Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Schools Move Forward With Seismic Upgrades

Posted by Greg Hambrick on Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:00 PM

8dea/1240945888-_080507.quake1886_resized.jpg

School District staff are expected to move forward this spring with massive rehabilitation plans for the county’s downtown schools most vulnerable to an earthquake. The school board has asked staff to bring forward a proposal next month to address the structural concerns and could move quickly on recommendations.

Charleston sits over a fault line that’s caused a few minor shuffles and shakes over the past few months. The region is also home to the massive, fatal Earthquake of 1886, which looms as a reminder more than a century later that hurricane-force winds aren’t the only natural disaster that pose a threat to the region. Five of the district’s campuses on the peninsula were never designed to withstand the ground shaking under them and would hold little hope of making it through.

The district has been constrained by budget concerns, but discretionary money in the building fund, increased awareness on the school board, and the potential for federal stimulus aid have reignited plans for precautionary improvements.

“The window has opened for us to proceed with speed,” says Bill Lewis, the district’s building director.

The Big Fix e9e8/1240945850-buist_academy_resized.jpg

A strong advocate for earthquake-safe improvements, Lewis has seen the traumatic impacts of earthquakes in California, including lives lost and the looming terror of aftershocks.

“This is not academic for me,” he says.

The campuses downtown, specifically the Rivers building, Buist Academy, Memminger Elementary, Charleston Progressive, and James Simmons Elementary, are highly vulnerable because of the soil conditions and the building structures. The peninsula is on terrible soil, Lewis says, and the schools themselves are not up to today’s seismic standards.

“They have very little sheer strength, and that’s what causes the issue,” he says.

Rivers has already received approval for intense rehabilitation to address seismic concerns. Solutions for the other campuses were included in a district-wide restructuring plan that the board approved earlier this year. It would require relocating students to empty buildings temporarily while the old buildings are extensively modified or demolished and rebuilt.

The district has up to $7 million on hand that it can spend on seismic analysis and designs, Lewis says.

Call For Baby Steps

Board member Arthur Ravenel recalls vivid stories of the 1886 earthquake handed down from his grandmother, who was 22 at the time.

“She said it sounded like all the freight trains in the world came together in a big wreck,” he says.

Ravenel supports incremental seismic upgrades established by the Federal Emergency Management Administration. A 2003 manual notes phased-in improvements could be made along with regularly scheduled maintenance.

“Such an approach, if carefully planned, engineered, and implemented, will ultimately achieve the full damage reduction benefits of a more costly and disruptive single-stage rehabilitation,” the manual reads.

This could work for other district buildings with fewer problems, but Lewis says, "The magnitude of challenges with the first 5 schools may make incremental seismic renovation impractical."

He says staff will be in a better position to advise the board after the engineering analysis.

The district needs to be aggressive in dealing with the seismic concerns, says board Vice Chairman Gregg Meyers, noting that the idea of downtown schools vulnerable to an earthquake “creeps me out.”

Also Read: New study: Charleston overreacting to earthquake threat (May '08)

Topics: Schools

Tags: , ,

  |  

Comments (5)

Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment

If a building is structurally unsound now then why continue to put students and teachers in them year after year? Why are downtown schools being singled out? Why no mention of Ron McNair or other older multi-story schools in the county that were built using lesser standards than those required inside the city? What does poor upkeep and deferred maintenance have to do with the health and safety issues within these schools?

Lewis says "The magnitude of challenges with the first 5 schools may make incremental seismic renovation impractical." Sounds more like the increased possibility of charter schools moving into them is what really "creeps out" the superintendent...even more than Gregg Meyers.

report   
Posted by gullah on April 29, 2009 at 10:04 PM

The district says it will look at incremental improvements to structures in the rest of the district that may not be up to current seismic codes. Bill Lewis says the problem on the peninsula is exacerbated by the poor soil.

The thing about these five schools is that, as of now, they need improvement because they'll remain active schools. Schools that could be on the chopping block for permanent demo would be Archer and Frasier — and that's at least several years off because they'll likely be used for swing space during construction.

report   
Posted by Greg Hambrick on April 30, 2009 at 8:46 AM

And you believe what CCSD officials are feeding you!? Review your own report from a year ago about how this issue is being carried over the edge.

They say it's "poor soil" downtown? Please explain how soils under Rivers or James Simons are any worse than St. Johns or West Ashley High. According to Bill Lewis, the entire peninsula is filled land even though this isn't true.

Though I would never argue against improving the safety of older school buildings, Lewis is using this debate to advance special interests he's not discussing. He's talking out of both sides of his mouth when he says he won't sign off on a renovation while using the same, if not worse, examples of "unsafe" schools as swing space. What about poor maintenance? West Ashley and Wando are reportedly falling apart. If you want to see a real joke, read the Bill Lewis plan for Sullivan’s Island Elementary in the event of a Tsunami.

This seismic safety debate is simply the evolution of CCSD's original argument to sell most if not all school properties downtown. In the face of public uproar and cries of playing fowl against the downtown community nearly ten years ago they backed down. Apparently they haven't given up.

report   
Posted by gullah on April 30, 2009 at 8:53 PM

Oh, No. I know you did not just tell me to review my own report. I'm sure you mean the one I linked to at the bottom of the post.

report   
Posted by Greg Hambrick on May 1, 2009 at 7:23 AM

Yes, I did. Your report last year contains a respectable amount of journalistic do diligence. This latest report reads more like you've been drinking their Kool Aid. Maybe I misread your earlier report, but I seriously doubt Mr. Lewis has the same priorities as some think. He's a company man, and one who may very well place his own survival alone above that. Don't forget who solicited financial support from school district contractors to give Maria Goodloe a going away party.

Besides, is it really wise to hire the friends of Bill to explain California's Plate Techtonics to us in Charleston. This rush to have outside experts come in is simply designed to get "objective third parties" to confirm what CCSD has already decided to do...with or without accurate information to support it. Nothing like making a one sided argument look balanced. That's when we depend on journalists and investigative reporters to look behind the curtain and tell us what's really there.

report   
Posted by gullah on May 2, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
By Email
With RSS
Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment

Greg Hambrick
News Editor

Press Time Tweets

City Paper Blogs

RSS Links

Classified Listings
{ more } Recent Comments
{ more } Reader Reviews

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2012, Charleston City Paper   RSS