State and local government agencies should consider all natural hazards when siting critical public facilities and schools. Critical facilities are considered to be health care, especially hospitals, and fire and police facilities. Facilities that are properly located and constructed, relative to natural hazards, will have less earthquake-induced damage or be subject to fewer other hazards, such as landslides and floods. These structures will be available for the use during, or following an emergency, and loss of life within such structures will be reduced and, perhaps, avoided entirely.
State and local governments risk their citizens' lives and businesses by allowing development in hazardous locations. Although there are requirements for use of codes and for earthquake resistant design in portions of Missouri, land-use policies related to natural hazards should be developed for all new critical structures and schools.
Existing structures may have no resistance to some hazards and inspections have not been programmed for existing critical facilities to assess earthquake vulnerability. Communities will benefit from the increased safety of critical facilities and schools.
Because new facilities can be constructed in safer locations, local government stakeholders should choose to locate new structures wisely. Legislation may be needed to specify that all hazards be considered when sites for critical facilities and schools are chosen. The State should cooperate with and provide technical support and other assistance to municipal and county governments as they develop policies and ordinances based on existing hazard maps. Additional hazard mapping funds are needed to adequately implement the strategy of protecting critical facilities and schools. State legislation could include incentives for local governments to develop zoning and other land-use planning procedures for reducing vulnerability of critical care facilities and schools to natural hazards.
Since existing facilities will not be impacted by the proper consideration of sites for new structures, local governments may wish to seek the advice of emergency management officials in assessing the vulnerability of existing critical facilities and schools. Many practical and low cost options can markedly decrease the harm caused by earthquakes and other hazards. Rehabilitation costs for existing structures are often greater than for equivalent designs of new buildings for the same hazard. On the other hand, the extreme consequences of losing a hospital or fire station during an emergency can greatly exceed the cost of improving the structure to withstand earthquakes and other hazards. Further, once damaged, critical facilities offer none of their intended response aid. Future generalized studies may be undertaken to evaluate important structures in high hazard areas.