Seattle stands at a critical juncture as experts predict an 85% likelihood of a significant earthquake within the next half-century. This potential disaster poses a particular threat to the city’s historic brick buildings, which are vulnerable to collapse. However, efforts to reinforce these structures could inadvertently lead to a reduction in affordable housing.
In a recent report by Joshua McNichols on KUOW’s economy podcast, Booming, the dilemma is laid bare. The last major quake, the Nisqually earthquake in 2001, inflicted $2 billion in damages, notably in Seattle’s Chinatown-International District. Leslie Morishita, who was present during the quake, recounts the event vividly with buildings swaying and parapets collapsing. “We got out of there, and we did not dare go back inside (laughter). And people were just wandering around and saying, are you OK? Are you OK? And there were bricks on the sidewalks because parapets of the old buildings had collapsed. I think a car got smooshed,” she says.
Morishita, who is part of a nonprofit focused on affordable housing and community development, highlights the plight of buildings like the West Kong Yick. Despite its historical significance and affordability, the building stands in disrepair, with only a fraction of its apartments occupied, primarily by elderly, low-income Chinese residents. The rent for these units can be as low as $150 a month, a rarity in Seattle’s high-priced housing market.
The city of Seattle is contemplating mandatory retrofitting of such buildings to withstand future earthquakes. This would involve significant structural reinforcements, a costly endeavor that might compel owners to sell their properties, potentially leading to higher rents or demolitions by new owners. Jan Johnson, the owner of the Panama Hotel in Japantown, expressed concerns over potential abandonment, drawing parallels to past requirements for fire sprinkler systems that led to buildings being shut down.
In response, Seattle is delaying mandatory upgrades until funding for partial reimbursements can be secured. Meanwhile, the city has revised its standards for retrofits, favoring a more cost-effective approach that prioritizes life safety over building preservation. Amanda Hertzfeld, who oversees Seattle’s retrofit program, notes, “The bottom line for me is that doing something is better than nothing.” This new standard reduces the financial burden by allowing buildings to use less metal, focusing on ensuring safe evacuation rather than complete structural integrity.
Structural engineer John Hooper supports this approach, suggesting it strikes a necessary balance between cost and safety. “You will save lives that way,” he explains, acknowledging that some buildings may still suffer irreparable damage.
As Seattle grapples with these challenges, it looks to the experience of California, where seismic safety measures are more advanced due to a longer history of earthquake awareness. Seismologist Megan Anderson points out, “They’ve had 120 years of science, doing these kinds of studies, to lay out where the faults are and understand how they move over time and try to understand what are the risks to communities. And we’re only, you know, about 35 years in, 30 years in.”
Ultimately, Seattle must navigate a complex path, balancing the preservation of its historic architecture, the provision of affordable housing, and the adoption of safety measures. The city’s choices will shape its resilience in the face of future seismic threats.
This article was originally written by www.npr.org
