91视频

A new national rating system for seismic resiliency goes much deeper than Portland city code, according to architect Jay Raskin.

Ron Mayes, acting executive director of the U.S. Resiliency Council, recently introduced its Building Rating System at a meeting of the American Institute of Architects‘ Portland chapter. He also gave a presentation in Salem to the Oregon Seismic Safety Policy Advisory Commission, said Raskin, vice chairman of the commission and chairman of the AIA Oregon Resilience Committee.

City code, according to a report by the city’s Retrofit Standards Committee, includes only 鈥減assive triggers鈥� for required seismic retrofits when a building is altered or upgraded. Raskin said the USRC system is more meaningful, offering two earthquake ratings 鈥� verified and transaction 鈥� that are based on an evaluation by USRC-certified engineers. Professional engineers can apply to become certified by the USRC by visiting .

Raskin said he believes the USRC rating system exceeds the current measure of probable maximum loss (PML). The PML system for rating buildings is 鈥渟omewhat broken,鈥� he said.

鈥淭he issue becomes that there is a lot of unknown seismic risk and any engineer can do a PML,鈥� he said. 鈥淢ost (PML ratings) are perfectly fine, but there’s a lot of pressure to go below 20 percent (of probable maximum loss).鈥�

The USRC’s system provides a way to double-check the PML rating, Raskin said, and establishes a detailed, standardized, higher level of review because of USRC certification.

鈥淵ou have to know what you’re doing (when rating a building), and that alone could have a potential impact on the ratings of buildings,鈥� he said. 鈥淓ven more important, USRC is rating buildings on more than just earthquake safety.鈥�

That’s because the USRC system looks at all the buildings components, including nonstructural and mechanical systems, Raskin said.

鈥淒amage to those things are usually more than to the structural system to the building when you go back and look at what is damaged afterwards,鈥� he said.

The Verified Earthquake Rating can be used for promotional, marketing and publicity purposes, according to the USRC. The rating assigns one to five stars for three performance measures: safety, damage (repair cost) and recovery (time to regain basic function).

The Transaction Earthquake Rating, according to the USRC, gives 鈥渁 reliable transaction due diligence report鈥� that allows better decision-making on property investment, management of risk exposure and consideration of the cost demands of leasing, sales, finance and insurance. This rating is reviewed randomly and kept confidential by the USRC. The rating assigns one to three stars for the same three performance measures: safety, damage and recovery.

The USRC’s hope is that building owners adopt the new ratings voluntarily, and that they become similar to the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ratings. More details on the ratings are available at .

Like LEED ratings, the new USRC ratings can increase buildings’ value, Raskin said.

鈥淚n Japan, people are willing to pay 20 to 25 percent more if a building is seismically stronger,鈥� he said. 鈥淐urrently, our seismic ratings have no economic benefit. The idea is to have a rating system that is certified.鈥�

Raskin, who helped author the Oregon Resilience Plan, said he hopes the USRC system will be accepted by the building and development communities.

鈥淭he proof is in the pudding, and we’ll see how much interest there is and if there is enough interest to sustain it,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t’s one of the things we called for in the Oregon Resilience Plan, and I’m quite excited about it.鈥�

Raskin said the USRC is not trying to convince state or city officials to adopt the new voluntary rating system, although the city of Los Angeles has adopted a similar one.

The USRC rating systems are not favored by everyone, including attorney and building owner Walter McMonies of Lane Powell PC. He is a member of a Portland volunteer task force on unreinforced masonry buildings, and he attended both of the meetings where the USRC’s Mayes spoke.

鈥淚’m concerned that it’s more punitive than beneficial,鈥� McMonies said of the new rating. 鈥淟EED (rating) is something you wear as a badge of honor and shows that you’ve done something virtuous for the community and occupants.鈥�

McMonies said he has two problems with the proposed USRC ratings: first, that they could be linked to the city permit system, which would impose a burden on building owners; and second, that they seem geared toward new construction, and not toward the plethora of unreinforced masonry buildings.

鈥淢ost unreinforced (masonry) buildings in Portland would get zero stars and, without going to enormous expense, have nothing you could brag about,鈥� he said.

Raskin disagrees with McMonies’ assessment of the rating systems.

鈥淚 don’t think he’s right on either count,鈥� Raskin said.鈥� The first point is that it’s really an attempt to do market-driven solutions, not code solutions. And the benefit cost is different because you can retrofit buildings to higher standards. But for existing buildings, it always costs more.鈥�

Raskin said a question was raised at the AIA meeting whether there should be a separate rating for existing buildings. But he believes 鈥渁 standard should be a standard.鈥�

鈥淪ome (existing buildings) will fail catastrophically, but the new standards will give much more information on cost and repair and time to regain function,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his allows you to determine which buildings you can use.鈥�

Architect Bill Hart of Carleton Hart Architecture was also at the AIA meeting and believes the USRC rating system has benefit.

鈥淚 think it’s a good thing as another rating system,鈥� he said. 鈥淚 think it’s hard to get cities to move beyond the minimum on the building code, and it’s easier to look at another code that looks at it from a different perspective.鈥�

Hart said the USRC rating system would shed light on the safety of Portland’s buildings.

鈥淚t takes it to another level of safety, resiliency and, I think, awareness,鈥� he said. 鈥淚 think the general public would become much more aware of what buildings are safe.鈥�