We walk through the world with the perception that the earth below us and the buildings around us are immobile.
Historic masonry in Pioneer Square. Photo by Mary Waelder.
In reality, our world is always in motion. The movement of tectonic plates is imperceptible most of the time, but on those rare occasions of an earthquake, soft soils under Seattle will move like water, a phenomenon called liquefaction.
Our city was built on shifting land and has, especially over the last several years, experienced rapid change above-ground due to economic pressures. Early twentieth century brick buildings contrast with concrete and glass, and old and new create rich and multi-layered pockets throughout the city. But the historic structures that are integral to this beautiful complexity are at risk.
On February 28, 2001—twenty years ago—the Nisqually Earthquake damaged unreinforced masonry and unreinforced concrete buildings in First Hill, Pioneer Square, and Sodo.
The Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections (SDCI) assembled an unreinforced masonry (URM) policy committee in 2008, but have not received the necessary support to pass such a policy. Since then, the City of Seattle has assembled and maintained a list of over one thousand URM buildings throughout the city. This is not a new struggle—according to the SDCI URM Policy Committee, "Seattle is the only city in the country to have experienced URM building damage from three different earthquakes in 73 years." The Seattle City Council passed several URM ordinances in the 1970s, which were repealed when building owners could not face the cost of retrofits. Decades later, the same challenge holds Seattle back from moving towards resilience.
Seattle, WA, March 4, 2001- A large van was crushed by earthquake debris in a Seattle parking lot. FEMA News Photo by Kevin Galvin
Use the Seattle Hazard Explorer to explore risks in your area. Created and maintained by the City of Seattle.
It can be costlier and more complex to retrofit a building for earthquake safety than to build in seismic protection for a new building.
Even if pressured to upgrade their properties for public safety, when considering whether to retrofit an existing building as opposed to demolishing it for future development, owners must face the possibility that they might never recoup the cost of work. Cale Ash of Degenkolb Engineers points out:
“Usually the retrofit of these buildings protects the general public, you know, people walking on the sidewalk—or the people that work in the building, but we think of it as the people on the sidewalk—but those people aren’t paying the rent in the building. The benefits are more to the public and the costs are more to the private building owner.”
But opting for demolition in the path toward greater public safety would be devastating to Seattle's architectural heritage and to the communities that have formed around historic masonry centerpieces of culturally rich neighborhoods like Pioneer Square, Chinatown-International District and the Central District. Furthermore, demolition for new construction and would be a brutal over-use of material resources and energy in a time when our planet is already under catastrophic strain. Despite the challenges, positive action—on the part of policymakers, building owners, designers, and the general public—is necessary to save Seattle's historic fabric from both seismic and economic risks. The Resources for the Public and Actions and Opportunities pages further address ways to support building owners in performing retrofits.
The Interurban Building, an unreinforced masonry building in Pioneer Square. Photo by Mary Waelder.
So what's to be done? The historic pattern of code upgrades and seismic ordinances is to institute a change in reaction to a catastrophic event. A cause (earthquake) leads to an effect (policy or engineering progress) due to greater awareness. Are we to wait until another catastrophe forces action? Historian Gregory Smits tells us, “The life history of a disaster begins prior to the appearance of a specific event-focused agent.” Manish Chalana of the Urban Design and Planning Department at the University of Washington uses the term “seismic culture” to describe the way human patterns of behavior interact with geologic conditions to shape the outcome of a seismic event. This exhibit seeks to foster a seismic culture in Seattle that is aware and proactive, to highlight opportunities for progress before another earthquake occurs.
We are at this moment, through our action or inaction, shaping how Seattle will emerge from its next earthquake. There is no need to wait when the information we need to move forward is already available.
Protecting Seattle's residents and structures isn't easy. It will take continued awareness and dedication from architects, engineers, policy makers, and building owners to shape a more resilient city. But the good news is that we are not doing this in isolation. Other cities have already succeeded, failed, struggled and moved onward, and paying attention to their lessons is necessary for Seattle's future.
Explore by city:
Learn how to make a disaster ready kit
Acknowledgements
Michael Mariano, AIA, Principal and Architect at Schemata Workshop
Rachel Minnery, FAIA, LEED AP, Senior Direction of Resilience, Adaptation, and Disaster Assistance
Terrence Paret, Senior Principal, Wiss Janney Elstner Associates
David Strauss, AIA, Principal and Architect at SHKS Architects
Daniel Zepeda, Degenkolb Engineers
Cale Ash, Degenkolb Engineers
Dr. Eser Cakti, Department of Earthquake Engineering, Bogazici University
Dr. Oguz Celik, Professor of Structural & Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul Technical University
Paul Edison-Lahm, NAACP-PDX
Sarah Karlinsky, SPUR
Kji Kelly, Historic Seattle