防灾规划体系在社区重建中的作用:美国北岭的案例
|
摘要
1994年凌晨发生在美国洛杉矶北岭社区的6.7级地震,成为发生在发达的城市化地区、伤亡数量少但经济损失巨大的地震典型案例。得益于美国加州完备的防灾减灾法规体系,北岭社区在灾前将防灾减灾策略渗透到城市规划的各个层面,并在灾前就制订出了适合当地社区的灾后再开发规划。这不仅明确了重建合作的框架,也使灾民充分了解重建流程、积极主动地参与到社区重建工作中。住房重建成为北岭震后恢复的重点,联邦、州和地方政府依据法规明确的权责形成了相互协作的组织框架,采取以贷款优惠为主的资金支持政策,并提供了多样而灵活的重建项目供受灾家庭选择。从重建实施效果来看,两年后北岭社区的社会经济和房地产都已恢复到震前水平,但私有独栋住房的重建速度远快于公共出租住房。北岭重建的经验显示,成熟完备的安全防灾体系不仅可以降低灾害损失,而且也对迅速而有序地展开灾后重建提供帮助;同时,以贷款为主、以预期的房地产增值为抵押的"自循环"资金运作,比直接拨款和捐款更能激发社区重建的动力,从而更具可持续性。
The 6.7 Richter degree Northbridge Earthquake happened in the north of LA,U.S.,which is the typical case in damage of few death but huge economy cost.Due to the well-established mitigation law in California,the idea of pre-disaster mitigation is accepted in all aspects of urban planning and local community redevelopment plan is prepared before the earthquake.This pre-disaster plan establishes the recovery cooperation framework,which involves the public not only acknowledging the process of recovery but also participating in rebuilding their community with motivation.Housing rebuilt is the most important part in Northbridge post-earthquake recovery.In the cooperation framework among Federal,State and local governments based on legal responsibility,flexible and diversified financial policy mainly focuses on discounted loan are provided to the influenced households.Evaluated by the recovery after two years,the Northbridge community got its economy and real estate aspects back to pre-disaster level,but the rebuild progress of apartment is far behind single family house.The experience of Northbridge earthquake recovery reveals that the well established pre-earthquake planning will decrease the damage of disaster and will benefit for well organized post-disaster recovery.Meanwhile,the"self-cycled"financial policy mainly comprised discounted loan and future real estate value mortagage proves to be better than directly financial aids distribution,which are more sustainable to initial the public motivation to rebuild the community.
The 6.7 Richter degree Northbridge Earthquake happened in the north of LA,U.S.,which is the typical case in damage of few death but huge economy cost.Due to the well-established mitigation law in California,the idea of pre-disaster mitigation is accepted in all aspects of urban planning and local community redevelopment plan is prepared before the earthquake.This pre-disaster plan establishes the recovery cooperation framework,which involves the public not only acknowledging the process of recovery but also participating in rebuilding their community with motivation.Housing rebuilt is the most important part in Northbridge post-earthquake recovery.In the cooperation framework among Federal,State and local governments based on legal responsibility,flexible and diversified financial policy mainly focuses on discounted loan are provided to the influenced households.Evaluated by the recovery after two years,the Northbridge community got its economy and real estate aspects back to pre-disaster level,but the rebuild progress of apartment is far behind single family house.The experience of Northbridge earthquake recovery reveals that the well established pre-earthquake planning will decrease the damage of disaster and will benefit for well organized post-disaster recovery.Meanwhile,the"self-cycled"financial policy mainly comprised discounted loan and future real estate value mortagage proves to be better than directly financial aids distribution,which are more sustainable to initial the public motivation to rebuild the community.
引文
[1]Berke P R.Natural Hazard Reduction and Sustainable Development:a global assessment[J].Journal of Planning Literature,1995,9,370-382.
[2]Bolin R&Standford L.The Northridge Earthquake:vulnerability and disaster[M].London and New York:Routledge,1998.
[3]Bolin R.Household and Community Recovery After Earthquake.Boulder,CO:Institute of Behavioral Science,University of Colorado,1993.
[4]Department of Building and Safety.City of Los Angeles Zoning Code[Z].Retrieved May,2005.http://www.lacity.org/ladbs/permits/codes.htm.
[5]City of Los Angeles.Economic and Demographic Information.2003.Retrieved Feb 24,2003.http://www.lacity.org/cao/econdemo.html.
[6]City of Los Angeles.Recovery and Reconstruction Plan.Emergency Operations Organizations,City of Los Angeles,California,1994.
[7]Comerio M C.Disaster Hits Home:new policy for urban housing recovery[M].Berkeley and Los Angeles,CA:University of California Press,1998.
[8]Comerio M C.The Impact of Housing Losses in the Northridge Earthquake[M].1995.
[9]Comerio M C,Landis J D,Firpo C J.Residential Earthquake Recovery[M].Berkeley:California Policy Seminar,University of California,1996.
[10]Federal Emergency Management Agency.Federal Response Plan.Washington D.C.1999.Retrieved February 13,2002,from http://www.fema.gov.
[11]Geis,D.E.Creating sustainable and disaster resistant communities.Aspen,Colorado:The Aspen Global Change Institute,1996.
[12]Los Angeles Housing Department.Rebuilding Communities:recovering from the January 17,1994 Northridge earthquake,unpublished report.Los Angeles:City of Los Angeles,1995.
[13]Mileti D S.Disaster by Design:a reassessment of hazards in the United States[M].Washington DC:Joseph Henry Press,1999.
[14]Siegel J M.Emotional Injury and the Northridge,California Earthquake[J].Natural Hazards Review,2000,1(4):204-211.
[15]Office of Emergency Service,California.The Northridge earthquake of January 17,1994:Report of data collection and analysis,Part B:Analysis and trends,Irvine and Pasadena:EQE International and Of ce of Emergency Service,1995.
[16]Office of Policy Development and Research,Department of Housing and Development.Preparing for the"Big One"--Saving lives through earthquake mitigation in Los Angeles,California.HUD USER,1999.
[17]Rubin C B.Physical Reconstruction:time scale for reconstruction//Wellington Earthquake Commission,Wellington After the Quake:The Challenge of Rebuilding Cities.Wellington,New Zealand:Wellington Earthquake Commission and the Center for Advanced Engineering,1995.
[18]Wilson R C.The Loma Prieta Quake:what one city learned.Washington D.C.:International City Management Association,1991.
[19]Wu J Y.A Comparative Study of Housing Reconstruction After Two Major Earthquake:The1994Northbridge Earthquake in the United States and the1999Chi-Chi Earthquake in Taiwan.Dissertation of Ph.D.,Texas A&M University,2003.
[20]黄铁屿,方怡之,颜亮一.美国加州北岭震灾之都市复建研究.台湾建筑研究所.台湾国家地震中心考察报告,1997.
[21]康仲远.中外大城市灾例对比研究系列报告四——墨西哥地震和洛杉矶北岭地震[J].灾害学,1997,12(1):64-71.
[2]Bolin R&Standford L.The Northridge Earthquake:vulnerability and disaster[M].London and New York:Routledge,1998.
[3]Bolin R.Household and Community Recovery After Earthquake.Boulder,CO:Institute of Behavioral Science,University of Colorado,1993.
[4]Department of Building and Safety.City of Los Angeles Zoning Code[Z].Retrieved May,2005.http://www.lacity.org/ladbs/permits/codes.htm.
[5]City of Los Angeles.Economic and Demographic Information.2003.Retrieved Feb 24,2003.http://www.lacity.org/cao/econdemo.html.
[6]City of Los Angeles.Recovery and Reconstruction Plan.Emergency Operations Organizations,City of Los Angeles,California,1994.
[7]Comerio M C.Disaster Hits Home:new policy for urban housing recovery[M].Berkeley and Los Angeles,CA:University of California Press,1998.
[8]Comerio M C.The Impact of Housing Losses in the Northridge Earthquake[M].1995.
[9]Comerio M C,Landis J D,Firpo C J.Residential Earthquake Recovery[M].Berkeley:California Policy Seminar,University of California,1996.
[10]Federal Emergency Management Agency.Federal Response Plan.Washington D.C.1999.Retrieved February 13,2002,from http://www.fema.gov.
[11]Geis,D.E.Creating sustainable and disaster resistant communities.Aspen,Colorado:The Aspen Global Change Institute,1996.
[12]Los Angeles Housing Department.Rebuilding Communities:recovering from the January 17,1994 Northridge earthquake,unpublished report.Los Angeles:City of Los Angeles,1995.
[13]Mileti D S.Disaster by Design:a reassessment of hazards in the United States[M].Washington DC:Joseph Henry Press,1999.
[14]Siegel J M.Emotional Injury and the Northridge,California Earthquake[J].Natural Hazards Review,2000,1(4):204-211.
[15]Office of Emergency Service,California.The Northridge earthquake of January 17,1994:Report of data collection and analysis,Part B:Analysis and trends,Irvine and Pasadena:EQE International and Of ce of Emergency Service,1995.
[16]Office of Policy Development and Research,Department of Housing and Development.Preparing for the"Big One"--Saving lives through earthquake mitigation in Los Angeles,California.HUD USER,1999.
[17]Rubin C B.Physical Reconstruction:time scale for reconstruction//Wellington Earthquake Commission,Wellington After the Quake:The Challenge of Rebuilding Cities.Wellington,New Zealand:Wellington Earthquake Commission and the Center for Advanced Engineering,1995.
[18]Wilson R C.The Loma Prieta Quake:what one city learned.Washington D.C.:International City Management Association,1991.
[19]Wu J Y.A Comparative Study of Housing Reconstruction After Two Major Earthquake:The1994Northbridge Earthquake in the United States and the1999Chi-Chi Earthquake in Taiwan.Dissertation of Ph.D.,Texas A&M University,2003.
[20]黄铁屿,方怡之,颜亮一.美国加州北岭震灾之都市复建研究.台湾建筑研究所.台湾国家地震中心考察报告,1997.
[21]康仲远.中外大城市灾例对比研究系列报告四——墨西哥地震和洛杉矶北岭地震[J].灾害学,1997,12(1):64-71.
版权所有：© 2023 中国地质图书馆 中国地质调查局地学文献中心