical Report Appendix I: Orthophotography Horizontal Accuracy Assessment Report Appendix J: Lidar Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report Appendix K: Contour Mapping Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report Appendix L: Listing of Orthophotography Tiles in Geo-TIF and MrSID Formats Appendix M: Listing of Lidar Tiles in LAS Format Appendix N: Listing of Digital Breakline Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format Appendix O: Listing of Contour Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format Appendix P: Listing of Lidar Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format Appendix Q: Listing of Ortho Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format Appendix R: Listing of Metadata Files in ArcGIS XML Format Appendix S: Listing of Digital Files included on the Hard Drive, which is a part of this MTS Report.


Appendix A: Duval Aerial Photography Flight Diagram, Ortho Tiling Footprint and Ortho QA/QC Checkpoint Location Map


Appendix B: Lidar Flight Diagram, Lidar Tiling Footprint and Lidar QA/QC Checkpoint Location Map


Appendix C: Aerial Photography Mission Flight Logs


Appendix D: Lidar Missions Flight Logs


Appendix E: Ground Control Surveying Coordinate Listing NGS published control stations targeted prior to the March 17 and 18, 2007 aerial photography missions.

NGS control stations utilized in the Virtual Reference System (VRS) field system calibration/QC process. NGS HERLPORT (PID BC2492) NGS HERLPORT AZ MK (PID BC2509) NGS E 571 (PID DG6650) NGS G 483 (PID DE6906) NGS FLGPS 27 Reset (PID DF7120) NGS FERNPORT AZ MK PID BC2502 NGS A 570 (PID DG5908)

C 143 T 143

DUV 18 R 325

872 0168 C 872 0137 J

A 326 S 331

Southside V 324 V 323 X 324 X 405 G 483

872 0409 T GPS 2

7 JDK Reset N 571 E 571

72 94 GPS 1 72 94 GPS 3 I 1072 A10

H 572 872 0213 E

P 514 FL GPS27 Reset

JEA 0108 Station 102


Ground control points utilized for additional aerial photography control and ortho, lidar and contour accuracy validation. Listed by ground category classification

FLGPS 27 Reset 412714.04 2227033.29 24.96 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Station 102 431041.00 2259492.92 17.7 1 Bare Earth Low Grass 872 0137 J 511841.89 2245635.37 7.85 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-21 433751.08 2138862.44 20.71 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

N 571 359014.90 2140657.54 83.31 1 Bare Earth Low Grass S 331 452120.29 2214834.15 23.65 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-2-18B 404064.37 2142070.47 46.25 1 Bare Earth Low Grass C 143 459937.70 2243601.79 35.37 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-2-3C 416844.60 2247990.65 17.60 1 Bare Earth Low Grass A 326 526443.14 2216433.70 6.56 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-3-4 487136.85 2240442.07 24.31 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-27 455187.81 2163007.80 23.00 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

P 514 407649.25 2242125.85 11.96 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-1-6 486516.17 2153215.11 38.62 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-2-5B 388551.44 2209132.47 67.12 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-15 417408.77 2246885.84 12.50 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-26 528478.66 2164899.22 13.36 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-2-18A 404063.37 2142018.10 47.49 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-23 482784.69 2118077.22 21.76 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-1-12 473789.35 2114304.65 27.65 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-10 334575.68 2134799.40 87.77 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

H 572 418746.74 2181535.24 15.35 1 Bare Earth Low Grass T 143 461840.41 2265284.57 7.70 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-3-19 403927.81 2142112.69 47.02 1 Bare Earth Low Grass V 324 527154.98 2178129.14 10.27 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

JEA 0108 393248.42 2229248.54 24.3 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-13 502228.42 2254154.90 5.70 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-2-3A 416842.59 2247995.23 17.65 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

GPS 2 413049.20 2169006.98 22.06 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-5 400885.87 2230647.69 17.85 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-17 400103.69 2185158.43 59.00 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-2-3B 416840.32 2247988.07 17.54 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

X 405 454955.53 2166868.13 23.22 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-8 388492.56 2209110.45 67.84 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

Duval-2-5A 388556.63 2209126.92 66.72 1 Bare Earth Low Grass Duval-3-11 508857.81 2226099.59 7.95 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

72 94 GPS 3 356678.74 2190540.34 77.3 1 Bare Earth Low Grass 872 0168 C 521684.89 2228110.94 7.21 1 Bare Earth Low Grass

E 571 324808.07 2134706.59 146.05 1 Bare Earth Low Grass


Duval-4-2 508904.92 2226098.07 8.00 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-5 418386.23 2245729.55 16.15 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-9 334594.38 2134747.65 88.17 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-20 455383.95 2223508.91 19.99 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-8 397671.97 2188008.36 57.06 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-3 487864.26 2239924.72 23.06 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-10 403898.12 2142168.95 46.30 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-11 433746.22 2138826.29 19.02 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-17 487516.14 2150479.92 33.82 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-12 482830.36 2118563.98 23.08 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-7 388502.05 2209179.92 66.87 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-18 356314.85 2171617.77 85.30 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-13 456052.01 2164978.34 26.80 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-19 444909.02 2229900.34 18.71 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-14 431575.34 2189763.07 25.28 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-6 399984.34 2230817.92 17.18 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-16 501830.11 2187081.99 38.87 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-15 529005.73 2164718.89 13.39 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-4-1 502267.91 2254066.47 5.02 2 Brush Land Low Trees Duval-3-14 502938.28 2255018.18 6.15 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-24 482902.27 2118308.76 23.78 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-16 417646.82 2246638.64 14.56 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-3 487489.89 2240041.26 22.97 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-7 388496.07 2209036.06 68.22 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-22 433333.79 2138917.29 11.23 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-9 334588.67 2134897.40 86.89 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-18 400325.28 2185281.77 56.38 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-28 454594.44 2162939.32 25.55 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-12 508069.34 2226971.84 11.32 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-2 460494.86 2259484.33 16.27 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-20 404028.05 2141998.54 48.46 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-25 528037.49 2165022.03 17.14 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-6 400629.76 2230630.83 19.06 3 Forested Full canopy Duval-3-30 430270.05 2189131.09 26.65 3 Forested Full canopy


Duval-2-26 487032.69 2240454.92 24.95 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-30 404063.87 2142044.29 46.87 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-19 403944.37 2142353.32 43.12 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-20 449945.50 2215408.13 22.00 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-14 482233.40 2118945.76 21.94 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-4 388840.39 2209059.83 65.39 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-9 460071.34 2134483.60 26.27 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-25 503771.93 2252104.29 9.49 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-3 530105.05 2190704.97 10.29 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-20 430251.38 2190246.31 26.21 4 Urban Areas

72 94 GPS 1 345992.09 2171331.50 82.00 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-8 334376.62 2134833.46 90.23 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-4 503315.58 2177426.74 34.27 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-10 528494.95 2164923.60 12.44 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-9 334240.97 2134800.49 90.50 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-28 460530.98 2259635.84 14.24 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-17 432865.69 2138909.03 16.18 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-12 454715.69 2162995.42 24.39 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-7 489075.63 2154099.97 33.40 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-2 417513.11 2246629.02 14.83 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-29 460596.76 2259359.72 15.41 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-0 400112.86 2230812.86 17.06 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-18 464637.27 2235351.94 23.21 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-6 400256.01 2185231.25 58.80 4 Urban Areas

Duval-2-5C 388556.41 2209131.91 66.92 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-15 482819.15 2118133.53 21.69 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-11 528236.99 2165009.15 14.19 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-5 484352.37 2184138.44 45.63 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-8 470429.90 2141830.22 25.70 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-11 454907.06 2111148.95 17.99 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-16 433559.25 2138923.08 18.51 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-1 518252.39 2152730.60 13.55 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-2 535333.53 2152334.92 6.73 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-19 455454.92 2234895.73 26.72 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-15 482145.84 2183132.04 54.26 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-17 480239.51 2224395.31 21.56 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-10 451833.04 2120237.76 8.91 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-14 504234.59 2098308.00 22.31 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-13 454878.52 2162835.64 24.66 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-16 477825.22 2211020.19 6.62 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-1 400704.21 2230692.57 18.69 4 Urban Areas Duval-1-13 488239.87 2111405.90 22.37 4 Urban Areas


Duval-2-7 399366.41 2184824.12 59.25 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-24 502547.75 2254541.55 5.34 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-21 430233.86 2189218.27 27.83 4 Urban Areas 872 0409 T 456321.05 2110102.98 10.10 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-23 506831.26 2227567.34 8.15 4 Urban Areas Duval-2-22 508498.07 2226607.88 9.48 4 Urban Areas


Appendix F: Digital Aerial Photography Sensor

(First 6 pages of 70 page document)


Appendix G: Lidar Sensor Certificate of Calibration


Appendix H: Analytical Triangulation Summary Statistical Report

Duval County, Florida Project Area Analytical Aerial Triangulation Statistical Results


Appendix I: Orthophotography Horizontal Accuracy Assessment Report


Appendix J: Lidar Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report


Appendix K: Contour Mapping Vertical Accuracy Assessment Report


Appendix L: Listing of Orthophotography Tiles in Geo-TIF and MrSID Formats

Duval County, Florida Project Area Listing of 2054 Color Orthophotography Tiles

Uncompressed geo-referenced TIF and MrSID 20:1 Compressed Images OP2007_NC_013657_24 OP2007_NC_013658_24 OP2007_NC_013659_24 OP2007_NC_013660_24 OP2007_NC_013952_24 OP2007_NC_013953_24 OP2007_NC_013954_24 OP2007_NC_013955_24 OP2007_NC_013956_24 OP2007_NC_013957_24 OP2007_NC_013958_24 OP2007_NC_013959_24 OP2007_NC_013960_24 OP2007_NC_013961_24 OP2007_NC_013965_24 OP2007_NC_013966_24 OP2007_NC_014251_24 OP2007_NC_014252_24 OP2007_NC_014253_24 OP2007_NC_014254_24 OP2007_NC_014255_24 OP2007_NC_014256_24 OP2007_NC_014257_24 OP2007_NC_014258_24 OP2007_NC_014259_24 OP2007_NC_014260_24 OP2007_NC_014261_24 OP2007_NC_014265_24 OP2007_NC_014266_24 OP2007_NC_014267_24 OP2007_NC_014550_24 OP2007_NC_014551_24 OP2007_NC_014552_24 OP2007_NC_014553_24 OP2007_NC_014554_24 OP2007_NC_014555_24 OP2007_NC_014556_24 OP2007_NC_014557_24 OP2007_NC_014558_24 OP2007_NC_014559_24 OP2007_NC_014560_24 OP2007_NC_014561_24 OP2007_NC_014562_24 OP2007_NC_014563_24 OP2007_NC_014565_24 OP2007_NC_014566_24 OP2007_NC_014567_24 OP2007_NC_014850_24 OP2007_NC_014851_24 OP2007_NC_014852_24 OP2007_NC_014853_24 OP2007_NC_014854_24 OP2007_NC_014855_24 OP2007_NC_014856_24 OP2007_NC_014857_24 OP2007_NC_014858_24 OP2007_NC_014859_24

OP2007_NC_014860_24 OP2007_NC_014861_24 OP2007_NC_014862_24 OP2007_NC_014863_24 OP2007_NC_014864_24 OP2007_NC_014865_24 OP2007_NC_014866_24 OP2007_NC_014867_24 OP2007_NC_014868_24 OP2007_NC_014869_24 OP2007_NC_015149_24 OP2007_NC_015150_24 OP2007_NC_015151_24 OP2007_NC_015152_24 OP2007_NC_015153_24 OP2007_NC_015154_24 OP2007_NC_015155_24 OP2007_NC_015156_24 OP2007_NC_015157_24 OP2007_NC_015158_24 OP2007_NC_015159_24 OP2007_NC_015160_24 OP2007_NC_015161_24 OP2007_NC_015162_24 OP2007_NC_015163_24 OP2007_NC_015164_24 OP2007_NC_015165_24 OP2007_NC_015166_24 OP2007_NC_015167_24 OP2007_NC_015168_24 OP2007_NC_015169_24 OP2007_NC_015170_24 OP2007_NC_015447_24 OP2007_NC_015448_24 OP2007_NC_015449_24 OP2007_NC_015450_24 OP2007_NC_015451_24 OP2007_NC_015452_24 OP2007_NC_015453_24 OP2007_NC_015454_24 OP2007_NC_015455_24 OP2007_NC_015456_24 OP2007_NC_015457_24 OP2007_NC_015458_24 OP2007_NC_015459_24 OP2007_NC_015460_24 OP2007_NC_015461_24 OP2007_NC_015462_24 OP2007_NC_015463_24 OP2007_NC_015464_24 OP2007_NC_015465_24 OP2007_NC_015466_24 OP2007_NC_015467_24 OP2007_NC_015468_24 OP2007_NC_015469_24 OP2007_NC_015470_24 OP2007_NC_015471_24




OP2007_NC_016942_24 OP2007_NC_016943_24 OP2007_NC_016944_24 OP2007_NC_016945_24 OP2007_NC_016946_24 OP2007_NC_016947_24 OP2007_NC_016948_24 OP2007_NC_016949_24 OP2007_NC_016950_24 OP2007_NC_016951_24 OP2007_NC_016952_24 OP2007_NC_016953_24 OP2007_NC_016954_24 OP2007_NC_016955_24 OP2007_NC_016956_24 OP2007_NC_016957_24 OP2007_NC_016958_24 OP2007_NC_016959_24 OP2007_NC_016960_24 OP2007_NC_016961_24 OP2007_NC_016962_24 OP2007_NC_016963_24 OP2007_NC_016964_24 OP2007_NC_016965_24 OP2007_NC_016966_24 OP2007_NC_016967_24 OP2007_NC_016968_24 OP2007_NC_016969_24 OP2007_NC_016970_24 OP2007_NC_016971_24 OP2007_NC_016972_24 OP2007_NC_017241_24 OP2007_NC_017242_24 OP2007_NC_017243_24 OP2007_NC_017244_24 OP2007_NC_017245_24 OP2007_NC_017246_24 OP2007_NC_017247_24 OP2007_NC_017248_24 OP2007_NC_017249_24 OP2007_NC_017250_24 OP2007_NC_017251_24 OP2007_NC_017252_24 OP2007_NC_017253_24 OP2007_NC_017254_24 OP2007_NC_017255_24 OP2007_NC_017256_24 OP2007_NC_017257_24 OP2007_NC_017258_24 OP2007_NC_017259_24 OP2007_NC_017260_24 OP2007_NC_017261_24 OP2007_NC_017262_24 OP2007_NC_017263_24 OP2007_NC_017264_24 OP2007_NC_017265_24 OP2007_NC_017266_24 OP2007_NC_017267_24 OP2007_NC_017268_24 OP2007_NC_017269_24 OP2007_NC_017270_24 OP2007_NC_017271_24 OP2007_NC_017272_24 OP2007_NC_017540_24 OP2007_NC_017541_24





OP2007_NC_023262_24 OP2007_NC_023263_24 OP2007_NC_023264_24 OP2007_NC_023265_24 OP2007_NC_023266_24 OP2007_NC_023267_24 OP2007_NC_023268_24 OP2007_NC_023269_24 OP2007_NC_023270_24 OP2007_NC_023554_24 OP2007_NC_023555_24 OP2007_NC_023556_24



OP2007_NC_023868_24 OP2007_NC_023869_24 OP2007_NC_023870_24 OP2007_NC_024164_24 OP2007_NC_024165_24 OP2007_NC_024166_24 OP2007_NC_024167_24 OP2007_NC_024168_24 OP2007_NC_024169_24 OP2007_NC_024170_24


Appendix M: Listing of Lidar Tiles in LAS Format

Duval County, Florida Project Area Listing of 2054 Lidar LAS Files

LID2007_013953_E.las LID2007_013954_E.las LID2007_013955_E.las LID2007_013956_E.las LID2007_013957_E.las LID2007_013958_E.las LID2007_013959_E.las LID2007_013960_E.las LID2007_013961_E.las LID2007_013965_E.las LID2007_013966_E.las LID2007_014251_E.las LID2007_014252_E.las LID2007_014253_E.las LID2007_014254_E.las LID2007_014255_E.las LID2007_014256_E.las LID2007_014257_E.las LID2007_014258_E.las LID2007_014259_E.las LID2007_014260_E.las LID2007_014261_E.las LID2007_014265_E.las LID2007_014266_E.las LID2007_014267_E.las LID2007_014550_E.las LID2007_014551_E.las LID2007_014552_E.las LID2007_014553_E.las LID2007_014554_E.las LID2007_014555_E.las LID2007_014556_E.las LID2007_014557_E.las LID2007_014558_E.las LID2007_014559_E.las LID2007_014560_E.las LID2007_014561_E.las LID2007_014562_E.las LID2007_014563_E.las LID2007_014565_E.las LID2007_014566_E.las LID2007_014567_E.las LID2007_014850_E.las LID2007_014851_E.las LID2007_014852_E.las LID2007_014853_E.las LID2007_014854_E.las LID2007_014855_E.las LID2007_014856_E.las LID2007_014857_E.las LID2007_014858_E.las LID2007_014859_E.las LID2007_014860_E.las LID2007_014861_E.las LID2007_014862_E.las





LID2007_016670_E.las LID2007_016671_E.las LID2007_016672_E.las LID2007_016942_E.las LID2007_016943_E.las LID2007_016944_E.las LID2007_016945_E.las LID2007_016946_E.las LID2007_016947_E.las LID2007_016948_E.las LID2007_016949_E.las LID2007_016950_E.las LID2007_016951_E.las LID2007_016952_E.las LID2007_016953_E.las LID2007_016954_E.las LID2007_016955_E.las LID2007_016956_E.las LID2007_016957_E.las LID2007_016958_E.las LID2007_016959_E.las LID2007_016960_E.las LID2007_016961_E.las LID2007_016962_E.las LID2007_016963_E.las LID2007_016964_E.las LID2007_016965_E.las LID2007_016966_E.las LID2007_016967_E.las LID2007_016968_E.las LID2007_016969_E.las LID2007_016970_E.las LID2007_016971_E.las LID2007_016972_E.las LID2007_017241_E.las LID2007_017242_E.las LID2007_017243_E.las LID2007_017244_E.las LID2007_017245_E.las LID2007_017246_E.las LID2007_017247_E.las LID2007_017248_E.las LID2007_017249_E.las LID2007_017250_E.las LID2007_017251_E.las LID2007_017252_E.las LID2007_017253_E.las LID2007_017254_E.las LID2007_017255_E.las LID2007_017256_E.las LID2007_017257_E.las LID2007_017258_E.las LID2007_017259_E.las LID2007_017260_E.las LID2007_017261_E.las LID2007_017262_E.las LID2007_017263_E.las LID2007_017264_E.las LID2007_017265_E.las LID2007_017266_E.las LID2007_017267_E.las





LID2007_022362_E.las LID2007_022363_E.las LID2007_022364_E.las LID2007_022365_E.las LID2007_022366_E.las LID2007_022367_E.las LID2007_022368_E.las LID2007_022369_E.las LID2007_022370_E.las LID2007_022654_E.las LID2007_022655_E.las LID2007_022656_E.las LID2007_022657_E.las LID2007_022658_E.las LID2007_022659_E.las LID2007_022660_E.las LID2007_022661_E.las LID2007_022662_E.las LID2007_022663_E.las LID2007_022664_E.las LID2007_022665_E.las LID2007_022666_E.las LID2007_022667_E.las LID2007_022668_E.las LID2007_022669_E.las LID2007_022670_E.las



LID2007_023856_E.las LID2007_023857_E.las LID2007_023861_E.las LID2007_023862_E.las LID2007_023863_E.las LID2007_023864_E.las LID2007_023865_E.las LID2007_023866_E.las LID2007_023867_E.las LID2007_023868_E.las LID2007_023869_E.las LID2007_023870_E.las LID2007_024164_E.las LID2007_024165_E.las LID2007_024166_E.las LID2007_024167_E.las LID2007_024168_E.las LID2007_024169_E.las LID2007_024170_E.las LID2007_013657_E.las LID2007_013658_E.las LID2007_013659_E.las LID2007_013660_E.las


Appendix N: Listing of Digital Breakline Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format

DUVAL_TOPOGRAPHIC.mdb (Personal Geodatabase) TOPOGRAPHIC (Feature Data Set) COASTALSHORELINE (Polygon Feature Class) FOOTPRINT (Polygon Feature Class) GROUNDCONTROL (Point Feature Class) HYDROGRAPHICFEATURE (Polyline Feature Class) ISLAND (Polygon Feature Class) OBSCUREDVEG (Polygon Feature Class) OVERPASS (Polyline Feature Class) ROADBREAKLINE (Polyline Feature Class) SOFTFEATURE (Polyline Feature Class) VERTACCTESTPTS (Point Feature Class) WATERBODY (Polygon Feature Class)


Appendix O: Listing of Contour Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format DUVAL_CONTOUR_CENTRAL.mdb (Personal Geodatabase) CONTOUR_1FT (Polyline Feature Class) CONTOUR_2FT (Polyline Feature Class) DUVAL_CONTOUR_EAST.mdb (Personal Geodatabase) CONTOUR_1FT (Polyline Feature Class) CONTOUR_2FT (Polyline Feature Class) DUVAL_CONTOUR_WEST.mdb (Personal Geodatabase) CONTOUR_1FT (Polyline Feature Class) CONTOUR_2FT (Polyline Feature Class)

Appendix P: Listing of LiDAR Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format

DUVAL_LiDAR.mdb (Personal Geodatabase)

FOOTPRINT (Polygon Feature Class)

LIDARCHCKPTS (Point Feature Class)

Appendix Q: Listing of Ortho Files in ArcGIS Geodatabase Format

DUVAL_ORTHOPHOTO.mdb (Personal Geodatabase)

CUTLINE (Polygon Feature Class)

FOOTPRINT (Polygon Feature Class) ORTHOCHCKPTS (Point Feature Class)


Appendix R: Listing of Metadata Files in ArcGIS XML Format Breaklines (Folder) BREAKLINE_METADATA (Folder) COASTALSHORELINE.xml FOOTPRINT.xml GROUNDCONTROL.xml HYDROGRAPHICFEATURE.xml ISLAND.xml OBSCUREDVEG.xml OVERPASS.xml ROADBREAKLINE.xml SOFTFEATURE.xml VERTACCTESTPTS.xml WATERBODY.xml Contours (Folder) CONTOUR_METADATA (Folder) CONTOUR_1FT.xml CONTOUR_2FT.xml LiDAR (Folder) LiDAR_METADATA (Folder) FOOTPRINT.xml LiDAR_METADATA.xml LIDARCHKPTS.xml ORTHO (Folder) ORTHO_METADATA (Folder) Cutline_metadata.xml Footprint_metadata.xml Imagery_metadata.xml Orthochckpts_metadata.xml


Appendix S: Listing of all digital files included on the hard drive which is a part of this report.

Ortho _____ 1054 GEOTIFFs files _____ 1054 SID files (.sid, .sdw, .aux.xml) _____ Geodatabase _____ DUVAL_ORTHO.mdb _____ ORTHO_METADATA _____ cutline_metadata.xml _____ footprint_metadata.xml _____ imagery_metadata.xml _____ orthochckpts_metadata.xml _____ DEM _____ Survey Report (PDF) LiDAR _____ 1054 LAS 1.1 files _____ Geodatabase _____ DUVAL_LiDAR.mdb _____ LiDAR_METADATA _____ FOOTPRINT.xml _____ LiDAR_METADATA.xml _____ LIDARCHKPTS.xml _____ Survey Report (PDF) _____ LiDAR Processing Report (PDF) _____ Vertical Accuracy Report (PDF) Topographic _____ Contours _____ DUVAL_CONTOUR_CENTRAL.mdb _____ DUVAL_CONTOUR_EAST.mdb _____ DUVAL_CONTOUR_WEST.mdb _____ CONTOUR_METADATA _____ CONTOUR_1FT.xml _____ CONTOUR_2FT.xml _____ Breaklines _____ DUVAL_TOPOGRAPHIC _____ BREAKLINE_METADATA _____ COASTALSHORELINE.xml _____ FOOTPRINT.xml _____ GROUNDCONTROL.xml _____ HYDROGRAPHICFEATURE.xml _____ ISLAND.xml _____ OBSCUREDVEG.xml _____ OVERPASS.xml _____ ROADBREAKLINE.xml _____ SOFTFEATURE.xml _____ VERTACCTESTPTS.xml _____ WATERBODY.xml

_____ MTS Survey Report (2 certified hard copies and 1 digital copy)

minimum technical standards (mts) final report of … · duval county, florida – lidar and...

Documents