NYC is anchored by very solid rock.
Doubt a 5.0 would cause widespread damage.
A lot of the brick buildings might come down. Brick is very vulnerable to earthquake damage.
Its not the new buildings that would fall. Yes, Manhattan is literally screwed into Bedrock. But that doesn’t always mean earthquake-safe. Screwed in also means brittle and brittle is not where you want to be when things start shaking.
The brick and concrete facades falling into the canyons that are the streets of NYC would be horrifying for anyone below.
Look at the damage the little shaker caused Washington DC a few years ago. Since the scale is logarithmic, a 5 would be ten times worse.
My guess is that no one would want to be walking across the Brooklyn Bridge when that hits.
It might be granite, but it’s not solid.
“There are several fault lines in the metro area, including one along Manhattan’s 125th St. - which may have generated two small tremors in 1981 and may have been the source of the major 1737 earthquake, says Armbruster. There’s another fault line on Dyckman St. and one in Dobbs Ferry in nearby Westchester County.”
Doesn’t matter what kind of ‘bedrock’ the buildings are founded in. If the structures are not engineered/built to stand the seismic energy they will come down. Only thing good bedrock does is transmit the seismic force more effectively.