Dozens of Courthouses Found at Risk in Quakes

Nearly half of California’s court buildings evaluated for seismic safety are at risk of partial collapse if there is a significant earthquake, according to a new report by the state Administrative Office of the Courts.

Of 300 court buildings assessed by structural engineers, 147 could pose a substantial risk to life and sustain substantial structural damage. Only 72 reached the state’s seismic safety bar.

The results did not surprise state officials, who said this week that many court buildings were old and not built to newer, more rigorous earthquake codes. California does not have the funds to rebuild or retrofit all aging courthouses, said Kim Davis, acting director of the state Office of Court Construction and Management. “We could not just tear down and rebuild everything to be bomb shelters,” she said. “It’s just not feasible.... We assume some amount of risk.”

Despite the findings, Davis said many of the buildings survived the 1994 Northridge earthquake with minimal damage.

But the report does raise concerns about the long-term safety of the courthouses, which are among hundreds of older buildings -- including schools and hospitals -- throughout California that need retrofitting.

The more state officials learn about the vulnerability of older structures, the more they need to prepare them for an earthquake, said Bruce Clark, former chairman of the state Seismic Safety Commission. The court buildings “pose a threat,” he said. “They need to be upgraded.... It’s going to be expensive, and it’s going to take a long time, but we really have to get started.”

Some of the structures, erected before the Loma Prieta and Northridge earthquakes, have older steel frames or reinforced masonry with wood floors and roofs. A few are of unreinforced masonry, such as the building in Paso Robles that collapsed during an earthquake in December. New structures must be built to current construction codes, but the requirements for retrofitting older buildings are less stringent.

The seismic study was conducted in preparation for the administrative transfer of court buildings from California’s 58 counties to the state. Under state law, control and financial responsibility for the courts must shift to Sacramento by 2007.

There are 452 court buildings or complexes in California. Of those, 227 were exempt from the evaluation because they are newer or because only small portions or them are used for court facilities. During the summer, engineers evaluated the remaining 225, which included 300 total structures, and ranked them on a scale of 1 to 7.

In the report, scheduled to be released today, the state labeled its assessment of 81 buildings as “pending,” in part because architectural drawings were not available for review. The majority of the buildings ranked either 4 or 5. The state intends to reject any structure that scores 5 or less if plans are not made for repairs.

In Los Angeles County, according to a draft report, engineers exempted 25 court buildings and evaluated 46. Only five of those assessed completely reached the state’s safety bar.

County officials said the report made the problem look worse than it was. Just because the buildings don’t meet the standard used by the Administrative Office of the Courts, they said, does not mean that they are unsafe. “If we don’t believe that those buildings are safe to work in, we wouldn’t recommend that people continue working in them,” said Tom Remillard of the county Department of Public Works. “That is not to say that in a catastrophic earthquake that you would not have damage.” He said there had to be a compelling reason to retrofit the buildings, because the county couldn’t afford to upgrade all its older structures.

The county, which owns the courthouses, will continue to maintain and operate any buildings the state rejects, said John Edmisten, division chief for the County Administrative Office.

L.A. County Superior Court spokesman Allan Parachini said the court was working with the county and state to address the needs of court facilities and ensure the safety of people using them.