Practical Lessons from the Loma Prieta Earthquake (1994) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
7. Recovery, Mitigation, and Planning
7. Recovery, Mitigation, and Planning
Pages 219-238
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 219... ...
The topics I will address, listed in order are funding, recovery plans and regulations, mitigation actions, state laws, demolition, housing, and business recovery. Of the various reports and papers I have read regarding the Loma Prieta earthquake that address the practical aspects of rebuilding after the event, I have to single out the California Seismic Safety Commission's report Loma Prieta's Call to Action, as an outstanding contribution (California SSC, 19911.
|
From page 220... ...
FUNDING My impression of the major recurring theme in the community reports that are contained in the Seismic Safety Commission's document is of the extreme frustration experienced by public and private interests in obtaining financial assistance critical to their recovery and reconstruction. This is certainly not news, but the vital role of assistance in recovery cannot be denied.
|
From page 221... ...
About twenty City staff people devoted full time to these programs for about nine months." This highlights the need for local jurisdictions to have at least one staff member who is up-to-date on federal and state funding programs so that the jurisdiction will have its own expert when disaster strikes. Such a person would be invaluable when the jurisdiction is confronted with complex funding programs at the same time the city is in chaos after an earthquake.
|
From page 222... ...
The Seismic Safety Commission's report states: "In short, the disaster assistance application and review processes needs a thorough overhaul." RECOVERY PLANS AND REGULATIONS A manager of the firm that contracted with Santa Cruz County to provide repair and reconstruction permitting services summed up the challenge to government when he said: Governments should focus on and formalize the process they want to have in place when disaster strikes rather than trying to reinvent or tweak or get around or ignore normal procedures when you're trying to move as quickly as possible to help your community. California SSC, 1991
|
From page 223... ...
Indeed, the report of the California Seismic Safety Commission recommends that the state should require local jurisdictions to develop community recovery plans with at least as much emphasis as is placed on emergency response plans. Given this perspective, what are some specific recommendations based on the lessons from the Loma Prieta earthquake?
|
From page 224... ...
Given the intense pressures local jurisdictions are under after an earthquake to allow rebuilding in hazardous areas, the Santa Cruz County report goes further and recommends state support in establishing regulations to govern building in hazardous areas and also in financial measures to help solve difficult situations through engineering remedies and relocation of development. Organizational approaches to directing the rebuilding of damaged areas varied in cities.
|
From page 225... ...
This argues for carefully anticipating where major damage might occur and then evaluating the various potential impacts on the rebuilding process.
|
From page 226... ...
Carrying these out probably requires state legislation, a topic addressed next in this paper. IMPORTANCE OF STATE LEGISLATION Patricia Bolton and Carlyn Orians, in their report Earthquake Mitigation in the Bay Area, Lessons from the Loma Prieta Earthquake, address the question of whether the earthquake caused local jurisdictions to take a more aggressive approach in mitigating earthquake hazards (Bolton, 1992~.
|
From page 227... ...
: Category 1, Existing Vulnerable Facilities Category 2, New Facilities Category 3, Emergency Management Category 4, Disaster Recovery Category 5, Research and Information/Education 61 24 22 61 16 When one considers the major advancements in seismic safety throughout California, it becomes clear that most of the actions that have been taken in the hazard-mitigation area are a direct result of state legislation. Bolton and Orians point out that the most common strategies both before and after the earthquake with respect to mitigation were application of the Uniform Building Code for Seismic Zone 4; the inclusion of a safety element in the general plan, which identifies seismic hazards and recommends programs for reducing hazards; and conformance with the California Unreinforced Masonry (URM)
|
From page 228... ...
points out that while the percentage of buildings considered historic that were damaged in the earthquake was small, these buildings were individually significant and were often grouped in older areas where they tended to constitute a historic area. To illustrate the small numbers, consider that in the of city of Santa Cruz, 53 of the 1,025 damaged buildings, or 5 percent, were classified as historic.
|
From page 229... ...
HOUSING It is estimated that approximately 24,000 residential structures sustained damage in the Loma Prieta earthquake. In Santa Cruz County, approximately 14,100 housing units were damaged, and of these about 900 were destroyed.
|
From page 230... ...
In order to help address this problem, the state had previously established the California Natural Disaster Assistance Program for Rental Properties after the Whittier Narrows earthquake to provide low-interest, deferred loans for rehabilitating rental units. The record indicates, however, since these loans are a measure of last resort, assistance was very slow and favored nonprofit housing groups (California SSC, 1991~.
|
From page 231... ...
Others moved into some empty buildings near the downtown, and still others were relocated into rapidly erected "pavilions" on downtown parking lots. After the initial clean-up and the commencement of the use of temporary quarters, the replanning of the downtown started with the appointment of the 36-member Vision Santa Cruz.
|
From page 232... ...
Unfortunately, it appears that local governments left to their own devices by and large will not adopt the seismic safety regulations necessary to protect local populations and improvements. The record seems to show that the most successful mitigation efforts were a direct result of state legislation.
|
From page 233... ...
California Seismic Safety Commission. California SSC (Seismic Safety Commission)
|
From page 234... ...
From the Loma Prieta earthquake (in the Santa Cruz mountains, in particular) and from the Oakland-Berkeley Hills fire, a series of special recovery considerations have emerged.
|
From page 235... ...
George Mader mentioned findings from my research on mitigation planning following the Loma Prieta earthquake. I would like to make three further observations based on that research and other findings and observation.
|
From page 236... ...
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, included in the Staff Act, was implemented after the Loma Prieta earthquake to provide matching funds to communities for mitigation projects. Some experienced problems coming up with mitigation projects for their proposals, but our observations indicated that those who had some type of project on the shelf had an easier time with their proposal.
|
From page 237... ...
Utah is a different world regarding hazards mitigation than California. The Utah Seismic Safety Council was active from 1977-1981.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.