## 1 Introduction  
The seismic response of foundation soil is a variable of significant impact on the design of a structure; therefore, seismic design codes define response spectra based on the seismic site classification and the seismic zonation of each country [1, 2]. However, for a specific project, seismic demand can be affected by local effects that may not necessarily be identified through the general zonation defined by a standard based on hazard criteria [3]. For this reason, microzonation studies of cities or localities become an important tool that provides analytical elements to refine criteria that could impact the seismic design of a structure. Nevertheless, to achieve this, it is also necessary to expand the use of the information recorded during the microzonation process beyond merely creating a spatial delineation of a terrain parameter within a study area. Seismic microzonation is a fundamental process in mitigating risks associated with earthquakes. This process involves subdividing earthquake-prone areas into smaller zones based on the geological and geophysical characteristics of the terrain, such as susceptibility to liquefaction, landslides, and rockfall hazards, with the objective of accurately identifying seismic hazards at each specific location [4, 5]. This approach is essential for site-specific risk analysis, enabling more effective implementation of risk reduction strategies and emergency planning [6, 7]. Moreover, seismic microzonation not only has implications for urban planning and disaster management, but also plays a crucial role in the seismic design of buildings and infrastructure by adapting design specifications to the seismic characteristics of the soil in each zone [8, 9]. Seismic microzonation has been applied in various regions around the world, providing valuable advancements in understanding the specific seismic risks of each area. InItaly, for instance, an integrated approach to seismic microzonation was developed and employed in the reconstruction planning following the 2016-2017 earthquakes in the central part of the country. This approach allowed for better risk management and contributed to the resilience of the affected communities [10]. In Colombia, the seismic microzonation project in Bogota has been pioneering in integrating earthquake loss scenarios into urban planning and improving building codes, serving as a model for other Latin American cities [6]. In India, the seismic microzonation of the nuclear power plant in the southern part of the country set a standard for detailed seismic hazard assessment in critical facilities, ensuring safety against natural disasters [9]. Another relevant example is the work carried out in Skopje, Macedonia, where seismic microzonation maps were implemented using the uniform hazard spectrum methodology, significantly improving the precision of seismic design in the region [11]. Each city may have zones susceptible to experiencing the well-known \"local effects\" or \"site effects\" during a seismic event. It is clear that the amplification caused by these effects is not only due to the site-specific response of the soil column beneath the project area being explored, but rather to the seismic response of the surrounding environment, whose coverage area depends on the geomorphological, stratigraphic, and topographic conditions of the region [12]. Therefore, as a first application, microzonation allows for the visualization of the spatial variability of a characterization parameter within a study area, providing elements to identify potential variations in seismic response due to the regional conditions of the terrain [13]. In recent years, seismic microzonation processes have incorporated aspects that have significantly improved the accuracy and utility of studies. One of these advancements is the integration of surface geophysical methods, such as the use of microtemors and passive seismic measurements.