Glendale (PDF) - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaSection 6 – EarthquakesTable 6-4: Injury Classification ScaleInjury SeverityLevelSeverity 1Severity 2Severity 3Severity 4Injury DescriptionInjuries requiring basic medical aid without requiring hospitalization.Injuries requiring a greater degree of medical care and hospitalization, butnot expected to progress to a life-threatening status.Injuries which pose an immediate life-threatening condition if not treatedadequately and expeditiously. The majority of these injuries are the resultof structural collapse and subsequent entrapment or impairment of theoccupants.Instantaneously killed or mortally injured.In addition, HAZUS produces casualty estimates for three times of day:• Earthquake striking at 2:00 a.m. (population at home)• Earthquake striking at 2:00 p.m. (population at work/school)• Earthquake striking at 5:00 p.m. (commute time).Displaced Households/Shelter Requirements - Earthquakes can cause loss of function orhabitability of buildings that contain housing. Displaced households may need alternativeshort-term shelter, provided by family, friends, temporary rentals, or public shelters establishedby the City, County or by relief organizations such as the Red Cross or Salvation Army. Longtermalternative housing may require import of mobile homes, occupancy of vacant units, netemigration from the impacted area, or, eventually, the repair or reconstruction of new publicand private housing. The number of people seeking short-term public shelter is of most concernto emergency response organizations. The longer-term impacts on the housing stock are ofgreat concern to local governments, such as cities and counties.Economic Losses - HAZUS estimates structural and nonstructural repair costs caused bybuilding damage and the associated loss of building contents and business inventory. Buildingdamage can cause additional losses by restricting the building's ability to function properly.Thus, business interruption and rental income losses are estimated. HAZUS divides buildinglosses into two categories: (1) direct building losses and (2) business interruption losses. Directbuilding losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the buildingand its contents. Business interruption losses are associated with inability to operate a businessbecause of the damage sustained during the earthquake. Business interruption losses alsoinclude the temporary living expenses for those people displaced from their homes because ofthe earthquake.Earthquakes may produce indirect economic losses in sectors that do not sustain direct damage.All businesses are forward-linked (if they rely on regional customers to purchase their output)or backward-linked (if they rely on regional suppliers to provide their inputs) and are thuspotentially vulnerable to interruptions in their operation. Note that indirect losses are notconfined to immediate customers or suppliers of damaged enterprises. All of the successiverounds of customers of customers and suppliers of suppliers are affected. In this way, evenlimited physical earthquake damage causes a chain reaction, or ripple effect, that is transmittedthroughout the regional economy.2006 PAGE 6 - 39
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaSection 6 – EarthquakesHAZUS Scenario Earthquakes for the Glendale AreaFive specific scenario earthquakes were modeled using the HAZUS loss estimation softwareavailable from FEMA: earthquakes on the San Andreas, Sierra Madre, Verdugo, Raymond andHollywood faults (see Table 6-5).Fault Source MagnitudeSan Andreas -Mojave SegmentTable 6-5: HAZUS Scenario Earthquakes for the City of Glendale7.1DescriptionA large earthquake that ruptures the Mojave segment of the SanAndreas fault is modeled because of its high probability of occurrence,even though the epicenter would not be too close to the City.Sierra Madre 7.2Verdugo 6.7Raymond 6.5Hollywood 6.4Likely worst-case scenario for the Glendale area. The 7.2 magnitudeearthquake modeled is at the lower range of the size of earthquakes thatresearchers now believe this fault is capable of generating.Possible worst-case scenario for Glendale. Although this earthquake isnot as large as the one estimated on the Sierra Madre fault, this faultextends through an extensively developed area, and therefore has thepotential to cause significant damage to buildings and infrastructure.Maximum magnitude earthquake on the Raymond fault. This fault nearthe southern portion of the City could cause significant damage in thesouthern and eastern portions of Glendale, and in the San Rafael Hills.Maximum magnitude earthquake on the Hollywood fault would causeextensive damage in Hollywood, West Hollywood, and in thesouthwestern portion of Glendale. This fault could break together withthe Santa Monica faults, generating a stronger, more damagingearthquake than the one presented herein.Four of the five earthquake scenarios modeled for this study are discussed in the followingsections. An earthquake on the San Andreas fault is discussed because it has the highestprobability of occurring in the not too distant future, even though the loses expected from thisearthquake are not the worst possible for Glendale. An earthquake on the San Andreas fault hastraditionally been considered the “Big One,” the implication being that an earthquake on thisfault would be devastating to southern California. However, there are several other seismicsources that, given their location closer to the Los Angeles metropolitan area, have the potentialto be more devastating to the region, even if the causative earthquake is smaller in magnitudethan an earthquake on the San Andreas fault. The 7.1 magnitude San Andreas earthquakemodeled for this study would result from the rupture of the Mojave segment of the fault. Thissegment is thought to have more than a 40 percent probability of rupturing in the next 30years. A larger-magnitude earthquake on the San Andreas fault would occur if more than onesegment of the fault ruptures at the same time. If all three southern segments of the SanAndreas fault break together, an earthquake of at least magnitude 7.8 would result.The Sierra Madre and Verdugo scenarios are also presented here because both of these faultshave the potential to cause significant damage in the City. As discussed in Section 1.5.5, theSierra Madre fault appears to have last ruptured more than 8,000 years ago, and may be nearthe end of its strain accumulation cycle. Given that recent studies suggest that the Sierra Madre2006 PAGE 6 - 40
Page 2 and 3:
City CouncilDave Weaver, MayorRafi
Page 4 and 5:
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53: Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 56 and 57: Table 4-2: STAPLEE Ranking of Actio
Page 58 and 59: Table 4-4: Description of Ranking C
Page 108 and 109: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Sec
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
NOTES:This map is intended for gene
Page 325:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 332 and 333:
City of GlendaleUpdateHazard Mitiga
Page 334 and 335:
Similar to Safety ElementIncludesEa
Page 336 and 337:
HospitalsPartnershipsWithin City an
Page 338 and 339:
Impact on CityMost significant area
show all

Glendale (PDF) - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?