3 Area Cities Miss Deadline to Show Quake Safety Compliance

The cities of Hawthorne, Lawndale and Lomita, where inspectors identified a total of 27 older masonry buildings that could suffer serious damage during an earthquake, have missed a Jan. 1 deadline to complete the first step toward complying with the state’s earthquake safety law.

All cities and counties in seismically active zones, such as Los Angeles and San Francisco, are required under a 1986 state law to identify their unreinforced masonry buildings and provide a program to reduce the potential for earthquake damage.

Officials in Hawthorne have identified 10 older masonry buildings that they believe are unreinforced. County authorities have identified three such buildings in Lawndale and 14 in Lomita. City officials in each community said they are working to meet the state requirements.

Because some of the buildings may already have been reinforced, property owners are being given an opportunity to provide proof that their buildings have been upgraded.

Once the unreinforced masonry buildings have been identified and a plan to lessen the potential for injuries and damage has been adopted, state law requires the cities and counties to report their progress to the state Seismic Safety Commission.

The deadline was Jan. 1, but commission spokesman Ed Hensley said there is no penalty for failing to comply.

Hawthorne, Lawndale and Lomita were among 44 cities in the state that did not report progress toward complying with the state law before the deadline.

By Jan. 1, about 25% of the 366 cities in 30 counties covered by the law met all the requirements; 23% finished the inventory; 21% were working on the inventory; and 13% did not report progress, according to commission officials. The remaining 18% of the jurisdictions had no unreinforced masonry buildings.

In the South Bay, five cities--Gardena, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Manhattan Beach and Torrance--met all the requirements before the deadline. Redondo Beach, Carson, El Segundo, Avalon and Palos Verdes Estates reported some progress to the state before Jan. 1 and are working to meet remaining state requirements.

Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates reported having no unreinforced masonry buildings.

The city of Los Angeles met all the requirements of the law by the deadline. The county met all deadlines for its unincorporated areas.

The most common unreinforced masonry buildings are brick buildings that were built before 1933 without steel reinforcement in the walls. Many seismic experts believe these buildings pose the greatest threat to life during earthquakes because masonry cannot absorb rocking and swaying motions.

Because the walls, ceilings and floors of unreinforced masonry buildings vibrate at different speeds and in different directions during a quake, they are likely to separate and collapse, according to experts. Steel reinforcements on such buildings allow the entire structure to vibrate as one and thus sustain less damage.

Upgrading such a building can cost as much as $20 per square foot--$120,000 for the average 6,000-square-foot building, city officials said.

Lawndale City Manager James Arnold said the city contracted with the building and safety division of the county’s Public Works Department in October to help Lawndale meet the state requirements.

According to Richard Glenn, senior building inspector for the Public Works Department, the county was asked to identify the unreinforced masonry buildings in Lawndale, to notify the property owners and to request proof of whether the buildings are reinforced. Once that is completed, the county will send its findings to the state, he said.

Under a county ordinance also adopted by Lawndale last year, owners of older masonry buildings are asked to provide proof if their buildings have been reinforced. Property owners who cannot provide proof are given 270 days to submit a plan to bring their buildings up to code or to demolish them. Glenn said adoption of that ordinance meets the state requirement for a mitigation program.

Arnold said the county began the inventory about three months ago and assured the city that it would be finished in time to meet the Jan. 1 deadline.

“Yeah, we missed the deadline, there is no question about that,” he said. “What can I say?”

Glenn said he does not know when the county will complete the inventory in Lawndale, but he said his agency did not promise Lawndale it could meet the deadline. He said the county reminded Lawndale of the requirements of the state law about a year and a half ago.

Arnold declined to identify any specific buildings until the inventory is completed, but he said they are near Hawthorne Boulevard and 147th Street. He said the city will soon notify the state Seismic Safety Commission about its progress.

Hawthorne Building and Safety Director Donald Knechtel said the city hired David Breiholv & Associates of Lomita about five months ago.

He said he expected the firm to help the city meet state requirements before the deadline but was told that it has been hampered because of difficulty in identifying the owners of a few older buildings.

However, Knechtel said the owners will be identified soon, and he expects the inventory to be completed within a month.

He also declined to identify any specific building until the inventory is completed, although he said most of the buildings that need upgrading are located along Hawthorne Boulevard.

As in Lawndale, Lomita city officials have also contracted with the county in order to meet the state requirements, said Senior Planner Richard Kawasaki.

Harry Kondo, manager of the Public Works Department’s district office in Lomita, said 14 “potentially hazardous buildings” in need of reinforcement have been identified in the city. Most are aging structures that house small businesses near Lomita Square, a commercial business center at the intersection of Lomita Boulevard and Narbonne Avenue.

However, Kondo said the city’s inventory will not be completed until property owners respond to a county request for proof that their buildings are reinforced.

The owner of one building at the Lomita Square intersection, David Harned of Harned Realty, said he received a letter from the county about two weeks ago advising him that his building was on the county’s list.

In a written response to the county, Harned said an architect and a construction foreman had advised him unofficially that the building’s brick structure was reinforced, but he does not have an engineer’s verification.

“I can understand the city and county wanting to ensure the safety of the general public,” Harned said in an interview. “But if they tell me it isn’t (reinforced), I don’t know where I’m at.”

He said he is worried that the cost of reinforcing his building could be so high that he will be forced to demolish the structure.

Other South Bay cities that have not met all the requirements of the law are at different stages of completion.

The city of Redondo Beach is drafting an ordinance to establish an earthquake damage mitigation program, officials said.

Under the proposed ordinance--which is expected to go before the City Council sometime next month--property owners would have 60 days to appeal a city finding that a building needs seismic work. After that, the owner would get 180 days to prove the building is safe, to demolish it or to submit plans for bringing it up to code within three years.

Within the next three months, the city of El Segundo is expected to enact an ordinance based on the county law. City officials there have identified nine unreinforced masonry buildings.

In August, Carson enacted a law that gives building owners a year and a half to demolish a building or three years to complete the reinforcement of the structure. Officials there identified 39 unreinforced masonry buildings.

However, the ordinance required the city to give building owners a grace period of six months before issuing any formal notices to comply, city officials said. That grace period ends next month.

City officials in Palos Verdes Estates, where there are two unreinforced buildings, are also considering an earthquake mitigation law based on the county ordinance. The ordinance should be before the council in the next few months.

The city of Avalon has also contracted with the county, which is working to get responses from property owners there about whether they have proof that their buildings are reinforced. Avalon has adopted the county ordinance for unreinforced masonry structures and has 24 such buildings.

UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS City: Avalon No. of buildings: 24 City: Carson No. of buildings: 39 City: El Segundo No. of buildings: 9 City: Gardena No. of buildings: 24 City: Harbor City No. of buildings: * City: Harbor Gateway No. of buildings: * City: Hawthorne No. of buildings: 10 City: Hermosa Beach No. of buildings: 66 City: Inglewood No. of buildings: 54 City: Lawndale No. of buildings: 3 City: Lomita No. of buildings: 14 City: Manhattan Beach No. of buildings: 12 City: Palos Verdes Estates No. of buildings: 2 City: Rancho Palos Verdes No. of buildings: 0 City: Redondo Beach No. of buildings: 23 City: Rolling Hills No. of buildings: 0 City: Rolling Hills Estates No. of buildings: 0 City: San Pedro No. of buildings: * City: Torrance No. of buildings: 40 City: Wilmington No. of buildings: *

* The Los Angeles Building and Safety Department does not have figures for these communities. However, it has identified 263 unreinforced masonry buildings in the 15th City Council district, which includes the four communities and a portion of Watts. SOURCES: City officials and state Seismic Safety Commission