First there was an article in the PI about a month ago that detailed the latest research into what areas of Seattle are at greater risk of damage in an earthquake. They generated this lovely map:
And of course that map is lovely since you'll see that good old Columbia City and points east to Seward Park are all at "Low" risk (well, "Low" relative to the rest of the city. Presumably "High" when compared to the earthquake risk in someplace like Kansas City).
Now, there's a new article over at Crosscut that asks geologists the $1000 dollar a month question - insurance, or not? Interestingly enough, most of the answers are "no". But then again, most of the people asked also chose their house specifically to avoid dangerous areas such as slopes and the duwamish valley.
The Admiral and I have earthquake insurance (even with the 10% deductible). Perhaps we should reconsider this, especially given that we're in the excellent "Low" portion of the city. Do any of you have earthquake insurance?
2 comments:
We moved here to Lakewood in 2003 and bought earthquake insurance after I found a map that showed we were in a liquifaction zone (near the old Genesee Slough) But with this new map, we are rethinking the insurance, too. Of course, I'm spooked by Murphy's law...
Our earthquake insurance is around $900, which is pretty cheap for peace of mind.
Post a Comment