H. Irma - Tampa Bay map, any damage observed by someone


#1

hay anyone was able to spot damage in the Tampa bay map.
my usual “follow the water” or “locate low areas” techniques for flooding are no good here as there are so many ponds and lakes and water-bodies. looking for debris is also not working.
And going house by house in such a huge city feels overwhelming. maybe we should subdivide such a huge city to many smaller maps.

the coastline gave the location quite fast but even the coast areas are not seemed to be affected. I hope the fact I was not able to see anything so far means good news for the people there and not my lack of ability.


#2

Tampa Bay may be a map we just need to grit our teeth to go through it. Think of it as the desert or the “piles of dirt” we did over a year ago… a view of geography… or fodder for our “silly images” posts.

We should not reject doing it based only on news reports like this one, because TN still needs some “data”. Remember that “X number of people looked at the tiles and marked very little” IS data. And the review now will help for future crisis, since TN archives its maps and data.


#3

I haven’t seen much damage on the Tampa Bay map(s). There has been the odd place where something didn’t quite look right, so I dropped the appropriate tag, but nothing compared to the Caribbean islands.
For every tile that I see that I don’t put any tags, I am always thankful.


#4

Correct me if I’m wrong, but - apart from the fact that we’re all happy and thankful for not finding any damage with respect to the people affected on the ground - not finding any damage can be a value in itself. If so and so many people scan a tile and don’t find/don’t tag any damage, there is a high probability that there is no damage in reality. So even not finding anything can sort of help to clarify the “big picture”.


#5

Exactly! Even a negative (no finds) is “data”. It’s one place local authorities can remove from the urgent response list.


#6

Uncle! The clouds have me beaten up and whipped like eggs whites with a touch of strawberry syrup! And I normally LOVE clouds, but only so I can SEE what’s below! There are few sights here… I’ve looked. :eyes: :mag:

Would need a :mage: to see through these clouds!

OK, rant over. Night for now.

Clouds! pffttt! Hiss, boo…


#7

OK I take it back. There is damage in the Tampa bay area :frowning: .
There are floods up north around Meadbrook estates. Just started tagging, so I am not sure how much there is.
both GE and before image are not helping much as the area was just recently developed.


#8

Well, I don’t want to say great. But I’m glad you found an area that needs tags.


#9

In my opinion, one tag that I seem to be tagging that others are not is damage to roofs partially covered by blue tarps. Tarps were extensively tagged in Harvey. Caution, however. There are some blue roofs and there can be confusion with swimming pools. Need to look at before pictures carefully.


#10

@Jim1 thanks. as for pools - Flooded pools and other water bodies are usually dark (mud?) compared to clear blue or green undamaged. used that as a visual on Harvey’s maps to decide if the water came high enough to flood the house.


#11

Shaker,
I’m working in the Tampa area. Flooded pools are almost unknown. But your comment is correct. I count flooded pools as damaged or flooded building.

You are correctl that if the pool floods, the house also likely got water in it. Even if the pool flooded & the house was not it will be expensive to muck out the pool, replace pumps & filters, etc.

Potential confusion between blue tarps partially covering partially damaged roofs and blue un-flooded pools is what I was trying to describe.

Part of the problem is that many pools are located very near to houses. There isn’t enough resolution in the “after” image to be certain. When I’m not sure I flip back & forth between the before & after images. Nearly always I can identify a pool snuggled against a house in the before image.

Cheers, Jim!