gov.noaa.csc.maps:2004_FL_SWFWMD_Lake_Hancock_m76 Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) 20050520 Charleston, SC NOAA's Ocean Service (NOS), Coastal Services Center (CSC) http://csc-s-maps-q.csc.noaa.gov/dataviewer/viewer.html The Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) LAS dataset is a survey of select areas within Southwest Florida. These data were produced for the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). This metadata record describes the ortho & LIDAR mapping of Lake Hancock, in Polk County, FL. The mapping consists of LIDAR data collection, contour generation, and production of natural color orthophotography with a 1ft pixel using imagery collected with a Wild RC-30 Aerial Camera. The Southwest Florida Water Management District uses topographic information to support regulatory, land management and acquisition, planning, engineering, and habitat restoration projects. The purpose of this mapping project is to create and deliver digital terrain models (DTM), capable of generating one-foot contours and to produce orthophotography at a 200'. The Lake Hancock Report of Topographic Survey may be viewed at: ftp://ftp.csc.noaa.gov/pub/crs/beachmap/qa_docs/fl/swfwmd 20040202 Publication Date Complete Unknown -081.992800 -081.747900 28.166600 27.892000 ISO 19115 Topic Category Elevation EDI Thesaurus Bathymetry/Topography Aerial Photography LIDAR Digital Terrain Model (DTM) Contours Digital Orthophotography Geographic Names Information System US Florida Southwest Florida Gulf Coast Polk County Lake Hancock None Users should be aware that temporal changes may have occurred since this data set was collected and some parts of this data may no longer represent actual surface conditions. Users should not use this data for critical applications without a full awareness of its limitations. Diana Burdick Southwest Florida Water Management District GIS Analyst Physical address

2379 Broad Street

Brooksville Florida 34604 USA 352-540-6018 352-540-6018 Diana.Burdick@swfwmd.state.fl.us 8:00 am - 4:30 pm Acknowledgement of the Southwest Florida Water Management District would be appreciated in products derived from these data. The generated contours have been produced to be fully compliant with NSSDA accuracy standards for 2' contours. The digital orthophotography meets national mapping accuracy standards for 200 scale product. Compliance with the accuracy standard was ensured by the placement of GPS ground control prior to the acquisition of aerial photography. The following checks were performed. 1. The ground control and airborne GPS data stream were validated through a fully analytical bundle aerotriangulation adjustment. The residuals of the adjustment met the required standards for accuracy which are 1 part in 10,000 of the flying height for the horizontal position (X and Y) and 1 part in 9,000 or better of the flying height in elevation (Z). 2. The DTM (Digital Terrain Model) data were checked against the project control. The technician visited and confirmed the accuracy of the project mass points during initial compilation. 3. Digital orthophotography was validated through an inspection of edge matching and visual inspection for image quality. The following software is used for validation of the 1. Aerotriangulation - Photo-T, ISAT 2. DTM data - Z/I Imaging SSK 3. Digital Orthophotography - Z/I Imaging OrthoPro The digital orthophotos fully comply with NMAS standards for production of orthophotos at a horizontal natural ratio of 1 to 2,400 with a ground pixel resolution of 1 foot. 110 cm (3.6 ft) horizontal accuracy at the 95% confidence level, not tested. The digital elevation model is fully compliant with National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA) published by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) in 1998. The NSSDA uses root-mean-square error (RMSE) to estimate positional accuracy. RMSE is the square root of the average of the set of squared differences between dataset coordinate values and coordinate values from an independent source of higher accuracy for identical points. Accuracy is reported in ground distances at the 95% confidence level. Accuracy reported at the 95% confidence level means that 95% of the positions in the dataset will have an error with respect to true ground position that is equal to or smaller than the reported accuracy value. The reported accuracy value reflects all uncertainties, including those introduced by geodetic control coordinates, compilation, and final computation of ground coordinate values in the product. The intended vertical accuracy of this project is 17.98 cm (0.59-feet) (95% confidence level) vertical. RMSE=9.144 cm (0.3-feet) for unobscured ground points, not tested. Kevin J. Chappell, PSM 20040723 Diagram 1200 Electronic mail system 20040426 20040427 Ground Condition Ground Control Kevin Chappell, a Florida PSM, under contract to EarthData International established 27 aerial targets and photo identifiable ground control points prior to aerial imagery acquisition. The points were surveyed using GPS for both vertical and horizontal coordinate values. Ground control references Florida West State Plane NAD83, NAVD88 both in Meters. EarthData Aviation, LLC 20040902 Profile Filmstrip 20040308 Publication Date Aerial Photography The aerial photographic mission was composed of a total of 613 exposures in 19 North-South oriented flight lines. Photography was obtained at an altitude of 4,100 feet above mean terrain. Aerial photography was exposed in conjunction with airborne GPS; the stationary GPS receiver was positioned over a control point located at the airport. Aerial photography was exposed on natural color negative film using Wild RC-30 camera 5086, with 153.277 mm (6 inch) focal length lens cone number 13112. Photography was exposed on Agfa X-100 film, emulsion number 67663036. EarthData Aviations 20040500 Profile Fire wire 20040202 20040203 Ground Condition LIDAR Acquisition The LIDAR acquisition for Lake Hancock was acquired in two sorties using the Leica ALS40 sensor. The data was acquired at a flying height of 6,000 feet AMT with a scan rate of 26 Hz and a 25 degree field of view. New ground control was established to control and orient the photography, and included both photo-identifiable features and artificial targets. The ground control network and airborne GPS data was integrated into a rigid network through the completion of a fully analytical bundle aerotriangulation adjustment. 1. The original aerial film was scanned at a resolution of 1,210 DPI. The scans were produced using Z/I Imaging PhotoScan flatbed metric scanners. Each unit has a positional accuracy of 1.5 microns and a radiometric resolution of 1,024 gray levels for each of three color layers. 2. The raster scans were given a preliminary visual check on the scanner workstation to ensure that the raster file size is correct and to verify that the tone and contrast were acceptable. A directory tree structure for the project was established on one of the workstations. This project was then accessed by other workstations through the network. The criteria used for establishment of the directory structure and file naming conventions accessed through the network avoids confusion or errors due to inconsistencies in digital data. The project area was defined using the relevant camera information that was obtained from the USGS camera calibration report for the aerial camera and the date of photography. The raster files were rotated to the correct orientation for mensuration on the softcopy workstation. The rotation of the raster files was necessary to accommodate different flight directions from one strip to the next. The technician verified that the datum and units of measurement for the supplied control were consistent with the project requirements. 3. The photogrammetric technician performed an automatic interior orientation for the frames in the project area. The softcopy systems that were used by the technicians have the ability to set up predefined fiducial templates for the aerial camera(s) used for the project. Using the template that was predefined in the interior orientation setup, the software identified and measured the eight fiducial positions for all the frames. Upon completion, the results were reviewed against the tolerance threshold. Any problems that occurred during the automatic interior orientation would cause the software to reject the frame and identify it as a potential problem. The operator then had the option to measure the fiducials manually. 4. The operator launched the point selection routine which automatically selected pass and tie points by an autocorrelation process. The correlation tool that is part of the routine identified the same point of contrast between multiple images in the Von Gruber locations. The interpolation tool can be adjusted by the operator depending on the type of land cover in the triangulation block. Factors that influence the settings include the amount of contrast and the sharpness of features present on the photography. A preliminary adjustment was run to identify pass points that had high residuals. This process was accomplished for each flight line or partial flight line to ensure that the network has sufficient levels of accuracy. The points were visited and the cause for any inaccuracy was identified and rectified. This process also identified any gaps where the point selection routine failed to establish a point. The operator interactively set any missing points. 5. The control and pass point measurement data was run through a final adjustment on the Z/I SSK PhotoT workstations. The PhotoT program created a results file with the RMSE results for all points within the block and their relation to one another. The photogrammetrist performing the adjustments used their experience to determine what course of action to take for any point falling outside specifications. 6. The bundle adjustment was run through the PhotoT software several times. The photogrammetrist increased the accuracy parameters for each subsequent iteration so, when the final adjustment was run, the RMSE for the project met the accuracy of 1 part in 10,000 of the flying height for the horizontal position (X and Y) and 1 part in 9,000 or better of the flying height in elevation (Z). The errors were expressed as a natural ratio of the flying height utilizing a one-sigma (95%) confidence level. 7. The accuracy of the final solution was verified by running the final adjustment, placing no constraints on any quality control points. The RMSE values for these points must fall within the tolerances above for the solution to be acceptable. 8. The final adjustment generates three files. The .txt file has all the results from the adjustment with the RMSE values for each point measured. The .XYZ file contains the adjusted X, Y, Z coordinates for all the measured points and the .PHT file contains the exterior orientation parameters of each exposure station. Aerotriangulation Scan 20040727 AT Scan EarthData International Raquel Charrois Project Manager Mailing and physical address

7320 Executive Way

Frederick Maryland 21704 301-948-8550 metadata@earthdata.com EarthData has developed a unique method for processing lidar data to identify and remove elevation points falling on vegetation, buildings, and other aboveground structures. The algorithms for filtering data were utilized within EarthData's proprietary software and commercial software written by TerraSolid. This software suite of tools provides efficient processing for small to large-scale, projects and has been incorporated into ISO 9001 compliant production work flows. The following is a step-by-step breakdown of the process. 1. Using the lidar data set provided by EarthData, the technician performs calibrations on the data set. 2. Using the lidar data set provided by EarthData, the technician performed a visual inspection of the data to verify that the flight lines overlap correctly. The technician also verified that there were no voids, and that the data covered the project limits. The technician then selected a series of areas from the dataset and inspected them where adjacent flight lines overlapped. These overlapping areas were merged and a process which utilizes 3-D Analyst and EarthData's proprietary software was run to detect and color code the differences in elevation values and profiles. The technician reviewed these plots and located the areas that contained systematic errors or distortions that were introduced by the lidar sensor. 3. Systematic distortions highlighted in step 2 were removed and the data was re-inspected. Corrections and adjustments can involve the application of angular deflection or compensation for curvature of the ground surface that can be introduced by crossing from one type of land cover to another. 4. The lidar data for each flight line was trimmed in batch for the removal of the overlap areas between flight lines. The data was checked against a control network to ensure that vertical requirements were maintained. Conversion to the client-specified datum and projections were then completed. The lidar flight line data sets were then segmented into adjoining tiles for batch processing and data management. 5. The initial batch-processing run removed 95% of points falling on vegetation. The algorithm also removed the points that fell on the edge of hard features such as structures, elevated roadways and bridges. 6. The operator interactively processed the data using lidar editing tools. During this final phase the operator generated a TIN based on a desired thematic layer to evaluate the automated classification performed in step 5. This allowed the operator to quickly re-classify points from one layer to another and recreate the TIN surface to see the effects of edits. Geo-referenced images were toggled on or off to aid the operator in identifying problem areas. The data was also examined with an automated profiling tool to aid the operator in the reclassification. 6. The data was separated into a bare-earth DEM. A grid-fill program was used to fill data voids caused by reflective objects such as buildings and vegetation. The final DEM was written to an ASCII XYZ and LAS format. 7. The reflective surface data was also delivered in ASCII XYZ and LAS format. 8. Final TIN files are created and delivered. LIDAR 20041026 LIDAR EarthData International Raquel Charrois Project Manager Mailing and physical address

7320 Executive Way

Frederick Maryland 21704 301-948-8550 metadata@earthdata.com This process describes the method used to compile breaklines to support the lidar digital elevation model data. Around the perimeter of the lidar data set to complete the surface model, breaklines were photogrammetrically derived. The following step-by-step procedures were utilized for breakline development. The breakline file contains three dimensionally accurate line strings describing topographical features. The relationship of lidar points to breaklines will vary depending on the complexity and severity of the terrain. Breaklines were collected where necessary to support the final product. Examples of some such locations include along the edges of roads, stream banks and centerlines, ridges, and other features where the slope of the terrain changes. 1. Using the imagery provided by EarthData Aviations, breakline data was captured in the MicroStation environment, which allowed the photogrammetrist to see graphically where each lidar X, Y, and Z point and any breaklines fall in relation to each other. This unique approach allowed for interactive editing of the breakline by the photogrammetrist. The technician generated a set of temporary contours for the stereo model in the ZI work environment to provide further guidance on the breakline placement. The technician added and/or repositioned breaklines to improve the accuracy as required. Once these processes were completed, the temporary guidance contours were deleted, and the data were passed to the editing department for quality control and formatting. 4. The breakline data set was then put into an ESRI shape file format 5. The 1 foot contours were generated in Microstation (using 2 foot specifications) with an overlay software package called TerraSolid. Within TerraSolid, the module TerraModeler was utilized to first create the tin and then a color relief was created to view for any irregularities before the contour generator was run. The contours were checked for accuracy over the DTM and then the Index contours were annotated. At this point the technician identified any areas of heavy tree coverage by collecting obscure shapes. Any contours that were found within these shapes do not meet Map Accuracy Standards and are coded as obscure. The dataset was viewed over the orthos before the final conversion. The contours were then converted to Arc/Info where final QC AMLs were run to verify that no contours were crossing. The contours were delivered in shp format as a merged file. Breaklines Contours 20041210 Breaklines Contours EarthData International Raquel Charrois Project Manager Mailing and physical address

7320 Executive Way

Frederick Maryland 21704 301-948-8550 metadata@earthdata.com The NOAA Coastal Services Center (CSC) received the files in LAS format. The files contained Lidar intensity and elevation measurements. The data was in Florida State Plane Projection and NAVD88 vertical datum. CSC performed the following processing to the data to make it available within the LDART Retrieval Tool (LDART): 1. The data were converted from Florida State Plane West coordinates to geographic coordinates. 2. The data were converted from NAVD88 (orthometric) heights to GRS80 (ellipsoid) heights using Geoid 03. 3. The LAS data were sorted by latitude and the headers were updated. 20080125 Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), Coastal Services Center (CSC) Coastal Elevation Mapping (CEM) Project Scientist Mailing and physical address

2234 South Hobson Ave.

Charleston SC 29405-2413 843-740-1200 tcm@csc.noaa.gov The NOAA National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) received Lidar data files on external harddrive. The disk contains LiDAR data from the NOAA Coastal Services Center. The data are currently being served via Digital Coastl at http://www.csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/. The data can be used to re-populate the system. The data are provided on this disk in LAS format. LAS format is an industry standard for serving LiDAR data. The data are exclusively in geographic coordinates, however, the datums used vary. Most are NAD 83, however some are in ITRF. Vertical systems include both ellipsoid (ITRF and NAD 83) and NAVD 88. For NAVD 88 values, Geiod 03 is primarily used; however, data received in NAVD 88 prior to 2003 was processed using Geoid 99. 20090720 DOC/NOAA/NESDIS/NGDC > National Geophysical Data Center, NESDIS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce Pamela Grothe Mailing and Physical Address

NOAA/NESDIS/NGDC E/GC1 325 Broadway

Boulder CO 80305-3328 USA (303) 497-6120 (303) 497-6958 (303) 497-6513 pamela.grothe@noaa.gov 7:30-5:00 Mountain Contact Data Center 0 Point 0.000000001 0.000000001 Decimal degrees North American Datum of 1983 Geodetic Reference System 80 6378137.000000 298.257222 Ellipsoid 0.001 Meters Explicit elevation coordinate included with horizontal coordinates Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), Coastal Services Center (CSC) CEM Project Scientist Mailing and physical address

2234 South Hobson Ave.

Charleston SC 29405-2413 843-740-1200 tcm@csc.noaa.gov Downloadable Data Any conclusions drawn for the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of the Coastal Services Center or its partners. This data can be obtained on-line at the following URL: http://csc-s-maps-q.csc.noaa.gov/dataviewer/viewer.html DOC/NOAA/NESDIS/NGDC > National Geophysical Data Center, NESDIS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce Pamela Grothe Mailing and Physical Address

NOAA/NESDIS/NGDC E/GC1 325 Broadway

Boulder CO 80305-3328 USA (303) 497-6120 (303) 497-6958 (303) 497-6513 pamela.grothe@noaa.gov 7:30-5:00 Mountain Contact Data Center Disclaimer While every effort has been made to ensure that these data are accurate and reliable within the limits of the current state of the art, NOAA cannot assume liability for any damages caused by any errors or omissions in the data, nor as a result of the failure of the data to function on a particular system. NOAA makes no warranty, expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty. The National Geophysical Data Center serves as the archive for this LIDAR data. NGDC should only be contacted for this data if it cannot be obtained from NOAA Coastal Services Center. 20111119 20111119 20121119 Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), Coastal Services Center (CSC) CEM Project Scientist Mailing and physical address

2234 South Hobson Ave.

Charleston SC 29405-2413 843-740-1200 tcm@csc.noaa.gov FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998