University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A comparison of two earthquake events in the City of Downey: the Puente Hills and Whittier faults at 7.0 and 6.8 magnitudes

(USC Thesis Other)

A comparison of two earthquake events in the City of Downey: the Puente Hills and Whittier faults at 7.0 and 6.8 magnitudes

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

A Comparison of Two Earthquake Events in the City of Downey:
The Puente Hills and Whittier Faults at 7.0 and 6.8 Magnitudes

by

Angela Woods

A Thesis Presented to the
Faculty of the USC Graduate School
University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science
(Geographic Information Science and Technology)

August 2017

ii

Copyright ® 2017 by Angela Woods
iii

Table of Contents
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... viii
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... x
Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Motivation ............................................................................................................................3
1.2 Study Objectives ..................................................................................................................4
1.3 Scope of Project ...................................................................................................................5
Chapter 2 Background .................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Study Area ...........................................................................................................................7
2.2 General Geology and Earthquakes in California .................................................................9
2.3 Earthquake Hazards ...........................................................................................................10
2.4 HAZUS ..............................................................................................................................16
Chapter 3 Data and Methodology ................................................................................................. 19
3.1 Data Used ...........................................................................................................................19
3.1.1. HAZUS census tract base data .................................................................................20
3.1.2. HAZUS inventory data ............................................................................................21
3.1.3. User supplied data ....................................................................................................23

3.2 Methodology ......................................................................................................................29
3.2.1. Earthquake Scenario Selection Process ...................................................................30
3.2.2. Whittier Earthquake Scenario 1: ..............................................................................30
3.2.3. Puente Hills Earthquake Scenario 2: ........................................................................32

3.3 Summary ............................................................................................................................34
Chapter 4 Results .......................................................................................................................... 35
4.1 Puente Hills Scenario Results ............................................................................................35
4.1.1. Building Damage .....................................................................................................35
4.1.2. Essential Facilities Damage .....................................................................................38
4.1.3. Debris Generation ....................................................................................................47
iv
4.1.4. Shelter Requirement.................................................................................................47
4.1.5. Casualties .................................................................................................................49
4.1.6. Economic Loss .........................................................................................................51

4.2 Whittier Scenario Results...................................................................................................53
4.2.1. Building Damage .....................................................................................................54
4.2.2. Essential Facilities Damage .....................................................................................55
4.2.3. Debris Generation ....................................................................................................63
4.2.4. Shelter Requirement.................................................................................................63
4.2.5. Casualties .................................................................................................................65
4.2.6. Economic Loss .........................................................................................................67

Chapter 5 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 70
5.1 Implication of these results ................................................................................................70
5.2 Limitations .........................................................................................................................72
5.3 Future Research .................................................................................................................73
References ..................................................................................................................................... 75

v
List of Figures
Figure 1: Probability of Earthquake Hazard (Source: USGS) .................................................................................................... 1
Figure 2: Overview of the City of Downey ................................................................................................................................ 8
Figure 3: Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (Version 3) (Source: USGS) ...................................................... 10
Figure 4: Natural Resources Conservation Service – Soil Map (Source: USDA) ................................................................... 13
Figure 5: Natural Resource Conversation Service -Types of Soil (Source: USDA) ................................................................. 14
Figure 6: Areas Prone to Liquefaction ...................................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 7: Comparison of U.S. Regional Seismic Risk Annualized Earthquake Loss (Source: FEMA) ................................... 17
Figure 8: Level of HAZUS Users (Source: FEMA) ................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 9: City of Downey by Census Tract .............................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 10: Essential Facilities Query (Source: CDMS) ............................................................................................................ 24
Figure 11: Default Fire Station Facility (Source: CDMS) ........................................................................................................ 24
Figure 12: Default Police Station Facilities (Source: CDMS) .................................................................................................. 25
Figure 13: Default Emergency Operation Centers Facility (Source: CDMS) ........................................................................... 25
Figure 14: Default Medical Care Facilities (Source: CDMS) ................................................................................................... 26
Figure 15: Default School Facilities (Source: CDMS) ............................................................................................................. 26
Figure 16: Updated Essential Facilities Data (Source: CDMS) ................................................................................................ 27
Figure 17: ShakeMaps ingested into HAZUS .......................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 18: Strike-slip fault (Source: USGS) ............................................................................................................................. 30
Figure 19: USGS ShakeMap of Whittier fault (Source: USGS) ............................................................................................... 31
Figure 20: Thrust Fault (Source: USGS) .................................................................................................................................. 32
Figure 21: USGS ShakeMap of Puente Hills (Source: USGS) ................................................................................................. 33
Figure 22: Estimated Moderate Damage to Fire Stations ......................................................................................................... 40
Figure 23: Estimated Moderate Damage to Medical Facilities ................................................................................................. 42
Figure 24: Estimated Moderate Damage to School Facilities ................................................................................................... 44
Figure 25: Estimated Moderate Damage to Police Station ....................................................................................................... 46
Figure 26: Displaced Households ............................................................................................................................................. 48
vi
Figure 27: Total Economic Loss (US Million $) ...................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 28: Estimated Moderate Damage to Fire Stations ......................................................................................................... 56
Figure 29: Estimated Moderate Damage to Medical Facilities ................................................................................................. 58
Figure 30: Estimated Moderate Damage to School Facilities ................................................................................................... 60
Figure 31: Estimated Moderate Damage to Police Station ....................................................................................................... 62
Figure 32: Displaced Household ............................................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 33: Total Economic Loss (US Million $) ...................................................................................................................... 69

vii
List of Tables

Table 1: Study Region (City of Downey) Population and Buildings Value ............................................................................. 21
Table 2: Default Transportation System ................................................................................................................................... 22
Table 3: Default Utility System ................................................................................................................................................ 23
Table 4: Estimated Building Damage by Occupancy ............................................................................................................... 36
Table 5: Estimated Building Damage by Building Type (All Design Levels) ......................................................................... 37
Table 6: Estimated Damage to Essential Facilities ................................................................................................................... 38
Table 7: Fire Station of the City of Downey ............................................................................................................................. 41
Table 8: Medical Facilities in the City of Downey ................................................................................................................... 43
Table 9: Schools in the City of Downey ................................................................................................................................... 45
Table 10: Casualty Estimates According to Severity Levels .................................................................................................... 50
Table 11: Esitmated Building Damage by Occupancy ............................................................................................................. 54
Table 12: Estimated Building Damage by Building Type (All Design Levels) ....................................................................... 54
Table 13: Estimated Damage to Essential Facilities ................................................................................................................. 55
Table 14: Fire Station of the City of Downey ........................................................................................................................... 57
Table 15: Medical Facility of the City of Downey ................................................................................................................... 59
Table 16: Schools of the City of Downey ................................................................................................................................. 61
Table 17: Casualty Estimates .................................................................................................................................................... 66
Table 18: Essential Facility to be considered first for Retrofitting ........................................................................................... 71

viii
List of Abbreviations
AEL Annual Earthquake Loss
AELR Annual Earthquake Loss Ratio
CDMS Comprehensive Data Management System
EOC Emergency Operation Center
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
GIS Geographic information system
GISci Geographic information science
HAZUS MH HAZards U.S., Multi-Hazard
HEFRA Honolulu Essential Facilities Risk Assessment
MH Manufactured Housing
NEHRP National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
OCEFRA Orange County Essential Facilities Risk Assessment
PGA Peak Ground Acceleration
PGV Peak Ground Velocity
RM Reinforced Masonry Manufactured Housing (MH)
SCEC Southern California Earthquake Center
SSI Spatial Sciences Institute
UCERF Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast
URM Unreinforced Masonry
USC University of Southern California
ix
USDA United State Department of Agriculture
USGS United States Geological Survey

x
Abstract
Earthquakes have produced losses of over $60 billion since 1971. Of these, California has suffered the
highest losses nationally. These losses include building and bridge damage, destruction of building
contents and business interruption. The risk factors (as they pertain to loss from earthquake damage) are
large stocks of old buildings and bridges; many high-tech and hazardous materials facilities; extensive
sewer, water, and natural gas pipelines; earth dams; petroleum pipelines; other critical facilities; and
private property. The secondary earthquake hazards (which include liquefaction, ground shaking,
amplification, and earthquake-induced landslides) can be just as devastating as the earthquake itself.
Damage caused by an earthquake depends on the quality of the buildings’ construction, the density of
the area, the pattern of intense shaking, and many other factors. Should an earthquake occur in a densely
populated area with older buildings, loss of life and damage to infrastructure would be much higher.
This study performs and evaluates two potential earthquake scenarios for the City of Downey
utilizing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) HAZards U.S., Multi-Hazard (HAZUS)
Earthquake Model. According to the Downey General Plan, there is a 50% probability that a major
earthquake will occur within the next 30 years along the Whittier-Elsinore Fault, which is 40 miles
northeast of Downey. In addition, the Anaheim, Puente Hills, Elysian and Newport-Inglewood Faults
are within or near Downey’s city limit and those faults are all active or potentially active faults. For this
reason, the Whittier and Puente Hills faults with Magnitude (M) 6.8 and 7.0 respectively were chosen to
run in the scenarios. HAZUS, which runs on an ArcGIS platform, along with Comprehensive Data
Management System (CDMS) was used to ingest updated data, model the earthquakes and create output
maps. Essential Facilities data were updated via data provided from the City of Downey Water Work
Department into the CDMS. United States Geological Survey (USGS) ShakeMaps were ingested via the
xi
Data tool into HAZUS. Based on the updated data, two earthquake scenarios were modeled and the
results were used for mitigation planning.

1
Chapter 1 Introduction
Earthquakes are the most expensive recurrent hazards in the United States. Many parts of California
have the highest probability for earthquake hazard (Figure 1) and produce the highest losses nationally
since 1971 (USGS, 2013).

Figure 1: Probability of Earthquake Hazard (Source: USGS)
The risk factors as they pertain to loss from earthquake damage are: (1) large stocks of old
buildings and bridges; (2) many high tech and hazardous materials facilities; (3) extensive sewer, water,
and natural gas pipelines; (4) earth dams; (5) petroleum pipelines; (6) other critical facilities; and (7)
private property (FEMA, 2008). The secondary earthquake hazards (which include liquefaction, ground
shaking, amplification, and earthquake-induced landslides) can be just as devastating as the earthquake
(Fitzpatrick & Petersen, 2016). Damage caused by an earthquake depends on the quality of the
2
building’s construction, the density of the area, the pattern of intense shaking, and many other factors.
Due to severe damage during an earthquake prior to 1993, California enhanced its building codes,
strengthened the highway structures, and improved emergency management organizations. These
changes have reduced the loss of life and damage to buildings. Recent earthquakes in California have
provided evidence of how efficient the new building codes are when it comes to construction and
retrofitting (Bonowitz, Kornfield, & McNutty, 2016).
The most recent significant earthquake event affecting Los Angeles County was the 1994
Northridge Earthquake (USGS, 2013). This was a moderate but very damaging earthquake with a
magnitude of 6.7 that struck the San Fernando Valley. There were thousands of aftershock waves for
weeks following the initial quake, causing additional damage. Los Angeles city officials say that more
than 200,000 people were living in retrofitted brick buildings when the quake hit. There was not a
single death or injury reported from more than 37,000 units in 1,300 strengthened buildings. The
structures that were built or strengthened under the new, stricter code experienced limited damage, while
those structures that had not been retrofitted suffered greater damage. Approximately 15,000 structures
were moderately to severely damaged, leaving thousands of people temporarily homeless. Of the
66,500 buildings that were inspected, nearly 4,000 were severely damaged, and over 11,000 were
moderately damaged. There were 57 people killed and more than 1,500 people seriously injured.
Thousands of homes and businesses were without electricity; tens of thousands had no gas, and nearly
50,000 had little or no water. Several collapsed bridges and overpasses created commuter havoc on the
freeway system. Extensive damage was caused by ground shaking, but earthquake-triggered
liquefaction and dozens of fires also caused additional severe damage. This extremely strong ground
motion in large portions of Los Angeles County resulted in record economic losses (USGS, 2013).
Therefore, to reduce losses in future earthquakes, much work is still needed. There are still older
3
buildings in California that have not been retrofitted. It is up to the owners to do so. Should an
earthquake similar to this quake occur in a more densely populated area with older buildings, loss of life
and damage would be much higher.
Understanding where future damage is likely to occur can help many to take actions now in order
to reduce potential future losses and assist in recovery. For this reason, the City of Downey was chosen
to compare earthquake scenarios similar to that of the Northridge earthquake. Many of the buildings in
Downey were built before 1993 when building codes were not as strict. Therefore, many of the
buildings remain at high risk because retrofitting is not required except under certain conditions and can
be expensive. Downey’s bridges and roads can be greatly damaged during an earthquake. This is
relevant in that many of Downey’s residents commute frequently by automobiles and public
transportation. According to the Downey General Plan, there is a 50% probability that a major
earthquake will occur within the next 30 years along the Whittier-Elsinore Fault, which is 40 miles
northeast of Downey. In addition, the Anaheim, Puente Hills, Elysian and Newport-Inglewood Faults
are within or near Downey’s city limit. Those faults are all active or potentially active faults.
1.1 Motivation
As a Geographic Information System (GIS) professional augmented to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) as a liaison, I was tasked to assist with responding to natural disasters. It
was here where I was introduced to the HAZards U.S., Multi-Hazard (HAZUS) software, which can
model earthquakes and the damage they may cause. After much research and dialogue with Downey’s
Office of Emergency Management, I discovered the office did not have an up-to-date earthquake
assessment. This was because their focus had been on flooding in the past. Downey’s flood concerns
have been resolved, as much of their work has been done on flood mitigation. However, little has been
done on earthquake mitigation. Given the need of the City of Downey - Office of Emergency
4
Management (OEM), I thought it would be an excellent opportunity to become familiar with the science
of earthquake ground motion and the engineering principles behind estimating earthquake impact on the
built environment, as well as the potential impact on the human population of the City of Downey. The
emergency manager was contacted and asked if an earthquake risk assessment would be useful. The
manager agreed and requested an assessment for mitigation planning.
The office emergency manager outlined the criteria for the earthquake risk assessment. They
wanted to know what would be the estimated overall loss if an earthquake should occur. They selected
earthquakes with a magnitude of 6.8 and 7.0 for the Puente Hills and Whittier faults. The Puente Hills
fault is located near the city while the Whittier fault is located just outside of the city. Once the risk
assessments are completed through this study, the findings are planned for presentation via a virtual
meeting.
1.2 Study Objectives
During the past 20 years, Downey has invested substantially in its essential facilities, enabling it
to be more responsive to floods. However, many of the buildings have not been retrofitted to meet the
new earthquake code. Essential facilities data (fire and police stations, medical facilities, and schools)
for the City of Downey are available through the city and county. This is in addition to those provided
with HAZUS. Default data provided with the HAZUS software allows a user to run a simplified (or
Level 1) analysis without collecting additional data. However, in many cases, the quality of default
national data delivered with the software is less than optimal. The data may originate from agencies
other than FEMA, or it was collected for applications other than loss estimation. Accordingly, the
accuracy of HAZUS results can be greatly improved with the input of various user supplied data on
either the hazard or the affected assets or both (David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003). Such an enhanced
analysis is usually referred to as a Level 2 analysis.
5
This study followed examples of other studies, such as the Orange County Essential Facilities
Risk Assessment (OCEFRA) Project Report and the Honolulu Essential Facilities Risk Assessment
(HEFRA) Project Report. The OCEFRA Pilot Study examined the risks to the county’s essential
facilities and general building stock from two different earthquakes, three different floods, and a tsunami
affecting the county (ABS, Dewberry, Davis, & MMI, 2009). The project also included an additional
task to develop a “Guidelines Document” outlining the approach used throughout the project for
enhancing essential facilities data and performing the Level 2 analysis using HAZUS. The HEFRA
Study examined the risks to the county’s essential facilities and general building stock from earthquakes,
hurricane, and floods affecting the Honolulu county (URS, 2010). Unlike the OCEFRA study, the
HEFRA study provided an additional risk assessment for high wind using the HAZUS Hurricane Model.
The City of Downey assessment examined the risk to the city’s essential facilities and general building
stock from two difference earthquakes performing the Level 2 analysis using the HAZUS Earthquake
Model.
1.3 Scope of Project
This study compared the loss/damage to the essential facilities and building stocks from two
Level 2 earthquake scenarios in and nearby the city of Downey. The earthquake events were run in the
earthquake model using the user-supplied hazard. Other than the transportation system and utility
systems, a second level analysis was conducted by improving the essential facilities, soil, liquefaction
and Shakemaps with user-supplied data. The earthquake scenarios were run for a user-defined, arbitrary
earthquake for two magnitudes of 6.8 and 7.0 on the Whittier-Elsinore and Puente Hills faults. This
project involved several steps:
1. Collect Essential Facilities data
2. Update Essential Facilities data
6
3. Import Essential Facilities into HAZUS via CDMS
4. Collect General Building Stock data import into HAZUS
5. Collect Earthquake Hazard data from USGS
6. Import ShakeMap into HAZUS
7. Verify Default Transportation and Utility Systems

8. Run Earthquake Model for the Puente Hills fault earthquake scenario
9. Run Earthquake Model for the Whittier fault earthquake scenario
10. Assess the loss estimation results

From these analyses and the resulting assessment, final recommendations were then possible and
resultantly made to create a mitigation plan, and how to the assessment could be improved, given further
research and data refinement.

7
Chapter 2 Background
For this project, it was imperative to understand the earthquake and geologic concepts as they relate to
the City of Downey. The geology of the terrain upon which the physical city is built is the fundamental
base that makes earthquakes possible. Historical earthquakes in California are important to understand
as they give insight to the potential impact upon the study area. Ground motion and ground failure
(landslides, liquefaction, and amplification) play an important role in determining the potential impacts
of an earthquake. The severity of the earthquake depends on soil and slope conditions, proximity to the
fault, earthquake magnitude, and the type of earthquake.
2.1 Study Area
The city of Downey is a populated area located with faults within or near the city limits. In
2012, the City of Downey had an estimated population of 112, 200 people, or about 1.1% of the total
population of Los Angeles County, California (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 estimate). According to the
Downey General Plan, there is a 79% probability that a major earthquake will occur within the next 30
years along the Whittier-Elsinore Fault. This fault is 40 miles northeast of Downey (Downeyca, 2009).
In addition, the Puente Hills Fault, which is active or potentially active, is located within or near the City
of Downey (see Figure 2).
8

Figure 2: Overview of the City of Downey
Downey is only five miles from Orange County and approximately twelve miles from the Pacific
coastline. It is located 13 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles, which allows it to be affected by
the heavy rains of the downtown area. The city is situated between two major rivers. The San Gabriel
River is to the east, and the Rio Hondo River is to the west. These rivers serve as flood control channels
during heavy rains. They are part of the County Flood Control District with the city being protected by
a levee wall with a height of 21 feet (FEMA, 2012). Normally, the river channels are dry and only carry
a significant water flow during a major rainstorm. The Rio Hondo River Channel has a capacity to carry
4,200 cubic feet of water per second, and the San Gabriel River Channel is designed to carry 1,900 cubic
9
feet of water per second. North of the city, there are three dams: (1) the Sepulveda; (2) the Whittier
Narrows; and (3) the Hansen. According to the City of Downey Emergency Operations Plan
(Downeyca, 2009), although the reservoir behind the Whittier Narrows Dam is empty (except during
times of heavy runoff) it holds 9.75 million gallons of water and has the potential impact for dam
inundation in the City of Downey.
2.2 General Geology and Earthquakes in California
Geological records show that California has a long history of seismic events. The San Andreas
Fault is a 400-mile-long fault that runs from the Mexican border to a point offshore, just west of San
Francisco. Geologic studies show that over the past 1,400 to 1,500 years, large earthquakes have
occurred at about 130-year intervals on the southern San Andreas Fault (USGS, 2013). As the last large
earthquake on the Southern San Andreas occurred in 1857, that section of the fault is considered a likely
location for an earthquake within the next few decades (USGS, 2013).
San Andreas is only one of many known earthquake faults that traverse Southern California.
Some of the better-known faults are the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier, Chatsworth, Elsinore,
Hollywood, Los Alamitos, Puente Hills, and Palos Verdes faults. There are a potentially large number
of “blind” faults that underlie the surface of Southern California. One such blind fault was involved in
the Whittier Narrows earthquake in October 1987. Although the most famous of the faults, the San
Andreas, is capable of producing an earthquake with a magnitude of 8+ on the Richter scale, it is located
further from the urban area. However, some of the “lesser” faults have the potential to inflict greater
damage on the urban core of the Los Angeles Basin because the faults are located closer to or within the
urban area. The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF) demonstrates the
probability of all-possible, damaging earthquakes over a specified time span (see Figure 3).
10

Figure 3: Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (Version 3) (Source: USGS)
Seismologists believe that a 6.0 earthquake on the Newport-Inglewood fault would result in far
more death and destruction than a “great” quake on the San Andreas because the San Andreas is
relatively remote from the urban centers of Southern California. Thousands of earthquakes occur in
California each year with some causing moderate damage and injuries in small areas. In Southern
California alone, over 300 faults may cause damaging earthquakes. Most everyone in Southern
California lives within 30 miles of one of these faults. When earthquakes on these faults are in
populated areas, the losses can be substantial (Seismic Hazard Zonation Program, 2015).
2.3 Earthquake Hazards
Earthquake hazards include ground motion and ground failure (liquefaction, landslides and
surface fault rupture). Essentially, these are the specific hazards associated with earthquakes. The
severity of these hazards depends on several factors, including soil and slope conditions, proximity to
11
the fault, earthquake magnitude, and the type of earthquake. Ground motion is the shaking felt on the
earth's surface caused by seismic waves generated by the earthquake (Fitzpatrick & Petersen, 2016). It is
the primary cause of earthquake damage. The strength of ground motion depends on the magnitude of
the earthquake, the type of fault, and distance from the epicenter (David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003).
Ground motion estimates are represented by contour maps and location-specific values of ground
shaking demand. For computational efficiency and improved accuracy, earthquake losses are computed
using location-specific estimates of ground shaking demand. The analysis has been simplified for
general building stock. The spatial distribution of ground motion can be determined using USGS
probabilistic ground motion maps (ShakeMaps). When ground motion is based on ShakeMaps location-
specific values of ground shaking demand are interpolated between peak ground acceleration (PGA),
peak ground velocity (PGV) and spectral acceleration (SA) contours, respectively (David Adler and Eric
Berman, 2003). In HAZUS, the user-supplied hazard option requires the user to supply digitized PGA
and SA contour maps. Spectral accelerations at 0.3 second and 0.1 second (SA at 0.3 and SA at 1.0) are
needed to define the hazard. The damage and losses are computed based on the user-supplied maps. In
general, for the general building stock, the analysis has been simplified so that ground motion demand is
computed at the centroid of a census tract. However, contour maps are also developed to provide
pictorial representations of the variation in ground motion demand within the study region.
As it relates to ground failure, liquefaction, landslides and surface fault rupture must be
considered. Liquefaction is a process by which water-saturated sediment temporarily loses strength and
acts as a fluid. This causes uneven settlement of the soil which can result in structural damage to
infrastructure. To include liquefaction in the analysis, you may supply a liquefaction susceptibility map
which shows the susceptibility for each census tract and is based on a soil survey of the area. Based on
the liquefaction susceptibility and the peak ground acceleration, a probability of liquefaction is assigned
12
during the analysis. A landslide is a movement of surface material down a slope. To include landslide
in the analysis, one may supply a landslide susceptibility map which shows the susceptibility for each
census tract. Once landslide susceptibility has been determined, HAZUS provides default values for
probability of land-sliding and estimated permanent ground displacement as a function of ground
acceleration.
When an earthquake occurs, the fault rupture can extend from its starting point all the way to the
ground surface. In the eastern part of the United States, many earthquakes do not show evidence of
rupture at the ground surface, however, in the western part of the United States and Alaska surface fault
rupture is common. Displacements due to surface fault rupture can measure up to several meters and
can cause significant damage to structure. Surface fault rupture can be included by selecting the Ground
Failure when the analysis is run.
Downey is primarily affected by flooding, which is of major concern because it promotes
liquefaction, and this may result in landslides during an earthquake event (Baumann, 2012 ). The city
has multiple low-lying areas that are prone to flooding (FEMA, 2012). The areas include the locations of
Rancho Los Amigos Hospital grounds, Firestone and Lakewood Boulevard, Firestone Boulevard
between Paramount Boulevard and Brookshire Avenue, areas south of Telegraph Road and north of the
Santa Ana Freeway, and portions of the Glenn Anderson Freeway within the City limits [all according to
the Downey Emergency Operations Plan (Downeyca, 2009)]. Almost 55% of the area in the City of
Downey has a high concentration of impermeable surfaces that either collect water or concentrate the
flow of water in unnatural channels. In addition, elevations in the city range from a high of 145 feet in
the northern region of the city to a low of 85 feet in the southern region, with an average elevation of
117 feet, according to the City of Downy Emergency Operations Plan. The terrain of the city is
primarily flat and low-lying which has the potential to flood (FEMA, 2012). Earthquake-induced
13
landslides are secondary earthquake hazards (Michael, Irvine, & Slang, 2001). They can destroy the
roads, buildings, utilities, and other critical facilities necessary to respond and recover from an
earthquake. The City of Downey has a high likelihood of encountering such risks given the soil
composition and the varying elevations (Krishna, 2013).
The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service soil map, which is considered a more
detailed soil survey, classified the City of Downey’s soil as mostly loam, sandy, silt, and clay, with a
small portion of bedrock and organic material (see Figure 4). Loam has a very high percentage of sand
and silt, all of which are susceptible to ground failure during an earthquake event (see Figure 5).

Figure 4: Natural Resources Conservation Service – Soil Map (Source: USDA)

14

Figure 5: Natural Resource Conversation Service -Types of Soil (Source: USDA)
Soils and soft sedimentary rocks near the earth's surface can modify ground shaking caused by
earthquakes. One of these modifications is amplification. Amplification increases the magnitude of the
seismic waves generated by the earthquake. The amount of amplification is influenced by the thickness
of geologic materials and their physical properties. Buildings and structures built on soft and
unconsolidated soils can face greater risk (Bonowitz, Kornfield, & McNutty, 2016).
The likelihood of experiencing liquefaction at a specific location is primarily influenced by the
susceptibility of the soil, the amplitude and duration of ground shaking, and the depth of groundwater.
Once liquefaction occurs, the ground loses its ability to support structures, can flow down even very
gentle slopes, and erupt to the ground surface to form sand boils. Many of these phenomena are
accompanied by settlement of the ground surface — usually in uneven patterns that damage buildings,
15
roads, and pipelines. The California Geological Survey has identified areas most vulnerable to
liquefaction (see Figure 6); the entire City of Downey is subject to liquefaction (Seismic Hazard
Zonation Program, 2015).

Figure 6: Areas Prone to Liquefaction
For this study, user-supplied USGS ShakeMaps were used. As 4‐3 HAZUS ‐MH Technical Manual
states in Section 4.1.2.1, the methodology assumes that user-supplied maps reflect soil amplification.
Each of these ground failure types are considered in HAZUS and quantified by permanent ground
displacement measured in inches (David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003).
16
2.4 HAZUS
HAZUS is the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) nationally applicable
software program that estimates potential building and infrastructure losses from earthquakes, riverine
and coastal floods, and hurricane winds. HAZUS loss estimates reflect state-of-the-art scientific and
engineering knowledge. It can be used to inform decision-making at all levels of government by
providing a reasonable basis for developing mitigation, emergency preparedness, and response and
recovery plans and policies. HAZUS uses geographic information system software (ArcGIS) to map
and display: (1) hazard data; (2) the results of damage and economic loss analyses; and (3) potential
effects on area populations. HAZUS analyses also can be run in real time to support response and
recovery actions following a disaster event. Other proprietary and research-based earthquake prediction
software exists, created and used by government experts at agencies like the Unites States Geological
Survey (USGS), or by academic institutions such the Southern California Earthquake Center (USGS,
2017) (SCEC, 2017). However, these are not generally freely available and are most user friendly for
Geophysicists and Engineers. Thus, HAZUS was chosen for use in this study, for it’s accessibility, ease
of use, and comprehensive technical documentation that allows a novice user to thoroughly learn the
science behind the earthquake damage modeling tools.
The HAZUS Earthquake Model was first released by FEMA in 1997 as HAZUS97, which was
subsequently updated three times. The multi-hazard version of HAZUS -HAZUS-MH - was first
released by FEMA in 2004 and its fourth update HAZUS-MH MR4 - became available in October 2009.
The HAZUS-MH Earthquake Model estimates earthquake damage and loss to buildings, essential
facilities, and transportation and utility lifelines. It also addresses debris generation, fire following
earthquake, casualties, and shelter requirements. In 2010, FEMA determined the average Annual
17
Earthquake Loss (AEL) and average Annual Earthquake Loss Ratio (AELR) risks for all states (see
Figure 7). California fell in the top tier of both measurements (FEMA, Earthquake Model , 2010).

Figure 7: Comparison of U.S. Regional Seismic Risk Annualized Earthquake Loss (Source: FEMA)
The tool created by FEMA and delivered with HAZUS for allowing updates to HAZUS provided
inventory with locally produced data is called the Comprehensive Data Management System (CDMS).
This tool was developed with the express purpose of allowing users to enhance the analytical outcomes
and, therefore, the accuracy of loss estimations generated by HAZUS, by bringing enhanced data into
the HAZUS loss estimation process. HAZUS provides three levels of analysis based on the level of
effort and expertise employed by the user (Figure 8).
18

Figure 8: Level of HAZUS Users (Source: FEMA)
For the purpose of this study, a Level 2 earthquake analysis was conducted which included a
combination of updated and default data. In HAZUS, a user-defined earthquake scenario was used for
the methodology.

19
Chapter 3 Data and Methodology
This chapter discusses the data used in the project. It discusses the data provided with the HAZUS
software, the data provided by the city (which was updated via the CDMS), as well as the ShakeMaps
provided by USGS which were incorporated into HAZUS. It also discusses the methodology using
HAZUS. The HAZUS earthquake model was run using a user-defined earthquake scenario on two
different faults - the Puente Hills and Whittier faults - at two different magnitudes. From this, the
results were analyzed and an assessment prepared for mitigation planning.
3.1 Data Used
Within the HAZUS earthquake model, hazards include both primary hazards (earthquake ground
motion), and secondary hazards, such as earthquake-induced ground failure. Technical background
material, required data formats, and descriptions are also provided in detail in the HAZUS Earthquake
Technical Manual Chapter 4 (FEMA, Earthquake Model , 2010).
For regional earthquake risk assessments, ground-shaking hazards (which may impact a broad
area) are of significant concern. Modeling of ground failure hazards typically requires detailed site-
specific analyses and data. While regional ground failure hazard maps (e.g., liquefaction or landslide
susceptibility maps) may be utilized within HAZUS, these hazards may only impact a portion of a given
census tract. As a result, interpretation of the results developed at the census tract level should be
cautiously used.
For use in estimating regional earthquake losses within HAZUS, three maps delineating patterns
of regional ground shaking are required. These include maps of peak ground acceleration (in units of g
[where g = the acceleration due to Earth's gravity, equivalent to g-force]), peak ground velocity (in units
of inches/second), and Spectral accelerations at both 0.3 and 1.0 second periods (in units of g).

20
3.1.1. HAZUS census tract base data
The earthquake methodology uses census tracts as the smallest geographic unit. Census tracts are
divisions of land that contain 2,500 to 8,000 inhabitants with relatively homogeneous population
characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. Each census tract boundary contains aggregated
population, demographics, and general building stock values. The City of Downey contains 22 census
tracts (see Figure 9), which have a total population of 111,772 people. The geographical size of the
region is 12.58 square miles.

Figure 9: City of Downey by Census Tract

21
3.1.2. HAZUS inventory data
3.1.2.1. General Building Stock Data
Default building inventory data in HAZUS consists of aggregated data that are summarized at
the census tract level for earthquakes. It represents the general building stock described in detail in the
HAZUS Earthquake Model technical manuals. Aggregate regional building inventory databases,
representing building square footage by HAZUS occupancy class, were developed from census data for
residential occupancies and from Dun & Bradstreet employment data for non-residential occupancies.
There are over 33 thousand households and an estimated 25 thousand buildings in the study
region with a total building replacement value (excluding contents) of over 9 million dollars.
Approximately 92% of the buildings (and 80% of the building value) are associated with residential
housing (see Table 1).

Table 1: Study Region (City of Downey) Population and Buildings Value

3.1.2.2. Lifeline Inventory (Transportation and Utility Systems)
HAZUS’s default databases for lifeline inventory is divided between transportation and utility
lifeline systems. For this assessment, the default data were used to complete this study. There are seven
(7) transportation systems that include highways, railways, light rail, bus, ports, ferry and airports and
six (6) utility systems that include potable water, wastewater, natural gas, crude and refined oil, electric

State

County Name
City of Downey
Population
Building Value (millions of dollars)
Residential Non-Residential Total
California Los Angeles 111,772 7,658 1,972 9,631
22
power, and communications. The lifeline inventory data were obtained from the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) and the Census Bureau's TIGER files.
The total value of the lifeline inventory was over 38 million dollars. This inventory includes
over 4,819 kilometers of highways, 23 bridges, and 8,323 kilometers of pipes. This data was not updated
but considered for a complete assessment (see Tables 2 and 3).
Table 2: Default Transportation System
System Component #Locations/
Segments
Replacement value
(millions of dollars)

Highway Bridges 23 101
Segments 4,931 36,848
Tunnels 0 0
Subtotal 36,959
Railways Bridges 0 0
Facilities 0 0
Segments 594 885
Tunnels 0 0
Subtotal 885
Light Rails Bridges 0 0
Facilities 1 2
Segments 99 376
Tunnels 0 0
Subtotal 379
Bus Facilities 0 0
Ferry Facilities 0 0
Port Facilities 0 0
Airport Facilities 0 0
Runways 0 0
Total 5,648 38,223

23
Table 3: Default Utility System
System Component #Locations/
Segments
Replacement value
(millions of dollars)
Potable Water

Distribution Lines NA 83.20
Facilities 0 0.00
Pipelines 0 0.00

Subtotal 83.20
Waste- Water

Distribution Lines NA 49.90
Facilities 0 0.00
Pipelines 0 0.00

Subtotal 49.90
Natural Gas Distribution Lines NA 33.30
Facilities 0 0.00
Pipelines 0 0.00
Subtotal 33.30
Oil Systems Facilities 1 0.10

Pipelines 0 0.00

Subtotal 0.10
Electrical Power Facilities

0.00

Subtotal 0.00
Communication Facilities 0 0.00

Subtotal 0.00
Total 1 166.60
3.1.3. User supplied data
3.1.3.1. Essential Facilities Data
The Essential Facilities (EF) are those facilities intended to provide services to the community in
the event of a disaster. In HAZUS, essential facilities are classified based on facility function and
include Medical Care Facilities, Fire Stations, Police Stations, Emergency Operations Centers, and
Schools. The default EF dataset was queried and then updated in the CDMS. The query yielded
seventy-seven (77) EFs: 1 Fire Station Facility, 3 Police Stations Facilities, 1 Emergency Operations
Center, 2 Medical Care Facilities, and 70 Public and Private Schools (Figures 10 through 15).
24

Figure 10: Essential Facilities Query (Source: CDMS)

Figure 11: Default Fire Station Facility (Source: CDMS)
25

Figure 12: Default Police Station Facilities (Source: CDMS)

Figure 13: Default Emergency Operation Centers Facility (Source: CDMS)
26

Figure 14: Default Medical Care Facilities (Source: CDMS)

Figure 15: Default School Facilities (Source: CDMS)

27
3.1.3.2. Upgraded Essential Facilities Data for use in HAZUS
The EF dataset was updated to increase accuracy with the city’s data acquired from the City of
Downey’s Water Work Department. The data was ingested into the CDMS repository and then
transferred into the study area dataset (David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003). There were an additional
41 Essential Facilities added to the dataset: 5 x Fire Station Facilities; 1 x Police Stations Facilities; 15 x
Emergency Operations Center/Medical Care Facilities; and 20 x Public and Private Schools (see Figure
16).

Figure 16: Updated Essential Facilities Data (Source: CDMS)

28
3.1.3.3. USGS ShakeMaps
The ShakeMaps were obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The maps facilitate
communication of earthquake information beyond just magnitude and location. By rapidly mapping out
earthquake ground motions, ShakeMaps portray the distribution and severity of shaking.
ShakeMap soil types are based on the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
(NEHRP), which define five soil types (USGS, 2016). In HAZUS, the default classified soil type is type
D, which includes some Quaternary muds, sands, gravels, silts, and mud. A significant amplification of
shaking by these soils is generally expected
This information is critical for gauging the extent of the areas affected, determining which areas
are potentially hardest hit, and allowing for rapid estimation of losses. The ShakeMaps take advantage
of any high-quality recorded ground motions and any available macro seismic intensity data to provide
ground-truth constraints on shaking. Thus, ShakeMaps portray the best possible description of shaking
by employing a combination of recorded and estimated shaking values (Worden & Wald, 2016). The
ShakeMaps (from both Puente Hills and Whittier) were imported into HAZUS via the Data Map tool to
enhance the area (see Figure 17).

Figure 17: ShakeMaps ingested into HAZUS
29
3.2 Methodology
The City of Downey earthquake risk assessments were conducted using HAZUS (FEMA F. E.,
2009). HAZUS study regions for Downey was created by extracting the census tracts designated for
City of Downey (FEMA, Earthquake Model , 2010). The data provided by the City of Downey’s Public
Works Office was ingested into CDMS to enhance the essential facilities database and improve general
building stock data (Downeyca, 2009). The USGS ShakeMap was converted to HAZUS compatible
geodatabase format so it could be incorporated into HAZUS as “user supplied hazard” data for scenario
analysis. For information on how this is done, see Appendix J of the technical manual (FEMA, HAZUS-
MH Overview, 2016). All analyses were conducted utilizing default damage functions, default
restoration functions, and default parameter settings (see Figure 18).

Figure 18: Flow of Methodology

Shelter Economic Causalities Inundation Fire HazMat
Indirect Economic
Loss
Debris
Direct Physical
Damage
Direct
Economic/Social
Loss
Induced Physical
Damage
Lifelines-
Utility
Systems
Lifelines-
Transportation
Systems
Essential and
High Potential
Loss Facilities
General
Building
Stock
Ground Motion Ground Failure
Potential Earth Science Hazards
30
For completeness, the HAZUS analysis modules for transportation and utility systems were
included in the analyses. However, these assessments used existing HAZUS default data. HAZUS
results from these modules are not included in this report.
3.2.1. Earthquake Scenario Selection Process
Two earthquake scenarios were selected for the risk assessment by the City of Downey - Office
of Emergency Management. The office emergency manager selected earthquakes with a magnitude of
M6.8 and M7.0 for the two faults. The Whitter and Puente Hills faults were selected for the scenarios.
3.2.2. Whittier Earthquake Scenario 1:
The Whittier Fault is a fault located in eastern Los Angeles County. It is one of the two upper
branches of the Elsinore Fault Zone; the Chino Fault is the second. The Whittier Fault is a 40 km (25
mile) right-lateral strike-slip fault that runs along the Chino Hills range between the cities of Chino Hills
and Whittier. A strike-slip fault is a fault that moves laterally, or side to side (see Figure 18).

Figure 18: Strike-slip fault (Source: USGS)
The fault has a slip rate of 2.5 to 3.0 millimeters (0.098 to 0.118 in) per year. It is estimated that this
fault could generate a quake of MW6.0–7.2 on the moment magnitude scale. For that reason, the USGS
31
Scenario ShakeMap for M6.8 earthquakes on the Whittier Fault was chosen to simulate ground motion
for the scenario (see Figure 19).

Figure 19: USGS ShakeMap of Whittier fault (Source: USGS)

32

3.2.3. Puente Hills Earthquake Scenario 2:
The Puente Hills fault is a fault located in the Los Angeles Basin and discovered in 1999. The
thrust fault runs about 40 km (25 mile) in three sections from the Puente Hills region in the southeast to
the south of Griffith Park in the northwest. A thrust fault is a break in the Earth's crust across which
there has been relative movement, in which rocks of lower stratigraphic position are pushed up and over
higher strata. Thrust faults are the result of compressional forces (see Figure 20).

Figure 20: Thrust Fault (Source: USGS)
Large earthquakes on the fault are relatively infrequent, but computer modeling has indicated
that a major event could have a substantial impact in the Los Angeles area. This fault is believed to be
responsible for the moderate Whittier Narrows earthquake in 1987 that caused considerable damage and
deaths, as well as another light event that took place in 2010. For this reason, the USGS Scenario
ShakeMap for a M7.0 earthquake on the Puente Hills fault was chosen to simulate ground motion for the
scenario (see Figure 21).
33

Figure 21: USGS ShakeMap of Puente Hills (Source: USGS)

34
3.3 Summary
HAZUS, which runs on the ArcGIS platform along with CDMS, was used to ingest updated data,
model the earthquakes, and create output maps. Essential Facilities data was updated via data provided
by the City of Downey Water Work Department into the CDMS. Detailed soil, liquefaction, and
ShakeMaps were ingested via the Data tool into HAZUS. Based on the updated data, two earthquake
scenarios were run in the earthquake model. The results are discussed in the next chapter. These results
are then used to make recommendations for future proactive planning in preparation for possible
earthquake events. The conclusions and recommendations are provided in Chapter 5.

35
Chapter 4 Results
HAZUS is one of several earthquake damage prediction algorithms & software. These systems model
ground motion (or ground failure), provide advanced engineering model outputs, show inundation from
dams and exposure related to that inundation, track fire following earthquakes, and provide reports of
estimated casualties as a result of earthquake events. Others used by experts include USGS or SCEC,
however not freely available like HAZUS. They all produce similar outputs which include reports,
tables, and a number of maps.
HAZUS scenarios were run to estimate damage due to earthquakes occurring on both the Puente
Hills and the Wittier faults, as described in detail in Chapter 3. A comparison of the results indicates that
the Puente Hills M7.0 earthquake would have a greater impact on the City of Downey area than the
Whittier M6.8 earthquake. The Puente Hills fault is a thrust fault located near and within the city limits
and the estimated magnitude is slightly higher, while the Whittier fault is a strike-slip fault located
approximately 5 miles from the City’s boundaries. Thrust faults are routinely considered to be more
destructive than strike-slip faults.
4.1 Puente Hills Scenario Results
4.1.1. Building Damage
The HAZUS earthquake model calculates direct physical damages. These include damages to
both structural and nonstructural building components reported as damage state probability, counts, and
losses. This section reports on the damages estimated in the HAZUS earthquake scenarios run as part of
this thesis work. Additional highly detailed explanations about the program outputs are provided in the
HAZUS-MH technical manuals. For example, a generalized description of the conditions that would
exist for each building type based on its damaged state are found in the technical manuals. The in-depth
explanations provided in the technical manuals can be freely accessed online from the HAZUS website,
36
and could assist the decision makers and others in effectively making better earthquake preparation
plans for their communities (David Adler and Eric Berman 2003).
For the Puente Hills scenario, HAZUS estimated that about 3,244 buildings would be at least
moderately damaged. This is over 13.00 % of the buildings in the region. An estimated 104 buildings
would be damaged beyond repair. About 1700 single-family homes are estimated to suffer moderate
damage, 174 Other Residential buildings which include mobile home, multi family dwelling, temporary
lodging, and institutional dormitory, and nursing home are estimated to suffer extensive to complete,
while damage to commercial structure would dominate (see Table 4).
Table 4: Estimated Building Damage by Occupancy

None

Slight

Moderate

Extensive

Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Agriculture 7 0.07 10 0.07 6 0.23 3 0.55 1 0.97
Commercial 314 3.35 483 3.67 487 18.33 214 43.94 53 51.03
Education 18 0.19 20 0.15 11 0.41 4 0.89 1 0.87
Government 8 0.08 9 0.07 7 0.27 4 0.79 1 1.00
Industrial 63 0.67 105 0.80 120 4.53 58 11.82 16 15.67
Other Residential 472 5.04 637 4.84 308 11.61 174 35.66 27 26.24
Religion 31 0.34 43 0.33 32 1.21 15 3.15 4 4.19
Single Family 8,459 90.26 11,859 90.08 1,683 63.40 16 3.20 0 0.02
Total 9,372

13,165

2,654

487

104

Based on the building, about 1800 wood buildings are estimated to suffer moderate damage. Steel,
concrete and manufactured housing (MH) buildings would possibly experience extensive and complete
damage (see Table 5).

37

Table 5: Estimated Building Damage by Building Type (All Design Levels)

*Reinforced Masonry (RM), Unreinforced Masonry (URM), and Manufactured Housing (MH)

Building damage can be described in terms of the nature and extent of damage exhibited by its
components (beams, columns, walls, ceilings, piping, HVAC equipment, etc.). Damage is described by
five damage states: none, slight, moderate, extensive or complete: None – No Damage; Slight - Small
plaster or gypsum board cracks at corners of door and window openings and wall, ceiling intersections,
and small cracks in masonry chimneys and masonry veneer; Moderate - Large plaster or gypsum-board
cracks at corners of door and window openings, small diagonal cracks across shear wall panels exhibited
by small cracks in stucco and gypsum wall panels, large cracks in brick chimneys, toppling of tall
masonry chimneys; Extensive - Large diagonal cracks across shear wall panels or large cracks at
plywood joints, permanent lateral movement of floors and roof, toppling of most brick chimneys, cracks
in foundations, splitting of wood sill plates and/or slippage of structure over foundations, partial collapse
of room-over-garage or other soft-story configurations, small foundations cracks; Complete - Structure
may have large permanent lateral displacement, may collapse, or be in imminent danger of collapse due
to cripple wall failure or the failure of the lateral load resisting system, some structures may slip and fall
off the foundations, large foundation cracks (David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003).
None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Wood 8,900 94.97 12516 95 1,794 67.58 41 8.49 5 4.57
Steel 51 0.55 97 0.7 191 7.21 104 21.36 24 23.18
Concrete 97 1.04 149 1.1 113 4.27 61 12.47 21 20.52
Precast 62 0.66 123 0.9 156 5.87 49 10.14 13 12.25
RM* 246 2.63 227 1.7 194 7.30 69 14.19 14 13.37
URM* 14 0.15 36 0.2 53 1.98 25 5.19 7 6.88
MH* 1 1 17 0.1 153 5.78 137 28.15 20 19.23
Total 9,372

13,165

2,654

487

104
38
4.1.2. Essential Facilities Damage
Before the earthquake, the region had 222 hospital beds available for use. On the day of the
predicted earthquake, the model estimates that only eight hospital beds (4%) would be available for use
by patients already in the hospital and those injured by the earthquake. After one week, 8% of the beds
are estimated to be back in service. By 30 days, 31% are estimated to be operational (see Table 6).
Table 6: Estimated Damage to Essential Facilities
Classification Total # Facilities
At Least Moderate
Damage> 50%
Complete
Damage> 50%
With Functionality
> 50% on day 1
Hospitals 19 18 0 1
Schools 86 0 0 27
EOCs 0 0 0 0
PoliceStations 1 0 0 0
FireStations 5 0 0 1

Essential facility outputs include restoration time to 100 percent functionality. The damage state
shown in Table 6 reflects schools suffering moderate or greater damage, estimated facility damage based
upon the number of facilities that may experience greater than 50 percent likelihood of at least moderate
damage, complete damage, and various states of functionality. In contrast to the general building stock,
where damage probabilities are calculated for groups of buildings, for essential facilities the damage
probabilities are estimated for each individual facility. As with the general building stock, the damage
states are none, slight, moderate, extensive and complete. Both structural and nonstructural damage is
considered. Damage state probabilities are estimated for health care facilities, police and fire stations,
emergency operation centers and schools. In addition, loss of beds and facility functionality are
computed as a function of time for health care facilities. In this context, functionality is defined as the
range of which the facility can operate. Figures 22-27 provide estimates of the peak ground velocity
39
(PGV) experienced by the essential facilities examined in the study. The higher the velocity, the higher
the degree of shaking experienced. For example, essential facilitates such as fire stations located closer
to the fault line experience a greater degree of ground shaking and, thus, more damage (Figure 22).
These included fire stations 3 and 4. Only fire station 1 experienced minor shaking, however, fire
stations 2 and 5 still suffered damage. The types of soil the buildings were built on may not have an
influence as to the degree of damage, given that all the soil types in the City of Downey are susceptible
to earthquake activity.

40

Figure 22: Estimated Moderate Damage to Fire Stations
41
Table 7: Fire Station of the City of Downey

The fire stations 3 and 4 are located closest to the fault line and should be considered first for
retrofitting. Fire station 1 should be considered last; it sustained the least amount of damage (see Table
7).
Medical facilities numbered 1, 4, 7, 13 and 15 located closer to the fault line experience a greater
degree of ground shaking and, thus, more damage (Figure 23). Medical facilities numbered 8 and 9
suffered the least amount of damage. The types of soil the buildings were built on may not have an
influence as to the degree of damage, given that all the soil types in the City of Downey are susceptible
to earthquake activity.
Fire Station
Name Address City State Zip code
Downey Fire Department - Station 1 12222 Paramount Blvd. Downey CA 90242
Downey Fire Department - Station 2 9556 Imperial Highway Downey CA 90242
Downey Fire Department - Station 3 9900 Paramount Blvd. Downey CA 90240
Downey Fire Department - Station 4 9349 Florence Ave. Downey CA 90240
Downey Fire Department - Station 5 11111 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
42

Figure 23: Estimated Moderate Damage to Medical Facilities
43
Table 8: Medical Facilities in the City of Downey

Medical Facility
ID Name Address City State Zip
1 Downey Regional Medical Center 11525 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
2 Kaiser Permanente Medical Center 9333 Imperial Highway Downey CA 90242
3 PIH Health Hospital 11500 Brookshire Ave. Downey CA 90241
4 Downey Family Health Care Center 12113 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90241
5 Prima Vida Medical Clinic 8706 Imperial Highway Downey CA 90242
6 Santo Tomas Medical Clinic 7862 Firestone Blvd Downey CA 90241
7 Talbert Medical 8311 Florence Ave Downey CA 90240
8 Downey Care Center 13007 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
9 Rancho Faculty Medical 12841 Dahlia Ave Downey CA 90239
10 Kaiser Downey Urgent Care 9449 Imperial Hwy Downey CA 90242
11 Pioneer Medical Group 11411 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
12 AME Medical Group - Urgent Care 11942 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
13 Downey Urgent Care 11003 Lakewood Blvd Downey CA 90241
14 Life Medical Home Care Services 8051 Imperial Hwy Downey CA 90242
15 Brookfield Healthcare Center 9300 Telegraph Rd Downey CA 90240

Medical facilities numbered 1, 4, 7, 13 and 15 were the closest to the fault line and suffered the most
damage; therefore, those facilities should be considered first for retrofitting. Medical facilities
numbered 8 and 9 should be considered last for retrofitting because they suffered the least amount of
damage (see Table 8).
Schools located closer to the fault line experience a greater degree of ground shaking, thus more
damage. These include schools numbered 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, and 17. Schools 1, 2, 4, 5, 9 and 20
experience minor shaking but still suffered damage (Figure 24). The types of soil the buildings were
built on may not have an influence as to the degree of damage, given that all the soil types in the City of
Downey are susceptible to earthquake activity.

44

Figure 24: Estimated Moderate Damage to School Facilities
45
Table 9: Schools in the City of Downey

Schools
ID Name Address City State Zip
1 St. Pius X - St. Matthias Academy 7851 Gardendale St Downey CA 90242
2 Alameda Elementary School 8613 Alameda St Downey CA 90242
3 Downey Unified School District 11627 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
4 A L Gauldin Elementary School 9724 Spry St Downey CA 90242
5 Sussman Middle School 12500 Birchdale Ave Downey CA 90242
6 Downey High School 11040 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
7 Griffiths Middle School 9633 Tweedy Ln Downey CA 90240
8 Stauffer Middle School 11985 Old River School Rd Downey CA 90242
9 Carpenter Elementary School 9439 Foster Rd Downey CA 90241
10 Gallatin Elementary School 9513 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90240
11 Old River Elementary School 11995 Old River School Rd Downey CA 90242
12 Doty Middle School 10301 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90241
13 Kirkwood Christian Schools 11115 Pangborn Ave Downey CA 90241
14 St Raymond School 12320 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
15 Unsworth Elementary School 9001 Lindsey Ave Downey CA 90240
16 Warren High School 8141 De Palma St Downey CA 90241
17 Our Lady of Perpetual Help School 10441 Downey Ave Downey CA 90241
18 Rio San Gabriel Elementary 9338 Gotham St Downey CA 90241
19 Kirkwood Christian Schools 10822 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
20 Calvary Chapel Christian School 12808 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90242

The schools closest to the fault line and suffered the most damage should be considered first for
retrofitting. These include schools numbered 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, and 17. Schools 1, 2, 4, 5, 9 and 20
suffered minor damage and should be retrofitted last (see Table 9).
The Downey Police Department is estimated to experience ground shaking and, thus, causing
extensive damaged (Figure 25). This is to be expected given the station’s foundation is built on sand,
clay and loam which are all susceptible to earthquake activity. The police station should be considered
in the group of the first to be retrofitted.
46

Figure 25: Estimated Moderate Damage to Police Station
47
4.1.3. Debris Generation
HAZUS estimates the amount of debris that will be generated by a given earthquake. The model
breaks the debris into two general categories: (1) wood and masonry structures and (2) estimates of
steel and concrete debris. This information is provided in order to recognize that different types of
debris requires different types of material handling equipment and, thus, different post-disaster response
actions.
The model estimates that 0.16 million tons of debris will be generated as a result of the Puente
Hills event. Of the total amount, brick or wood comprises 29% of the total with the remainder being
reinforced concrete or steel. If the debris tonnage is converted into an estimated number of truckloads, it
will require 6,440 truckloads, assuming at 25 tons/truck, to remove the debris generated by the
earthquake.
4.1.4. Post-Disaster Shelter Requirements
HAZUS estimates a percentage of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes
due to a particular earthquake and the number of displaced people that will require accommodations in
temporary public shelters (Figure 26).
48

Figure 26: Displaced Households
49

The model estimates 602 households to be displaced due to the predicted earthquake. Of these,
499 people (out of a total population of 111,772) will seek temporary shelter in public shelters.
4.1.5. Casualties
HAZUS estimates the number of people that will be injured and killed by a given earthquake
(David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003). The casualties are broken down into four severity levels that
describe the extent of the injuries. The levels are defined as follows:
(1) Severity Level 1: Injuries will require medical attention, but hospitalization is not needed.
(2) Severity Level 2: Injuries will require hospitalization but are not considered life-
threatening.
(3) Severity Level 3: Injuries will require hospitalization and can become life-threatening if
not promptly treated.
(4) Severity Level 4: Victims are killed by the earthquake.
The casualty estimates are provided for three times of day: 2:00 AM, 2:00 PM and 5:00 PM.
These times represent the periods of the day that different sectors of the community are at their peak
occupancy loads. The 2:00 AM estimate considers that the residential occupancy load is maximum. The
2:00 PM estimate considers that the educational, commercial and industrial sector loads are maximum.
The 5:00 PM represents peak commute time (see Table 10). The greatest casualties in one single area
occurred in the commercial area with the exception of the 2:00 AM timeframe. The total amount at all
levels is 270 with the major at level 1 at 201. The greatest casualties in all areas at all levels is 464 with
the major at level 1 at 348. These casualties include areas in commercial, commuting, educational,
hotels, industrial, other residential, and single family during the 2:00 PM timeframe.

50
Table 10: Casualty Estimates According to Severity Levels

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
2AM Commercial 3 1 0 0

Commuting 0 0 0 0
Educational 0 0 0 0
Hotels 0 0 0 0
Industrial 6 1 0 0
Other-Residential 54 11 2 3
Single Family 38 2 0 0
Total 101 15 2 3
2PM
Commercial 201 48 7 14

Commuting 0 0 1 0
Educational 88 21 3 6
Hotels 0 0 0 0
Industrial 41 9 1 2
Other-Residential 11 2 0 1
Single Family 8 1 0 0
Total 348 81 12 23
5PM Commercial 142 33 5 10

Commuting 6 7 13 2
Educational 10 2 0 1
Hotels 0 0 0 0
Industrial 26 6 1 2
Other-Residential 21 4 1 1
Single Family 14 1 0 0
Total 219 53 20 16
51
4.1.6. Economic Loss
The HAZUS earthquake model can generate a great deal of information about the economic
impacts of an earthquake on a community (David Adler and Eric Berman, 2003). Direct economic
losses include building losses reported for the general building stock. This is information about
buildings aggregated to the census tract level and can be reported for both structural and nonstructural
building components, the contents of those buildings (such as furnishings), and business inventory in
structures (such as commercial facilities).
Finally, the HAZUS earthquake model can also calculate business interruption impacts. These
can include wage and income losses, rental and relocation costs, and business cost. Business costs are
defined as repair and replacement cost, contents and business inventory damages. HAZUS can
additionally generate lifeline estimates, reported in terms of the cost of repairs to lifelines. Lifelines are
defined as the transportation and utility systems. These systems include highways, railways, light rails,
bus, ports, airports, ferries, electric, gas, potable water, wastewater, oil and communication. The
estimates are based on the following considerations:
 For components of the 13 lifeline systems: damage probabilities, cost of repair or
replacement and estimated functionality for various times following earthquake
 For all pipeline systems: the estimated number of leaks and breaks
 For potable water and electric power systems: estimate of service outages
This information provides calculations of economic impacts to transportation networks and
utility networks that are considered lifelines within the earthquake model. These vital components of a
community are necessary to be available to the community in order for that community to return to its
economic status of that prior to the earthquake.
52
The HAZUS earthquake model can also calculate indirect economic losses. These longer-term
impacts are vital to helping community planners understand what is going to be needed in order to bring
a community back to its former state, or at least a state that has improved beyond the conditions that
exist following the earthquake hazard. The total economic loss estimated for a Puente Hills M7.0
earthquake is 800 million dollars, which includes building and lifeline-related losses, as well as the
indirect economic losses based on the region's available inventory (Figure 27). Census tracts
06037550800 and 06037550901 will suffer the highest total losses (as considered below):
Dollar losses associated with general building stock:
 Structural and nonstructural cost of repair or replacement
 Loss of contents
 Business inventory loss
 Relocation costs
 Business income loss
 Employee wage loss
 Loss of rental income
Lifeline – related losses:
 For components of the 13 lifeline systems: damage probabilities, cost of repair or
replacement and estimated functionality for various times following earthquake
 For all pipeline systems: the estimated number of leaks and breaks
 For potable water and electric power systems: estimate of service outages
Indirect economic impact
 Long-term economic effects on the region based on a synthetic economy
 Long-term economic effects on the region
53

Figure 27: Total Economic Loss (US Million $)
54
4.2 Whittier Scenario Results
4.2.1. Building Damage
HAZUS estimates that about 960 buildings will be at least moderately damaged. This is over 4%
of the buildings in the region. An estimated one building will be damaged beyond repair. Table 11
below summarizes the estimated damage by general occupancy for the buildings in the region. Table 12
below summarizes the estimated damage by general building type.
Table 11: Esitmated Building Damage by Occupancy

Table 12: Estimated Building Damage by Building Type (All Design Levels)

*Note: Reinforced Masonry, URM Unreinforced Masonry, and MH Manufactured Housing

None Slight

Moderate Extensive Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Wood 15,206 93 7642 91 407 45.06 1 2.53 0 0.92
Steel 216 1.31 145 1 7, 96 10.66 11 18.89 0 32.73
Concrete 227 1.38 144 1.71 64 7.04 7 12.90 0 13.44
Precast 175 1 07 136 1.61 82 9.09 9 15.76 0 9.57
RM 495 3.02 167 1.99 80 8.91 8 13.28 0 4.04
URM 48 0.30 52 0.62 31 3.42 3 5.93 0 10.45
MH 44 0.27 123 1.47 143 15.82 18 30.72 0 28.85
Total 16,412

8,409

903

57

1

None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Agriculture 14 0.08 8 0.10 3 0.38 1 0.91 0 2.06
Commercial 799 4.87 496 5.89 233 25.82 23 40.42 0 38.57
Education 33 0.20 16 0.19 5 0.53 0 0.64 0 0.36
Government 18 0.11 8 0.09 3 0.37 0 0.61 0 0.59
Industrial 167 1.02 118 1.40 68 7.58 8 14.83 0 20.51
Other
Residential
863 5.26 534 6.34 200 22.13 22 37.64 0 34.43
Religion 70 0.43 39 0.46 15 1.72 2 2.88 0 3.47
Single
Family
14,448 88.03 7,192 85.53 374 41.47 1 2.06 0 0.00
Total 16,412

8,409

903

57

1

55
4.2.2. Essential Facilities Damage
Before the predicted earthquake, the region had 222 hospital beds available for use. On the day of the
predicted earthquake, the model estimates that only 72 hospital beds (32%) would be available for use by
patients already in the hospital and those injured by the earthquake. After one week, 64% of the beds would be
back in service. By 30 days, 96% would be operational (see Table 13).
Table 13: Estimated Damage to Essential Facilities
Classification Total # Facilities
At Least Moderate
Damage> 50%
Complete
Damage> 50%
With Functionality
> 50% on day 1
Hospitals 19 18 0 1
Schools 86 0 0 27
EOCs 0 0 0 0
PoliceStations 1 0 0 0
FireStations 5 0 0 1

Essential facility outputs include restoration time to 100 percent functionality; information expressed as
damage state as shown in this example, which reflects schools suffering moderate or greater damages; and
estimated facility damages based upon the number of facilities that are showing at least moderate damages
greater than 50 percent likelihood, complete damages, and various states of functionality. Explanations for
these estimates are also provided in the technical manuals. The peak ground acceleration experienced by
essential facilities such that they experience moderate damage is shown in Figure 28 through 32.

56

Figure 28: Estimated Moderate Damage to Fire Stations

57
As detailed earlier, the fault line is located north-east of the city. The fire stations located closest to the
fault line experience a greater degree of ground shaking and, thus, more damage. These included fire stations 3
and 4. Only fire station 1 experienced minor shaking, however fire stations 2 and 5 still suffered damage (see
Table 14). The types of soil the buildings were built on may not have an influence as to the degree of damage,
given that all the soil types in the City of Downey are susceptible to earthquake activity. Only one facility
experienced minor shaking, but still suffered damage.
Table 14: Fire Station of the City of Downey

The fire stations 3 and 4 are located closest to the fault line and should be considered first for retrofitting.
Fire station 1 should be considered last as it sustained the least amount of damage.
Medical facilities located closer to the fault line experience a greater degree of ground shaking and, thus,
more damage. The facility numbered 6, 7 and 15 were the closest to the fault line and suffered the most
damage. Facilities numbered 3, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14 suffered moderate damage (Figure 29). The types of soil
the buildings were built on may not have an influence as to the degree of damage, given that all the soil types
in the City of Downey are susceptible to earthquake activity.
Fire Station
Name Address City State Zip code
Downey Fire Department - Station 1 12222 Paramount Blvd. Downey CA 90242
Downey Fire Department - Station 2 9556 Imperial Highway Downey CA 90242
Downey Fire Department - Station 3 9900 Paramount Blvd. Downey CA 90240
Downey Fire Department - Station 4 9349 Florence Ave. Downey CA 90240
Downey Fire Department - Station 5 11111 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
58

Figure 29: Estimated Moderate Damage to Medical Facilities

59
Table 15: Medical Facility of the City of Downey
Medical Facility
ID Name Address City State Zip
1 Downey Regional Medical Center 11525 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
2 Kaiser Permanente Medical Center 9333 Imperial Highway Downey CA 90242
3 PIH Health Hospital 11500 Brookshire Ave. Downey CA 90241
4 Downey Family Health Care Center 12113 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90241
5 Prima Vida Medical Clinic 8706 Imperial Highway Downey CA 90242
6 Santo Tomas Medical Clinic 7862 Firestone Blvd Downey CA 90241
7 Talbert Medical 8311 Florence Ave Downey CA 90240
8 Downey Care Center 13007 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
9 Rancho Faculty Medical 12841 Dahlia Ave Downey CA 90239
10 Kaiser Downey Urgent Care 9449 Imperial Hwy Downey CA 90242
11 Pioneer Medical Group 11411 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
12 AME Medical Group - Urgent Care 11942 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
13 Downey Urgent Care 11003 Lakewood Blvd Downey CA 90241
14 Life Medical Home Care Services 8051 Imperial Hwy Downey CA 90242
15 Brookfield Healthcare Center 9300 Telegraph Rd Downey CA 90240

The medical facilities experience a greater degree of 6, 7, and 15 should be first to be retrofitted. The
medical facilities 2, 4, 5, 8, and 10 should be retrofitted last (see Table 15).
School facilities located in the north, north-west region experience a greater degree of ground shaking
and, thus, more damage. These facilities include 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, and 19. School facilities 2, 3, 12, 13, 14
16, and 18 experience moderate damage. Seven facilities 1, 4, 5, 9 and 20 experience minor shaking, but still
suffered damage (Figure 30).
60

Figure 30: Estimated Moderate Damage to School Facilities

61

Table 16: Schools of the City of Downey
Schools
ID Name Address City State Zip
1 St. Pius X - St. Matthias Academy 7851 Gardendale St Downey CA 90242
2 Alameda Elementary School 8613 Alameda St Downey CA 90242
3 Downey Unified School District 11627 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
4 A L Gauldin Elementary School 9724 Spry St Downey CA 90242
5 Sussman Middle School 12500 Birchdale Ave Downey CA 90242
6 Downey High School 11040 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
7 Griffiths Middle School 9633 Tweedy Ln Downey CA 90240
8 Stauffer Middle School 11985 Old River School Rd Downey CA 90242
9 Carpenter Elementary School 9439 Foster Rd Downey CA 90241
10 Gallatin Elementary School 9513 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90240
11 Old River Elementary School 11995 Old River School Rd Downey CA 90242
12 Doty Middle School 10301 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90241
13 Kirkwood Christian Schools 11115 Pangborn Ave Downey CA 90241
14 St Raymond School 12320 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
15 Unsworth Elementary School 9001 Lindsey Ave Downey CA 90240
16 Warren High School 8141 De Palma St Downey CA 90241
17 Our Lady of Perpetual Help School 10441 Downey Ave Downey CA 90241
18 Rio San Gabriel Elementary 9338 Gotham St Downey CA 90241
19 Kirkwood Christian Schools 10822 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
20 Calvary Chapel Christian School 12808 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90242

School facilities numbered 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, and 19 should be considered first for retrofitting.
School facilities 2, 3, 12, 13, 14 16, and 18 experience moderate damage and should be considered next
for retrofitting. The seven facilities numbered 1, 4, 5, 9 and 20 suffered minor damage and should be
considered last for retrofitting (see Table 16).

62

Figure 31: Estimated Moderate Damage to Police Station
63

The Downey Police Department is estimated to experience ground shaking thus, causing extensive
Damaged (Figure 31). The station should be retrofitted.
4.2.3. Debris Generation
The HAZUS model estimated that 0.03 million tons of debris will be generated. Of the total
amount, brick or wood Brick/Wood comprises 45% of the total with the remainder being reinforced
concrete or steel. If the debris tonnage is converted into an estimated number of truckloads, it will
require 1,360 truckloads at 25 (@25 tons/truck) to remove the debris generated by this the earthquake.
4.2.4. Shelter Requirement
HAZUS estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes
due to an earthquake and the number of displaced people that will require accommodations in temporary
public shelters (Figure 32). The model estimates that 53 households might to be displaced due to the
predicted earthquake. Of these, 45 people (out of a total population of 111,772) will seek temporary
shelter in public shelters.

64

Figure 32: Displaced Household

65
4.2.5. Casualties

HAZUS estimates the number of people that will be injured and killed by a given earthquake.
The casualties are broken down into four severity levels that describe the extent of the injuries. The
levels are defined as follows:
(5) Severity Level 1: Injuries will require medical attention, but hospitalization is not needed.
(6) Severity Level 2: Injuries will require hospitalization but are not considered life-
threatening.
(7) Severity Level 3: Injuries will require hospitalization and can become life-threatening if
not promptly treated.
(8) Severity Level 4: Victims are killed by the earthquake.
The casualty estimates are provided for three times of day: 2:00 AM, 2:00 PM and 5:00 PM.
These times represent the periods of the day that different sectors of the community are at their peak
occupancy loads. The 2:00 AM estimate considers that the residential occupancy load is maximum. The
2:00 PM estimate considers that the educational, commercial and industrial sector loads are maximum.
The 5:00 PM represents peak commute time (see Table 17).
The greatest casualties in one single area occurred in the commercial area with the exception of
the 2:00 AM timeframe. The total amount at all levels is 52 with the major at level 1 at 48. The greatest
casualties in all areas at all levels is 119 with the major at level 1 at 110. These casualties include areas
in commercial, commuting, educational, hotels, industrial, other residential/single family during the 2:00
PM timeframe.

66

Table 17: Casualty Estimates

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
2AM Commercial 3 0 0 0

Commuting 0 0 0 0
Educational 0 0 0 0
Hotels 0 0 0 0
Industrial 1 1 0 0
Other-Residential 11 1 0 3
Single Family 16 0 0 0
Total 28 1 0 0
2PM
Commercial 26 3 0 0

Commuting 0 0 0 0
Educational 10 1 0 0
Hotels 0 0 0 0
Industrial 6 1 0 0
Other-Residential 2 0 0 0
Single Family 3 0 0 0
Total 48 4 0 0
5PM Commercial 19 2 0 0

Commuting 0 1 1 0
Educational 1 0 0 0
Hotels 0 0 0 0
Industrial 4 0 0 0
Other-Residential 4 0 0 0
Single Family 6 0 0 0
Total 34 3 1 0
67
4.2.6. Economic Loss
Direct economic losses include building losses reported for the general building stock. This is
information about buildings aggregated to the census tract level and can be reported for both structural
and nonstructural building components, the contents of those buildings (such as furnishings), and
business inventory in structures (such as commercial facilities).
Finally, the HAZUS earthquake model can also calculate business interruption impacts. These
can include wage and income losses, rental and relocation costs, and business costs. Business costs are
defined as repair and replacement costs for contents and business inventory damages. HAZUS can
additionally generate lifeline estimates, reported in terms of the cost of repairs to lifelines. Lifelines are
defined as the transportation and utility systems. These systems include highways, railways, light rails,
bus, ports, airports, ferries, electric, gas, potable water, wastewater, oil and communication. The
estimates are based on the following considerations:
 For components of the 13 lifeline systems: damage probabilities, cost of repair or
replacement and estimated functionality for various times following earthquake
 For all pipeline systems: the estimated number of leaks and breaks
 For potable water and electric power systems: the estimate of service outages
This information provides calculations of economic impacts to transportation networks and
utility networks that are considered lifelines within the earthquake model. These vital components of a
community are necessary to be available to the community in order for that community to return to its
economic status of that prior to the earthquake.
The HAZUS earthquake model can also calculate indirect economic losses. These longer-term
impacts are vital to helping community planners understand what is going to be needed in order to bring
a community back to its former state, or at least a state that has improved beyond the conditions that
68
exist following the earthquake hazard. The total economic loss estimated for the Whittier earthquake is
approximately 300 million dollars (see Figure 33), which includes building and lifeline-related losses, as
well as the indirect economic losses. Census tracts 06037550500, 06037551000, 06037550400 and
06037551300 will suffer the highest total losses. In the total losses, the following are considered:
Dollar losses associated with general building stock:
 Structural and nonstructural cost of repair or replacement
 Loss of contents
 Business inventory loss
 Relocation costs
 Business income loss
 Employee wage loss
 Loss of rental income
Lifeline – related losses:
 For components of the 13 lifeline systems: damage probabilities, cost of repair or
replacement and estimated functionality for various times following earthquake
 For all pipeline systems: the estimated number of leaks and breaks
 For potable water and electric power systems: estimate of service outages
Indirect economic impact
 Long-term economic effects on the region based on a synthetic economy
 Long-term economic effects on the region
69

Figure 33: Total Economic Loss (US Million $)
70
Chapter 5 Conclusions
The results from running the earthquake model provided by HAZUS showed that there is
potential for moderate damage from an earthquake on both the Whittier and Puente Hills faults.
Although there are limitations when running the earthquake model, the results can provide
enough information to frame a mitigation plan. The mitigation plan can be better refined if future
research is conducted while the recommendation is being offered for consideration.
5.1 Implication of these results

After running HAZUS, the model showed that the damage from a Whittier 6.8 and
Puente Hills 7.0 magnitude earthquake could have a significant impact on residential homes,
other residential homes, and commercial structures. Other residential homes include mobile
homes, apartments/condominiums, hotel/motel, institutional dormitory, and nursing home. The
Puente Hills 7.0 magnitude earthquake had a greater predicted impact on the City of Downey
area than the Whittier 6.8 magnitude earthquake. HAZUS estimates that, out of residential
homes, 90% will be slightly damaged, 60% will be moderately damaged, and 3% will be
extensively damaged. If the predicted outcome holds true, it is necessary to retrofit the city’s
building stock to meet the current earthquake code to mitigate loss. Given that much of the
building stock in Downey does not meet the earthquake-prone code and retrofitting the building
stock is expensive, it would be helpful if the city can provide an incentive for companies and a
grant for consumers to offset the cost to retrofit the building stock. In both the Puente Hills and
Whittier earthquake scenarios the essential facilities suffered over 50% of heavy to moderate
damage combined. The following table list the essential facilities that should be considered first
for retrofitting (see Table 18).
71
Table 18: Essential Facility to be considered first for Retrofitting
Fire Station
ID Name Address City State Zip
3 Downey Fire Department - Station 3 9900 Paramount Blvd. Downey CA 90240
4 Downey Fire Department - Station 4 9349 Florence Ave. Downey CA 90240
Medical Facility
6 Santo Tomas Medical Clinic 7862 Firestone Blvd Downey CA 90241
7 Talbert Medical 8311 Florence Ave Downey CA 90240
13 Downey Urgent Care 11003 Lakewood Blvd Downey CA 90241
15 Brookfield Healthcare Center 9300 Telegraph Rd Downey CA 90240
School Facility
7 Griffiths Middle School 9633 Tweedy Ln Downey CA 90240
8 Stauffer Middle School 11985 Old River School Rd Downey CA 90242
10 Gallatin Elementary School 9513 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90240
11 Old River Elementary School 11995 Old River School Rd Downey CA 90242
12 Doty Middle School 10301 Woodruff Ave Downey CA 90241
13 Kirkwood Christian Schools 11115 Pangborn Ave Downey CA 90241
14 St Raymond School 12320 Paramount Blvd Downey CA 90242
15 Unsworth Elementary School 9001 Lindsey Ave Downey CA 90240
17 Our Lady of Perpetual Help School 10441 Downey Ave Downey CA 90241
19 Kirkwood Christian Schools 10822 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241
Police Department Station
1 Police Department Station 10911 Brookshire Ave Downey CA 90241

During an earthquake, the Whittier 6.8 earthquake, out of a total population of 111,772,
the model estimates 53 households to be displaced, and 45 people will seek temporary shelter in
public shelters. From the Puente Hills 7.0 earthquake, the model estimates 602 households to be
displaced, of these, 499 people will seek temporary shelter in public shelters.
HAZUS estimates the number of people that will be injured and killed by the earthquake.
While there are only 146 predicted injuries throughout the various times of the day due to the
Whittier 6.8 earthquake. There are a predicted 851 injured and 42 killed throughout various times
of the day from the Puente Hills 7.0 earthquake. The time of day is a big factor. If the earthquake
72
were to hit in the early morning or late at night while many people are at home and not
commuting, the number of injured and killed people is estimated to be lower. If the earthquake
were to hit during rush hour while people are commuting, then the likelihood of the number of
people that are injured and/or killed increases. This is why it is imperative to have roads and rail
systems that can withstand earthquakes.
In transportation, roads are a crucial component and are vital in built-up areas that rely on a
dense road network. As part of the road network, bridges are critical as well and are extremely
vulnerable to earthquake activity. Major earthquakes during the past 40 years have revealed the
vulnerability of highway bridges to seismic loads. If the outcome holds true when running the
earthquake model in HAZUS, many of the bridges in the city of Downey were predicted to be
slightly or moderately damaged, making the bridges inoperative. The need for the development of
effective bridge seismic design criteria and retrofitting techniques are necessary to help mitigate
both direct and indirect loss.
5.2 Limitations
HAZUS-MH provides users with valuable information that can be used to reduce damage
to a community from an earthquake. HAZUS provides this information in the form of maps,
reports, charts, graphs, and tables. For user convenience, reports generated in HAZUS can be
saved in various file formats. One loss estimation that is unique to earthquake models is
casualties. These are all advantages that HAZUS offers, however, it is important to keep in mind
that all outputs generated in HAZUS-MH are estimations. In order to get insight, it is necessary
to have excellent data that will give one a more accurate estimate of what may occur.
For this project, many of the limitations revolved around HAZUS and the data used in the
model. In some cases, accurate data was not available and needed to be collected and/or created
73
which, in both cases, can be very time consuming. Although HAZUS provides “canned” data at
the national level, much of it is quite basic and often out-of-date; it essentially just provides one
with a start. It is best to seek and obtain state, county or local level data to get more accuracy in
the outcome. In doing so, the data still needs to be prepared in order to be ingested into HAZUS
via the HAZUS database CDMS. Again, this process is time consuming. Detailed data for all
modules were not collected; as a consequence, the predictive results were limited.
5.3 Future Research
In order to have a more accurate study, there are several recommendations to refine this
study:
(1) Collect and update the building stock data. The data can be collected from the county
and city government, which would provide a more accurate dataset. This data could
then put into the correct format and ingested into the HAZUS provided database.
(2) Collect and update the transportation and utility system data. Again, the data can be
collected from a local source to include the government and the private sector. One
can collect the data themselves. However, this option is more time consuming. Once
the data is collected and put into the correct format, it can be ingested into HAZUS’s
database.
(3) Update soil data within HAZUS. Although ShakeMaps were used to simulate ground
shake, the soil was based on the NEHRP soil type. It used soil type D for the entire
Downey. The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service soil data is considered
a more detailed soil survey. There were five soil types for Downey to include
bedrock. Ultimately, this generic consideration of the soils type could have affected
the overall results.
74
(4) Develop seismic design criteria and retrofitting techniques for the road network.
(5) Develop seismic design criteria and retrofitting techniques for the building stock.
In researching and completing the above tasks, it could provide more accurate
information for the study. With a more accurate study, it could enhance the management budget
plan, as well as provide guidance in terms of resource allocation. It could also provide a priority
list for retrofitting the city-owned roads, bridges and buildings. Ultimately, this would enhance
the city mitigation plan.

75
REFERENCES
ABS, Dewberry, Davis, & MMI. (2009, April). Orange County Essential Facilities Study. Retrieved
October Monday, 2010, from FEMA: http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1719-
25045-0604/ocefra_report_final___tagged.pdf
Baumann, F. P. (2012 , July). Flood Analysis . Retrieved February 1999
Bonowitz, D., Kornfield, L., & McNutty, J. (2016). Soft Store RETROFIT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT.
Association of Bay Area Governments : ABAG.
Burrough, P. A. (1986). Principles of Geographical Information Systems for Land Resurces. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Campbell, J. B., & Wayne, R. H. (2011). Introduction to Remote Sensing. New York: The Guilford Press.
Chang, K. T. (2010). Introduction to Geographic Informatoin Systems. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Chrisman, R. N. (1983). The role of quality information in the longterm functioning of a geographic
information system. Cartoraphica, 79-87.
David Adler and Eric Berman. (2003, February 01). Hazuz - 2.1 Manual. Retrieved 4 15, 2016, from
fema.gov: https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/24609
Downeyca. (2009, 01 01). Retrieved 11 20, 2015, from http://www.downeyca.org/gov/emergency/
FEMA. (2008). HAZUS MH Estimated Annualized Earthquake Losses for the United States. Retrieved
Jan 20, 2016, from FEMA.
FEMA. (2010). Earthquake Model . Washington DC: Department of Homeland Security Federal
Emergency Management Agency Mitigation Division. Retrieved from
https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1820-25045-1179/hzmhs2_1_eq_um.pdf
FEMA. (2012, July 21). National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) New Products and Services for FEMA's
Flood Hazard Map Data. Retrieved July 21, 2012, from FEMA.
FEMA. (2016). HAZUS-MH Overview. Retrieved Jan 20, 2016, from FEMA.
FEMA, F. E. (2009). Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Multi-Year Plan: Fiscal Years
2010-2014. Washington DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Fitzpatrick, J., & Petersen, M. (2016). Induced Earthquakes Raise Chances of Damaging Shaking in
2016. Retrieved Jan 20, 2016, from USGS.
Kimerling, J. A., Buckley, A. R., Muehrcke, P. C., & Muehrcke, J. O. (2009). Map Use: Reading and
Analysis . Redland: Esri Press.
76
Krishna, S. B. (2013, Nov 16). Soil Liquefaction Evaluation using Deterministic and Probabilistic
Approaches: A case study. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering
and Technology , pp. 1 - 9.
Michael, S. A., Irvine, P. J., & Slang, T. S. (2001). EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
EVALUATION REPORT. Los Angeles: California Department of Conservation Division of Mines
and Geology.
Monmonier, M. (2005). Lying with Maps. Statistical Science, 215 - 222.
Montello, D. R., & Sutton, P. C. (2006). An Introduction to Scientific Research Methods in Geography.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc.
O'Sullivan, D., & Unwin, D. J. (2010). Geographic Information Analysis. Hoboken: John Wiley & Son,
Inc.
Petersen, M. D., Mueller, C. S., Moschetti, M. P., Hoover, S. M., Rubinstein, J. L., Llenos, A. L., . . .
Anderson., J. G. (2015). Incorporating Induced Seismicity in the 2014 United States National
Seismic Hazard Model - Results of 2014 Workshop and Sensitivity Studies. Retrieved Jan 20,
2016, from U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2015-1070.
Ploeger, S., Atkinson, G., & Samson, C. (2010). Applying the HAZUS-MH software tool to assess
seismic risk in downtown Ottawa, Canada. Natural Hazards, 1 - 20.
SCEC. (2017). Retrieved from Southern California Earthquake Center : https://www.scec.org/projects
Seismic Hazard Zonation Program. (2015, 01 01). Retrieved 4 15, 2016, from
http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/html/pdf_maps_so.html
URS, R. /. (2010, Jan 29). Honolulu Essential Facilites Study. Retrieved October Monday, 2010, from
FEMA:
http://www.r9map.org/Docs/Honolulu%20Esssential%20Facilities%20Risk%20Assessment.pdf
USGS. (2013, Janurary 11). When Could the Next Large Earthquake Occur Along the San Andreas
Fault? Retrieved April 20, 2016, from The U.S. Geological Survey:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/earthq3/when.html
USGS. (2016). Soil Type and Shaking Hazard in the San Francisco Bay. Retrieved Jan 20, 2016, from
USGS.
USGS. (2017). Retrieved from Earthquake Hazards Program. United States Geological Survey:
https://earthquake.usgs.gov
Worden, C. B., & Wald, D. J. (2016). ShakeMap Manual Online: technical manual, user’s guide, and
software guide. Retrieved Jan 25, 2016, from USGS:
http://usgs.github.io/shakemap/introduction.html.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Earthquakes have produced losses of over $60 billion since 1971. Of these, California has suffered the highest losses nationally. These losses include building and bridge damage, destruction of building contents and business interruption. The risk factors (as they pertain to loss from earthquake damage) are large stocks of old buildings and bridges; many high-tech and hazardous materials facilities; extensive sewer, water, and natural gas pipelines; earth dams; petroleum pipelines; other critical facilities; and private property. The secondary earthquake hazards (which include liquefaction, ground shaking, amplification, and earthquake-induced landslides) can be just as devastating as the earthquake itself. Damage caused by an earthquake depends on the quality of the buildings’ construction, the density of the area, the pattern of intense shaking, and many other factors. Should an earthquake occur in a densely populated area with older buildings, loss of life and damage to infrastructure would be much higher. ❧ This study performs and evaluates two potential earthquake scenarios for the City of Downey utilizing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) HAZards U.S., Multi-Hazard (HAZUS) Earthquake Model. According to the Downey General Plan, there is a 50% probability that a major earthquake will occur within the next 30 years along the Whittier-Elsinore Fault, which is 40 miles northeast of Downey. In addition, the Anaheim, Puente Hills, Elysian and Newport-Inglewood Faults are within or near Downey’s city limit and those faults are all active or potentially active faults. For this reason, the Whittier and Puente Hills faults with Magnitude (M) 6.8 and 7.0 respectively were chosen to run in the scenarios. HAZUS, which runs on an ArcGIS platform, along with Comprehensive Data Management System (CDMS) was used to ingest updated data, model the earthquakes and create output maps. Essential Facilities data were updated via data provided from the City of Downey Water Work Department into the CDMS. United States Geological Survey (USGS) ShakeMaps were ingested via the Data tool into HAZUS. Based on the updated data, two earthquake scenarios were modeled and the results were used for mitigation planning.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Modeling potential impacts of tsunamis on Hilo, Hawaii: comparison of the Joint Research Centre's SCHEMA and FEMA’s HAZUS inundation scenarios

PDF

Preparing for the next major southern California earthquake: utilizing HAZUS with soils maps and ShakeMaps to predict regional bridge damage and closures

PDF

Assessment of the FEMA HAZUS-MH 2.0 crop loss tool Fremont County, Iowa 2011

PDF

Preparing for earthquakes in Dallas-Fort Worth: applying HAZUS and network analysis to assess shelter accessibility

PDF

Risk analysis and assessment of non‐ductile concrete buildings in Los Angeles County using HAZUS‐MH

PDF

Creating a Web GIS to support field operations and enhance data collection for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)

PDF

Analyzing earthquake casualty risk at census block level: a case study in the Lexington Central Business District, Kentucky

PDF

Trojan Food Finder: a web-based GIS campus food sharing application

PDF

Dasymetric mapping of building stocks within HAZUS-FL

PDF

An examination of close-range photogrammetry and traditional cave survey methods for terrestrial and underwater caves for 3-dimensional mapping

PDF

A model for emergency logistical resource requirements: supporting socially vulnerable populations affected by the (M) 7.8 San Andreas earthquake scenario in Los Angeles County, California

PDF

Utilizing advanced spatial collection and monitoring technologies: surveying topographical datasets with unmanned aerial systems

PDF

Automated assessment of potential cell tower signal interference with high accuracy surveys in Los Angeles County

PDF

Integrating GIS into farm operations at the Homer C. Thompson Research Farm in Freeville, New York

PDF

Building a geodatabase design for American Pika presence and absence data

PDF

Using the Digital Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS) to analyze changes in shoreline position caused by seawalls along a section of Oregon's coast

PDF

Assessing the impact of a web-based GIS application to promote earthquake preparation on the University of Southern California University Park Campus

PDF

Predicting post-wildfire regreen rates: an application of multi-factor regression modeling

PDF

Developing art-based cultural experiences in North Kohala: A community engagement project with OneIsland

PDF

Precipitation triggered landslide risk assessment and relative risk modeling using cached and real-time data

Asset Metadata

Creator Woods, Angela D. (author)

Core Title A comparison of two earthquake events in the City of Downey: the Puente Hills and Whittier faults at 7.0 and 6.8 magnitudes

School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Degree Master of Science

Degree Program Geographic Information Science and Technology

Degree Conferral Date 2017-08

Publication Date 12/19/2017

Defense Date 06/19/2017

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag ArcGIS,CA,CDMS,City of Downey,earthquake,FEMA,HAZUS,mitigation planning,OAI-PMH Harvest,Puente Hills,Whittier

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Fleming, Steven D. (committee chair), Loyola, Laura D. (committee member), Swift, Jennifer N. (committee member)

Creator Email aabost@aol.com,angeladw@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC11255780

Unique identifier UC11255780

Identifier etd-WoodsAngel-5425.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-WoodsAngel-5425

Dmrecord 386764

Document Type Thesis

Format theses (aat)

Rights Woods, Angela D.

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu