230 likes | 564 Views
Landslide Risk Management for Berkley-Riverside Escarpment Presentation to the Community January 16, 2006 Michael Porter, M.Eng., P.Eng. Dr. Matthias Jakob, P.Geo. Dr. K. Wayne Savigny, P.Eng., P.Geo. BGC Engineering Inc. What We Know.
E N D
Landslide Risk Management for Berkley-Riverside Escarpment Presentation to the Community January 16, 2006 Michael Porter, M.Eng., P.Eng. Dr. Matthias Jakob, P.Geo. Dr. K. Wayne Savigny, P.Eng., P.Geo. BGC Engineering Inc.
What We Know • On January 19, 2005 a landslide killed Eliza Kuttner and seriously injured her husband • At least 5 other landslides since 1972 • all triggered by heavy rainfall • Many other locations in the GVRD are subject to landslide hazards • not unique
Hong Kong (1972) Po Shan Road Landslide
Hong Kong Slope Safety Program • Principles of risk management and quantitative risk assessment • Manage 58,000 registered slopes • Dr. Norbert Morgenstern (U of A) on Advisory Panel • Public education program • State-of-the-art monitoring • Hong Kong is now the world-leader in LRM • Australia, California, Seattle, British Columbia • Thousands of lives have been saved!
Work Completed to Date • Detailed investigations in the vicinity of the January 2005 landslide: • escarpment geology • assessment of landslide cause • assessment of residual risk Fill / Retaining Walls Marine Silt and Sand Colluvium Glacial Till
Work Completed to Date • Along Rest of Escarpment (Current Contract): • inventory of past landslides • evaluation of landslide-triggering storms • rainfall and piezometer monitoring • visual inspection and hand-auger drilling • quantitative risk assessment
Landslide Likelihood Estimates • Subdivided crest into 75 Increments • Rank based on: • thickness of fill • drainage conditions • slope angle • evidence of past movement > 2 times Average ~ Average < ½ Average
Crest of Escarpment Landslide Initiation Zone Seymour River 25o 23o 21o 19o Landslide Deposition Zone Landslide Runout Consequence a function of the angle to the crest of the escarpment
Landslide Runout Moderate to high likelihood of damage to homes Low to moderate likelihood of damage to homes Damage possible; mostly sedimentation and flooding Minor flooding >25o >23o >21o >19o
Landslide Risk Estimates and Evaluation • Potential for fatality at crest and base of escarpment • To be safe, a property must pass two tests: • risk to individuals must be tolerable • societal risks must be tolerable
Tolerable Risks Within a range society can live with Low, but not zero Less than other risks in everyday life Reduced further if practicable Limits defined in collaboration with the affected Community
Individual Risk • Risk faced by a single individual exposed to one or more landslide hazards • Hong Kong: • Existing slopes: 10-4 per year (1:10,000) • New development: 10-5 per year (1:100,000)
What Does 10-4 per year Mean? 10-4 per year = 0.0001 or a 1 in 10,000 chance of fatality per year of exposure Equivalent to average Canadian’s risk from motor vehicle accidents volvocanada.com
Individual Risk Estimates for Berkley-Riverside • Risk > 10-4 per year • 51 properties at base • 1 property at crest • Risk = 10-4 to 10-5 per year • additional 56 properties • Risk < 10-5 per year • rest of escarpment
Societal Risk • Risk imposed upon the community by a single landslide • Hong Kong: • F-N Curves
Societal Risk Estimates for Berkley-Riverside Assigned to the 75 source areas along escarpment crest • Unacceptable Risk • 22 source areas • ALARP Zone • 37 source areas • Broadly Acceptable • 16 source areas • (Hong Kong Criteria)
Comments on Risk Estimates • They match the historical record • calibrated • They represent a snapshot in time • risk changes over time • They do not account for: • acquisition of 8 properties affected by the January 2005 landslide • improvements to the storm sewer system • increased public awareness of the hazards • rainfall and piezometer monitoring program
Work Plan for Risk Reduction • More investigation of top rated sites • Evaluate viable risk control options: • ongoing monitoring and inspection • drainage improvements • removal of unstable retaining walls • removal or recompaction of unstable fills • slope reinforcement (new retaining walls; soil nails) • Quantify benefit and cost of each option • Implement preferred option(s)
Closing Remarks • A risk management program has been initiated • consistent with Canadian standards and international best practices • Baseline risks have been estimated • to prioritise sites for mitigation • to facilitate evaluation of risk control options • Risks are currently managed through monitoring • We have an opportunity to apply best practices, exhibit leadership, and minimise the potential for future tragedy