GNGTS 2018 - 37° Convegno Nazionale

488 GNGTS 2018 S essione 2.2 level risk areas are those that have two characteristics: the public highly-vulnerable buildings are above 35% (of the total number of buildings), there is a high density of strategic and populated buildings. The medium risk areas are those with one of these two characteristics, all the low-risk areas have none of the two. Additionally, the efficiency of the Piano di Emergenza Comunale has been evaluated with the CLE. Starting from a risk scenario, the main actions needed for the seismic risk reduction have been listed in a document that should support the territorial planning. An example of such actions is the definition and eventually enlargement of multifunctional emergency areas (not in accordance with the PRG), such areas will assume different functions in emergency and ordinary phases. Other possible actions are the seismic retrofitting for strategic or relevant structures, the seismic improvement of buildings and interfering structural aggregates; the removal of interfering obstacles and architectural barriers; the replacement of the road pavement with non-slippery and draining materials; securing railway level crossings; the seismic improvement of all covered driveways and pedestrian areas such as arches, historic gates and bridges. Conclusions future developments. Seismic safety is a central topic in territorial planning that has a strong interdisciplinary connotation. Although still in the initial phase, the research presented in this paper produced some fundamental results. Among them, there is the importance of coherent and coordinated developments of MZS studies and CLE. Synergies between different Institutions, such as the DICEAA of the University of L’Aquila and the Regione Abruzzo, allowed the contributions of different skills, professionalisms, technologies and resources to be appreciated and great results in terms of municipal urban planning to be obtained. The experimental analyses highlighted the efficiency of the coordination between “Quadri Conoscitivi” (e.g., MZS, PAI, PSDA, CLE, etc…) and “Pianificazione delle operazioni di Protezione Civile e Progettazione/Pianificazione Urbanistica e dello sviluppo Territoriale” (Fabietti 1999). These instruments are often undervalued and neglected in urban plans. On the contrary, urban plans should account not only for the traditional planning instruments but also for more accurate and specific analyses (such as MZS studies and PAI), and for a planning approach more oriented to the safety “in and for” the municipality (Di Ludovico et al., 2017). Acknowledgements. Thesis of Chiara Capannolo, supervisor D. Di Ludovico, co-supervisor L. Di Lodovico, for Fig.2. References Berti D., Chiarini E., D’Andrea V., Durante F., La Posta E., Macerola L., Nocentini M., Palucci D., Roma M., Silvestri S., and Tallini M.; 2016: Microzonation (Level 3) of Santa Lucia and Capitignano (Abruzzo Region): first results and considerations , Gruppo Nazionale di Geofisica della Terra Solida, Atti del 35° Convegno Nazionale, CD- Rom, Lecce. Del Monaco F., Tallini M., De Rose C. and Durante F.; 2013: HVNSR survey in historical downtown L’Aquila (central Italy): Site resonance properties vs. subsoil model , Engineering Geology, DOI10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.03.008. Di Lodovico L. and Di Ludovico D.; 2015: La Vulnerabilità del Territorio. Dalla Condizione Limite per l’emergenza Locale a quella Intercomunale . In: XVIII Conferenza Nazionale SIU Italia ‘45-’45. Radici, Condizioni, Prospettive, Venezia 11-13 Giugno 2015, Planum Publisher, pp.709-712. Fig. 2.