preventing exposure 3 <2.5% of business output at risk services from the city or loss of workforce – from probable” scenario. through inability to reach their place of work. “most (See also essential 5 2 2.5-5% of business output at risk Loss is for 3 months or longer. – on ecosystem from probable” scenario. “most services) 1 5-7.5% of business output risk – from probable” scenario. Effectiveness of zoning should ideally be “most independently validated (see also Essential 2). 0 - >7.5% of business output at risk from probable” scenario. “most 4.1.3 Potential population % of population at risk of 5 No population displacement from Displacement for 3 months or longer as a – displacement. displacement severe” scenario. consequence of housing being destroyed or “most rendered uninhabitable, or the area in which it is located being rendered uninhabitable. 4 No population displacement from – probable” scenario. “most This assessment also needs to cover informal 3 <2.5% population displacement and unplanned settlements. – from probable” scenario. “most Effectiveness of zoning should ideally be independently validated (see also Essential 2). 2 2.5-5% population displacement – from probable” scenario. “most 1 5-7.5% population displacement – from probable” scenario. “most 0 - >7.5% population displacement from probable” scenario. “most 4.2 Building codes 4.2.1 Existence of building Existence of applicable Codes exist that will ensure: Building codes should be specifically codes designed to address to all physical assets. evaluated for ability to deal with “most risks identified in Essential 2. 1– Zero damage (to the point safety probable” and severe” scenarios in “most Essential 2. risk) from severe” scenario. “most It may make sense to subdivide the city by 4 Zero damage (to the point of safety – risk) from probable” scenario. region or neighborhood. “most
preventing exposure (See also essential 5 on ecosystem services) 3 – <2.5% of business output at risk from “most probable” scenario. 2 – 2.5-5% of business output at risk from “most probable” scenario. 1 – 5-7.5% of business output risk from “most probable” scenario. 0 - >7.5% of business output at risk from “most probable” scenario. services from the city or loss of workforce through inability to reach their place of work. Loss is for 3 months or longer. Effectiveness of zoning should ideally be independently validated (see also Essential 2). 4.1.3 Potential population displacement. % of population at risk of displacement 5 – No population displacement from “most severe” scenario. 4 – No population displacement from “most probable” scenario. 3 – <2.5% population displacement from “most probable” scenario. 2 – 2.5-5% population displacement from “most probable” scenario. 1 – 5-7.5% population displacement from “most probable” scenario. 0 - >7.5% population displacement from “most probable” scenario. Displacement for 3 months or longer as a consequence of housing being destroyed or rendered uninhabitable, or the area in which it is located being rendered uninhabitable. This assessment also needs to cover informal and unplanned settlements. Effectiveness of zoning should ideally be independently validated (see also Essential 2). 4.2 Building codes 4.2.1 Existence of building codes designed to address risks identified in Essential 2. Existence of applicable to all physical assets. Codes exist that will ensure: 1– Zero damage (to the point safety risk) from “most severe” scenario. 4 – Zero damage (to the point of safety risk) from “most probable” scenario. Building codes should be specifically evaluated for ability to deal with “most probable” and “most severe” scenarios in Essential 2. It may make sense to subdivide the city by region or neighborhood.
Resilience%20Scorecard%20Updated%20V2%20-%20April%2030th%202015.docx