To populate a state like Florida, one must accept the
potential risk these storms pose. You
can limit the vulnerability of a particular community with flood mitigation
measures and geographical solutions (e.g., moving structures from coastal
areas), but enforcing building construction techniques that help preserve life
and property remains the most effective tool available to public leaders.
At the same time we’re watching the storm, a study in California is drawing the interest of hazard mitigation planners and lawmakers alike. The subject is the safety of earthquakes and university buildings and an article in the LA times carries the ominous title, “Earthquakes could kill people in many UCLA, UC Berkeley buildings, officials say.”
At the same time we’re watching the storm, a study in California is drawing the interest of hazard mitigation planners and lawmakers alike. The subject is the safety of earthquakes and university buildings and an article in the LA times carries the ominous title, “Earthquakes could kill people in many UCLA, UC Berkeley buildings, officials say.”
Like the wind and storm damage from a hurricane or
typhoon, avoiding the hazard of an earthquake is difficult if the only solution
you have is geographical. With a few
exceptions for micro-site decisions (e.g., elevation, soil type, proximity to
known faults) you can’t move away from earthquakes. Rather, reducing damage and
loss of life from seismic events requires a strong focus on
engineered solutions—building safer structures.
Recently, researchers have identified at least 86 buildings at two of California’s major UC campuses (UCLA and Berkeley) that pose significant risks for occupants in the event of a major earthquake. Studies at other state institutions are pending. The cost of repairs for Berkeley alone exceeds $1 billion. State leaders are asking voters to approve another $8 billion in bonds for retrofitting university buildings—this in addition to the $2 billion already in the state’s capital plan. So why haven’t they made repairs? They did. The article says:
Recently, researchers have identified at least 86 buildings at two of California’s major UC campuses (UCLA and Berkeley) that pose significant risks for occupants in the event of a major earthquake. Studies at other state institutions are pending. The cost of repairs for Berkeley alone exceeds $1 billion. State leaders are asking voters to approve another $8 billion in bonds for retrofitting university buildings—this in addition to the $2 billion already in the state’s capital plan. So why haven’t they made repairs? They did. The article says:
“UCLA and UC Berkeley have been leaders in seismic retrofits for decades. UCLA has spent more than $2.8 billion, and UC Berkeley, more than $1 billion, on retrofits — strengthening buildings that are particularly at risk of extensive damage. But new research over the past quarter-century has shown that, at least for the Berkeley campus, the severity of potential shaking is much worse than previously believed…”
“In a campus email Wednesday, UC Berkeley Chancellor
Carol Christ said the campus was submitting its preliminary findings to the UC
Office of the President as officials begin ‘a coordinated, systemwide effort to
holistically prioritize and address the work that will need to be done on
hundreds of buildings on the 10 UC campuses.
Before remediation can proceed, experts must first determine the best
option — retrofit, replace or vacate — for each of the seismically deficient
buildings. In the meantime,' she added, 'UC Berkeley will review ‘available,
realistic options to limit occupancy and usage of seismically deficient
buildings on our campus.’”
The Hayward fault (left) runs through Berkeley, Oakland, Hayward
and Fremont. It's capable of producing an earthquake greater than magnitude 7. Source: the LA Times article.
No comments:
Post a Comment