Skip to comments.Concrete Risks
Posted on 10/14/2013 7:19:58 AM PDT by BenLurkin
More than 1,000 old concrete buildings in Los Angeles and hundreds more throughout the county may be at risk of collapsing in a major earthquake, according to a Times analysis.
By the most conservative estimate, as many as 50 of these buildings in the city alone would be destroyed, exposing thousands to injury or death.
A cross-section of the city lives and works in them: seamstresses in downtown factories, white-collar workers in Ventura Boulevard high-rises and condo dwellers on Millionaires' Mile in Westwood.
Despite their sturdy appearance, many older concrete buildings are vulnerable to the sideways movement of a major earthquake because they don't have enough steel reinforcing bars to hold columns in place.
Los Angeles officials have known about the dangers for more than 40 years but have failed to force owners to make their properties safer. The city has even rejected calls to make a list of concrete buildings.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Just another reason to leave CA.
Are democrat HQ’s in any of these buildings?
Yah .. so .. ?
“Just another reason to leave CA.”
Hopefully they won’t. If my beliefs are correct, those leaving CA have successfully Kalifornicated Oregon, Washington and parts of other states with their socialist and breakfast cereal way of life.
This causes me to recall a memory, a couple decades ago a car passed us with the bumper sticker: “California Blonde”. My first thoughts were slut and venereal disease.
There must be a way for government to make money off of this...
today’s meme on msnbc and cnbc was “the republicans will surrender”
msnbc had the plethor of bending forward pundits and CNBC had the insurance and “fmr” deposed loser ceos and congressmen. (iow asset protection product perveyors) ALL were demanding immediate surrender.
Remember insurance companies will lose money because of the guarantees of their asset protection policies. You also have europeans who are addicted to debt=cash=slaves.
Earthquake proof, eh?
I wish they all could be California girls...ah, maybe not.
Steel construction making a comeback?
More making people afraid of whatever.
If there are buildings not up to code, this is not a Fed govt issue, and no money should be spent on it.
Just another reason to leave CA.
So long as you research the are you move to, there are a lot of dangerous faults east of the Rockies like the New Madrid that people have totally ignored. I wonder what the building codes for those areas are like and how their buildings will hold up. Like Roseanne-Roseannadanna says “It’s always something.” Earthquakes, tornado’s, floods, whatever.
Los Angeles is Detroit with palm trees.
All buildings are at risk to collapse during an earthquake.
They are designed to 2/3 the force of a Maximum Considered Earthquake Risk and those which have not been so designed, fall under the category to be considered for a seismic retrofit. Some are so required, others not.
A farm shed used to keep hay dry, doesn’t have to be seismically retrofitted. A public school in CA or a Hospital is required to be retrofitted.
Older bldgs not yet retrofitted generally require maintenance and repairs, which in themselves, frequently receive renovations partially retrofitting them.
All the bldg codes include considerations of seismic forces for buildings, bridges, structures, attachments, and generally anything that can get shaken and fall causing a death.
FWIW, they still won’t protect us from an Act of God, especially if it is Divine Discipline.