clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

How Will LA Retrofit 1,500 Potentially Dangerous Buildings?

New, 6 comments


Now that the city's got that list of pre-1976 concrete buildings that could be dangerous in a strong earthquake (Thanks, University of California researchers!), it's finally moving on what to do with them and other structures that have a high chance of collapsing or otherwise endangering life in a strong earthquake. (Those include both concrete buildings and LA's signature dingbats, aka soft-story buildings, which are generally wood-framed.) The city has recently partnered with a USGS seismologist and the mayor is now asking that she review the concrete building list and make recommendations on what steps to take next, reports the Daily News. The Department of Building and Safety will also get to work on creating a way to evaluate which structures on the list are the most dangerous. (There are varying degrees of instability among the 1,500; it's estimated that only 75 would actually collapse in an earthquake, but which 75?) While that happens, the city will also be figuring out how to fund the probably-lifesaving retrofits, even though many are privately-owned. Councilmember Mitch Englander is pushing for some help from the state, possibly a tax credit, since he assumes that the public will have to step in and help out private property owners (and the city can't afford it): "A lot of these are pre-1976 structures and more than 20 years old, are under rent control, and the landlords can't afford to do it themselves. Even if they are able to pass through the cost to their tenants, a lot of renters will not be able to afford it and will be forced to move," says Englander. We're sure they'd rather not move at all, but if it came down to moving or staying in a building that might collapse, that's a pretty easy choice.
· Los Angeles weighs mandate on earthquake retrofits for dangerous buildings [DN]
· Mapping LA's 1,451 Most Potentially Collapse-Prone Buildings [Curbed LA]