Structural engineer may get a crack at evaluating the stability of the old courthouse

The Daily Inter Lake

After years of rumors, concerns and conflicting reports, Flathead County officials might be ready to hire an engineer who can tell them just how safe - or unsafe - the old courthouse really is.

The 105-year-old building houses several county departments and dozens of employees. It's showing its age in a variety of ways, including sagging floors, cracked walls and a leaking roof. Some people who work there worry that it couldn't withstand even a moderate earthquake.

Last week, employees heard "a crack and a thump" from the attic, according to Jed Fisher, Weed, Parks and Building Department supervisor. Upon investigation, it appeared that one of the vertical roof beams may have split; the thump may have been caused by a piece of drywall that fell down.

Commissioners Joe Brenneman and Gary Hall crawled up into the attic Tuesday to look at the problem. No obvious failures were evident, though shallow cracks could be seen in several thick beams. There were buckets of water from the leaking roof, layers of grimy insulation and a few deposits of what Fisher said were bat guano, but nothing that seemed to warrant evacuating the building.

"To me, a vertical crack doesn't constitute a reason to kick everyone out," Fisher told the commissioners.

However, given the age of the courthouse and that it was constructed before modern building codes were in place, Fisher recommended that a professional structural engineer be hired to evaluate the building's structural integrity.

"I'm recommending that we come up with a scope of work and go out to bid for a study," he said. "I was told it would probably cost less than $100,000 and more than $30,000, but I think there's [grant] money available for historical buildings. This is something we need to move forward with."

Two evaluations reached opposite conclusions about how safe the courthouse would be in an earthquake.

A 1999 evaluation, done by the county's insurance carrier, indicated that "the courthouse is an extremely solid building."

"I'm not an earthquake specialist," noted the consultant, "but this building is very stable … This would be as safe a place as anywhere for protection."

A second evaluation in 2004, however, highlighted several potential problems, including the lack of reinforcement in the courthouse's masonry walls, soil conditions that might amplify ground motion during an earthquake, and insufficient "lateral capacity" that would help the building withstand swaying.

"If the design earthquake event should occur, there is the potential for significant damage to and failure of the building," the report concluded.

Neither evaluation included an in-depth analysis or "exploratory demolition" to look behind ceilings or wall finishes. They were basically visual inspections of the exterior walls and interior spaces, together with a construction drawing review.

Fisher recommended that something more detailed be done this time. The commissioners authorized him to move forward with the scope of work, though what actually gets done will depend on the cost of the analysis and the cost of any structural improvements or fixes that the analysis identifies.

Reporter Bill Spence may be reached at 758-4459 or by e-mail at bspence@dailyinterlake.com