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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Section 6 – EarthquakesCity of Glendale, CaliforniaMap 6.9: Distribution and Severity of Damaged Bridges in Glendaleas a Result of Three Different Earthquake Scenarios2006 PAGE 6 - 53
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaSection 6 – EarthquakesA maximum magnitude earthquake on the Verdugo fault is modeled to damage about 25bridges in the city, with 4 of them considered completely damaged. However, as before,all but 2 of the bridge locations are expected to be functional by the next day. TheRaymond and Hollywood fault earthquake scenarios model some damage to theGlendale transportation system, but less than that caused by either the Sierra Madre orVerdugo earthquakes discussed above.Table 6-11: Expected Damage to Transportation SystemsScenario System Segments inInventorySan AndreasReplacementValue for AllSegments inInventoryWith AtLeastModerateDamageWithCompleteDamageEconomicLoss ($M)>50 percentFunctionalafter 1 DayHighway Major Roads 5 $2.8 Billion 0 0 0 5Bridges 143 $419 Million 1 0 0.8 143Railways Tracks 2 $19 Million 0 0 0 2Airport Facilities 4 $8 Million 0 0 0.3 4Sierra MadreVerdugoHighway Major Roads 5 $2.8 Billion 0 0 0 5Bridges 143 $419 Million 27 5 24.4 143Railways Tracks 2 $19 Million 0 0 0 2Airport Facilities 4 $8 Million 2 0 1.8 4Highway Major Roads 5 $2.8 Billion 0 0 0 5Bridges 143 $419 Million 25 4 23.3 141Railways Tracks 2 $19 Million 0 0 0 2Airport Facilities 4 $8 Million 1 0 1.7 4RaymondHighway Major Roads 5 $2.8 Billion 0 0 0 5Bridges 143 $419 Million 13 2 12.1 143Railways Tracks 2 $19 Million 0 0 0 2Airport Facilities 4 $8 Million 1 0 1.6 4Utility Systems Damage - The HAZUS inventory for the Glendale area does not includespecifics regarding the various lifeline systems in the city, therefore, the model estimateddamage to the potable water and electric power using empirical relationships based on thenumber of households served in the area. The results of the analyses regarding thefunctionality of the potable water and electric power systems in the city for the four mainearthquakes discussed herein are presented in Table 6-12. According to the models, all of theearthquake scenarios will impact the electric power systems; thousands of households in the cityare expected to not have electric power even three days after an earthquake on any of the faultsdiscussed in this report. An earthquake on either the Sierra Madre or Verdugo fault isanticipated to leave as many as 9,000 households without electricity for more than one week.The potable water system is anticipated to do better, but nearly 8,000 households are expectedto be without water for at least 3 days after the earthquake. These results suggest that the citywill have to truck in water into some of the residential neighborhoods in the northern portion ofthe city until the damages to the system are repaired. Residents are advised to have drinking2006 PAGE 6 - 54
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:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Table 4-2: STAPLEE Ranking of Actio
Page 58 and 59:
Table 4-4: Description of Ranking C
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67: Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 108 and 109: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Sec
Page 114 and 115: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Sec
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?