The commentary presented in “Office Towers Already Solid as Can Be” (Sept. 17) misses the point save for one. Mr. Youssef’s comment that “there is no reasonable or financially feasible way to defend every building from this type of event” is the appropriate starting point. Following up on Mr. Youssef’s comment, the solution is not to be found in the design of high rise buildings, but rather in the strategy used to fight fires in high rises.
After 1973, the strategy has been consistent: design a structural system to withstand a fire of a given intensity for a certain length of time; install sprinklers to attempt to put the fire out at its inception or localize its impact until firefighters can access it and, utilizing built-in firefighting systems, put it out.
Clearly the systems in today’s high rises were not designed to fight the intense heat generated by a planeload of aviation fuel. One system that might work would be the foam system employed at local airports. A question that your reporter might ask would be: if it were not feasible to retrofit several transport helicopters with water cannons in the noses and tanks of foam attached to their bellies. My hunch is that a couple of airborne “foam tankers” could possibly have put out the fire which ultimately weakened the steel to the point of collapse.
Clifton P. Allen
President, Meyer & Allen
Associates Architects
Los Angeles
Shaken by Image
Your article regarding the recent reprieve on Seismic upgrade deadlines for hospitals (Sept. 3) was upsetting especially the picture which accompanied the article showing the newly built Olive View Medical Center after the Feb. 9, 1971 Sylmar earthquake.
Amazingly, the picture shows the building collapsed even though it was built to earthquake standards at the time. If that can happen to a newly built hospital, you can imagine what will happen to our aging hospitals during an earthquake, particularly now that they can wait another five years or more to renovate their facilities to current standards.
The number of buildings on your ratings chart that were built or under pre-1973 construction codes is significant. It has now been 30 years since the Sylmar quake and many of these buildings still pose a risk of collapse. What are our lawmakers thinking? When the next quake hits, I’m sure they wouldn’t want to be in one of the 339 buildings that pose a risk of collapse but have been allowed to remain open.
Pauline E. Schiff
Sylmar
Ending Homelessness
I must take exception to the views expressed by the new head of the Union Rescue Mission in your Aug. 20th interview. Shelter Partnership, which provides leadership to community based organizations and local governments and has secured more than $80 million in product donations for homeless agencies, strongly believes that ending homelessness is well within our community and our nation’s grasp.
Firstly, we must plan for outcomes for ending homelessness, not merely managing it. New national data has shown that most communities could help homeless people more effectively by changing the mix of assistance they provide. Secondly, people who become homeless are almost always clients of public mental health, welfare, veterans and foster care systems. We must put an end to the practice of discharging people with nowhere to go. Thirdly, while most people who become homeless enter and exit homelessness relatively quickly, there is a smaller group of people who are chronically homeless and chronically ill and virtually live in the shelter system. For these individuals we need to provide permanent, affordable housing with supportive services on-site.
Finally, we need to build the infrastructure for the very poor by increasing the supply of affordable housing, incomes and services so that they can be self-sufficient.
Ruth Schwartz
Executive Director, Shelter Partnership Inc.
Los Angeles
Protecting Victims
Jane Bryant Quinn (Aug. 13) asserts that ‘No-Fault’ divorce is wrong because in spousal homicide cases, the divorce court does not disgorge the killer’s interest in the community property.
In homicide cases, California’s Probate Code protects the victim’s portion of the community. The victim’s family will likely follow the DA’s criminal prosecution with a civil suit, thus exposing the murderer’s portion of the community to a judgment. Therefore, we need not change our ‘No-Fault’ system in order to disgorge the murderer.
One of the advantages of the ‘No-Fault’ system is that it makes it easier for victims to flee from abusive relationships. Under our existing system, we retain this important benefit and we can still disgorge murderers from their properties.
Armando Paz
Los Angeles
