Natural hazard mitigation in Southern California

	Earthquake	Landslides	Flood	Wildfire
Los Angeles County	J	J	J	J
Carson_____________	J	J	J	×
El Segundo________	J	J	J	J
Glendale____________	J	J	J	J
Long Beach________	J	J	J	J
Los Angeles________	J	J	J	J
Malibu____________	J	J	J	J
Pasadena___________	J	×	×	×
Sierra Madre________	J	J	J	J

Table 4.9 Natural hazard mitigation elements in General Plans in Orange County

	Factual basis	Goal definition	Balancing interests	Mitigation policies	səɪɔɪɪod uopv)iɪəuɪəɪduɪɪ	Hazard maps	Evacuation routes	Clearances	Peak load water requirements
Los Angeles County	+	0	+	+	0	0	0	0	0
Carson_____________	+	+	0	+	+ +	+	+ +	0	0
El Segundo________	+	+	0	+ +	+	+	0	0	+
Glendale____________	+	~0¹)~	+	+ +	+	+ +	0	0	0
Long Beach________	+ +	+ +	+ +	+ +	0	+ +	0	0	0
Los Angeles________	+ +	+	0	+	0	+ +	0	0	0
Malibu____________	++	0	+	+	0	+	0	0	0
Pasadena___________	0	+	0	+	0	0	0	0	0
Sierra Madre________	+	0¹)	0	+	0	0	0	0	0

Table 4.10 Natural hazard mitigation elements in General Plans in Orange County

¹⁾ The goal definition was not completely absent, but merely stated something like ‘reduce the risks to the
community’ without any further specifications.

4.3.4 Evaluation

The goal of this evaluation is not a ranking of the plans, but to obtain an overview of the
quality of local natural hazard mitigation plans. Therefore, no total scores per plan are
calculated for it is not the score of a single plan that counts, it is the mitigation planning
situation in Southern California as a whole. Tables 4.6 and 4.9 show that not all plans cover all
categories of natural hazards. San Clemente and Carson claim not to be at risk from wildfires
and therefore did not include fire risk in their natural hazard mitigation plan. Pasadena only
included seismic hazard mitigation in its plan. Maybe that is the only risk the city is exposed

CorPapers

Natural hazard mitigation in Southern California

More intriguing information