Transparent Seismic Mitigation for Community Resilience
Abstract
Healthy communities continuously grow by leveraging their intellectual capital to drive economic development while protecting their cultural heritage. Success, in part, depends on the support of a healthy built environment that is rooted in contemporary urban planning, sustainability and disaster resilience. Planners and policy makers are deeply concerned with all aspects of their communities, including its seismic safety. Their reluctance to implement the latest plans for achieving seismic safety is rooted in a misunderstanding of the hazard they face and the risk it poses to their built environment. Probabilistic lingo and public debate about how big the "big one" will be drives them to resort to their own experience and intuition. There is a fundamental lack of transparency related to what is expected to happen, and it is partially blocking the policy changes that are needed. The solution: craft the message in broad based, usable terms that name the hazard, defines performance, and establishes a set of performance goals that represent the resiliency needed to drive a community's natural ability to rebound from a major seismic event. By using transparent goals and measures with an intuitive vocabulary for both performance and hazard, earthquake professionals, working with the San Francisco Urban Planning and Research Association (SPUR), have defined a level of resiliency that needs to be achieved by the City of San Francisco to assure their response to an event will be manageable and full recovery achievable within three years. Five performance measures for buildings and three for lifeline systems have been defined. Each declares whether people will be safe inside, whether the building will be able to be repaired and whether they will be usable during repairs. Lifeline systems are further defined in terms of the time intervals to restore 90%, 95%, and full service. These transparent categories are used in conjunction with the expected earthquake level to describe the standards needed for new buildings and lifelines and the rehabilitation programs needed for existing buildings and systems. Earthquake professionals -- Emergency Response Planners, Earth Scientists, and Earthquake Engineers - need to embrace this level of transparency and work with their communities to craft the policies needed to instill change and achieve disaster resilience.
- Publication:
-
AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts
- Pub Date:
- December 2008
- Bibcode:
- 2008AGUFM.S14B..01P
- Keywords:
-
- 6324 Legislation and regulations (6615);
- 6600 PUBLIC ISSUES;
- 6615 Legislation and regulations (6324);
- 7212 Earthquake ground motions and engineering seismology