My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Supplemental Materials 2026-01-28
>
OnTrack
>
CU
>
2025
>
CU 25-03
>
Supplemental Materials 2026-01-28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2026 11:47:44 AM
Creation date
1/29/2026 11:45:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CU
File Year
25
File Sequence Number
3
Application Name
Emergency Department W 6th Ave
Document Type
Supplemental Materials
Document_Date
1/28/2026
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
186
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The Oregon Resilience Plan – Critical and Essential Buildings – February 2013 76 <br /> <br /> <br />recovery scores; these are subject to a larger variation in expected results and should not be viewed <br />with same level of reliability as those in Figure 4.2. Recovery scores developed from the 2007 SSNA <br />report have been separated from the scores developed through the use of FEMA Hazus due to the <br />differences between the two sources. <br />Target States of Recovery <br />With recovery scores established, the next step was to determine the recovery state that should be <br />targeted in planning the path to statewide seismic resilience. The recovery state is the average time that <br />should be needed to repair a building in a given sector and restore most of its functionality. For the <br />Phase 1 target states, which are measured in hours, there is not much differentiation in the building <br />performance, though it should be realized that just evaluating buildings, particularly in the areas most <br />severely affected, may take several days. Buildings with Phase 2 response times are expected to require <br />some repairs, but generally should not sustain major damage to the primary structures. Phase 3 <br />buildings are expected to sustain significant damage, likely requiring many months to a year or more to <br />repair. The worst building performance—expected of structures in the 18 month and 36+ month <br />categories—will likely be at, or near, a complete loss. Many buildings can be reconstructed in 18 months <br />with sufficient resources; the remaining collapsed buildings will likely require 36+ months. <br />The determination of target states was based mostly on assessing the relative importance of each of the <br />occupancy types to the response and recovery effort after the seismic event. Buildings that house first <br />responders or provide emergency functions are the most vital to the response effort and will need to be <br />functional immediately after the seismic event occurs. Schools in the affected areas need to provide a <br />level of life-safety protection for the children and adults in them during the earthquake, but could be <br />out of service for up to 60 days without significant impacts on resilience. The exceptions are those <br />schools designated as emergency shelters for displaced citizens after the event occurs. The availability of <br />food, water, medical supplies, and money will also be critical to the speed of recovery of the <br />communities affected by the seismic event. Consequently, retail centers, pharmacies, and banks will <br />have to be able to return to normal operation in a reasonable amount of time. All of these <br />considerations informed the development of the target recovery scores for each building class that are <br />reflected in Figures 4.2 and 4.3. Note that a specific target state was not determined for vulnerable <br />buildings. This is because the use and function of these structures varies widely. Instead, the recovery <br />state should either match the building’s occupancy category, if the building is used for a critical function, <br />or upgrade criteria should be established based on the needs of the facility—but these criteria should <br />not be less than life safety. <br />With both expected and target recovery states identified and tabulated for each building class by <br />seismic region, the gaps between expected and target building performance can easily be seen. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.