Design Meeting Internal December 17, 2020

Date: December 17th, 2020 via Zoom

Participants

• Jamie H.
• Murray J
• Joost v.
• Tiegan H.
• Karolina P.
• Drew R.
• Will C.
• Malaika U.
• Nicky H.
• Sahar S.

Minutes

Discussion on threat and risk graphic sections:

• Jamie: looking for something more “personal” for the public user
• Murray: conversation… what kind of building are you in? Where do you live? We can answer the question “should I be worried?” Once we know that we can provide a rating for their relative risk. Am I safe in this building?
• Tiegan: “what would the big one look like?” Show financial loss for a building like theirs.
  • Jamie, we don’t know what the house costs so this is hard…
    • Tiegan: maybe that’s not the best metric to present
  • Probability of damage is probably more relevant
  • Murray: based on the damage we can say how likely you are to be injured
    • Estimates of how long before you can go back into the building
    • Tiegan: we might not want to include the downtime, it’s not the strongest part of the model.
    • Murray: focussing on numbers is probably not ideal for this user, they can drill down if they want to.
      • Am I okay?
      • Am I safe?
      • Threat: low, considerable, extreme?
        • Relative risk using qualitative metrics
• Murray: what kind of information can we provide for multi-hazard threat (outside of earthquake)?
  • Sahar: just being able to answer “Am I exposed?” Is important and relevant
  • Murray: Most granular is 250m grid spacing
    • We can say “Are you above or below the threshold of damage?”
    • We can provide general exposure for the region
  • Jamie: good if we can answer “Am I at risk?”
  • Murray: Time slider likely relevant only for regional users