The seismic performance of chimneys associated with permanent residential dwellings and mobile (manufactured) homes is documented via onsite reconnaissance including interviews with Anchorage building officials and contractors familiar with the earthquake damage and recovery efforts. Relatively few chimneys suffered structural damage, and there was no evidence of mobile homes shifting or toppling. The lack of damage is attributed to relatively modest shaking intensities and qualities of the housing inventory. State-of-practice fragility curves are assessed by comparison to observed damage.
ASCE 41-17 (2017) Seismic evaluation and of retrofit of existing buildings.
3.
Anchorage Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) (2012) Anchorage indicators. Report compiled by AEDC for the Municipality of Anchorage. Anchorage, AK: AEDC.
4.
BoothDBWellsREGivlerRW (2004) Chimney damage in the Greater Seattle Area from the Nisqually Earthquake of 28 February 2001. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America94(3): 1143–1158.
5.
California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) (1989) Evaluation of Manufactured Housing Support System Performance in the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Sacramento, CA: HCD.
6.
City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety (LADBS) (2000) Reconstruction and replacement of earthquake damaged masonry chimneys. Document No. P/BC 2002-07. Los Angeles, CA: LADBS.
7.
City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development (SDPD) (2004) Alteration and repair of unreinforced masonry chimneys. Director’s Rule 5-2004. Seattle, WA: SDPD.
8.
DavisWM (1934) The Long Beach earthquake. Geographical Review24(1): 1–11.
9.
DizhurDGiarettonMInghamJ (2017) Performance of early masonry, cob and concrete buildings in the 14 November 2016 Kaikoura earthquake. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering50(2).
10.
DoğangünATulukOILivaoğluRAcarR (2006) Traditional wooden buildings and their damages during earthquakes in Turkey. Engineering Failure Analysis13: 981–996.
11.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2003) Hazus MR4 Multi-Hazard Loss Estimation Methodology. Washington, DC: FEMA. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAZUS (accessed 29 August 2020).
12.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2012) Next-generation methodology for seismic performance assessment of buildings. Prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No. FEMA P-58. Washington, DC: FEMA.
GEER (2019) Geotechnical engineering reconnaissance of the 30 November 2018 Mw 7.1 Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake (Version 2.0) (ed. KoehlerRDFrankeKW). Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance Association (GEER). DOI: 10.18118/G6P07F. www.geerassociation.org (accessed 29 August 2020).
15.
International Code Council (2012) International Building Code. Falls Church, VA: International Code Council.
16.
KrawinklerHOsteraasJDMcDonaldBMHuntJP (2012) Development of damage fragility functions for URM chimneys and parapets. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, 24–28 September.
17.
LA Times (1994) Earthquake: The long road back: New mobile home rules considered, damage: Nearly 10% of such dwelling units in L.A. County were rendered uninhabitable by the quake: Some call for new bracing requirements. LA Times, 1February. Available at: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-02-01-me-17709-story.html (accessed 29 August 2020).
18.
LewHSLevendeckerEVDikkersRD (1971) Engineering aspects of the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake. Report NBS BSS-40. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards, Department of Commerce.
19.
LiuCLayTXieZXiongX (2019) Intraslab deformation in the 30 November 2018 Anchorage, Alaska, MW 7.1 earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters46: 2449–2457. DOI: 10.1029/2019GL082041.
20.
MaisonBCobeenK (2016) Analytical study of mobile home response to the 2014 South Napa earthquake. Earthquake Spectra32(1): 1–22.
MillikanRAMartelRRAustinJCHuntSWitmerDJHillRALabarreRVBowenOGNoiceBBuwaldaJPJohnsonHRConnollyPLCrowellHHDixonLEReedRJShieldJEBaskervilleHHFarmerZJSimpsonWA (1933) Long Beach earthquake and protection against future earthquakes. Summary Report by Joint Technical Committee on Earthquake Protection, California Institute of Technology. Available at: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/12455/1/MILlberpt33.pdf (accessed 29 August 2020).
23.
Municipality of Anchorage (2013) Mobile (Manufactured) Home Set-Up and Permit Requirements. Handout R.10. Anchorage, AK: Municipality of Anchorage.
24.
National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS) (1994) Northridge Earthquake Effect on Manufactured Housing in California. Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
25.
OsteraasJKrawinklerH (2010) Fragility of Masonry Chimneys. Background Document FEMA P-58/BD-3.9.7, December. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
26.
PennaAMorandiPRotaMManziniCFda PortoFMagenesG (2014) Performance of masonry buildings during the Emilia 2012 earthquake. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12: 2255–2273.
27.
RobinsonATalwaniP (1983) Building damage at Charleston, South Carolina, associated with the 1886 earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America73(2): 633–652.
28.
Scholl (1974) Statistical analysis of low-rise building damage caused by the San Fernando earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America64(1): 1–23.
29.
SteinbruggeKVRothRJ (1994) Dwelling and Mobile Home Monetary Losses Due to the 1989 Loma Prieta, California, Earthquake with an Emphasis on Loss Estimation. US Geological Survey Bulletin 1939-B, Prepared in cooperation with the State of California Department of Insurance for estimation of earthquake losses to housing in California. Reston, VA: US Geological Survey.
30.
SteinbruggeKVSchaderEEAlgermissenST (1979) Mobile homes and earthquake damage in California. SSC 79-06, 13August. Sacramento, CA: California Seismic Safety Commission.
31.
The Masonry Society (TMS) (1994) Performance of masonry structures in the Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994 (ed. KlingnerRE). Technical Report 301-94, June. Boulder, CO: TMS.
32.
TurnerF (2004) Seventy years of the Riley Act and its effect on California’s building stock. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6 August.
33.
Uniform Building Code (UBC) (1946) Uniform Building Code. Whittier, CA: International Conference of Building Officials.
34.
US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (1995) Minimizing Damage and Repair Costs to Manufactured Homes during an Earthquake. Office of Policy Development and Research. Available at: https://www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/pdrbrch.pdf (accessed 29 August 2020).
US Geological Survey (USGS) (1966) The Alaska Earthquake, March 27, 1964: Investigations and reconstruction effort. Geological Survey Professional Paper 541. Washington, DC: USGS.
ZhaoBTaucerFRossettoT (2009) Field investigation on the performance of building structures during the 12 May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China. Engineering Structures31: 1707–1723.
