Abstract

The study aims to present, compare, and assess three different types of buildings considered as flood-resilient construction: building on piles (also called static elevation), amphibious building (also called can-float), and floating building in terms of their performance in the context of a semiwild river in a large city. The comparative multiple-case study covers three objects realized between 2014 and 2017 at the Vistula riverbanks in Warsaw, Poland: pile founded Beach Pavilion, amphibious Boulevard Pavilion, and floating Water Tram Terminal. The research was based on the blueprints analysis as well as on on-site observations in the phase of construction and operation and interviews. The general characteristic of the three resilient typologies has been confirmed in the study. The pile building has an almost unlimited range of operation regarding the water level on the cost of a relatively remote location from the river, but during an exceptionally extreme flood, it will be flooded. Floating buildings provide the best visual and physical contact with water, cannot be flooded, and may be relocated but access to them from land is hampered, especially during very low and very high water levels. Amphibious buildings seem to be a compromise of water proximity and reliability of operation in all circumstances. A closer look reveals technical problems with buoyant structures. In the case of the floating terminals, problems with mooring on the semiwild freezing river remain a challenge. The amphibious buildings are still in the phase of implementation, waiting for their first test in natural flooding conditions.

Highlights

  • The paper focuses on the design approach [48] with a theoretical replication multiple-case method [49] being applied to the unique setting of significant research potential characterized by (1) three cases realized in a similar time (2014–2017) and place, similar in sizes and functions but using different flood-resilient strategies, (2) rare amphibious buildings being one of the cases, and (3) semiwild river with very variable water levels and flows passing through an urbanized area

  • Three cases studied in this paper are (1) Beach Pavilion, a service building on piles erected on the semiwild east riverbank, (2) Boulevard Pavilion, one of eight amphibious mixed-use buildings located on the periodically inundated boulevard on the west channelized riverbank, and (3) Floating Water Tram Terminal, one of the four floating buildings mooring from spring to autumn along the west bank (Table 2)

  • Two buoyant cases by definition cannot be destroyed by water what is still a possible scenario for the pile building, so describing the risk of flood damage according to the water level referred to the floor cannot be implemented here

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The Relationships of Risk, Vulnerability, and Resilience. The foundations for risk come from multiple disciplines. The term is broadly used in the insurance industry [1]. Differences in risk definitions between disciplines (public health, psychology, environmental health, occupational health, engineering, sociology, and medicine) are not essential and mainly connected to the usage of terminology. In most cases of risk definitions, probability and severity are both important aspects and often a quantification of risk is desired, whereas risk perception is seen as a subjective appraisal and a cognitive construct [2]. The concept of risk is often undertaken in relation to hazards interacting with social structures [3]. The key concepts in modern disaster research except for the hazard and risk cover vulnerability and resilience [4]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call