pages: PlanningBoard/2006-04-24.pdf, 13
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2006-04-24 | 13 | 8-D. Seismic Retrofit Workshop (GM). Voluntary Seismic Retrofit Program with incentives For Existing One to Three Story Residential Structures. Mr. McFann summarized the staff report, and displayed a PowerPoint presentation. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Ken Gutleben noted that he informed City Manager Bill Norton of a project involving the installation of a basement and seismic retrofit of a historic residence in Alameda. He noted that the permit for the project was denied due to AMC 30, regarding offstreet parking section. He noted that the habitable space was to be in the basement, similar to that in Ms. Ezzy Ashcraft's and President Cunningham's homes. This particular lot size did not meet the offstreet parking requirement, and the project was terminated, leaving the home vulnerable to earthquakes. Mr. Norton agreed that this section of the Code should be changed. Mr. Gutleben believed the Planning Board placed design review over safety, and that retrofits should be placed as a high priority. He noted that Alameda's geographical placement and location on sandy soil left Alameda vulnerable to earthquake damage. He urged adoption of this program. Mr. David Baker, 939 Taylor, agreed that seismic retrofits were important but believed that this ordinance was a political gimmick to solve a serious issue. He did not believe that exempting historical structures from design review and exempting parking requirements would solve this problem. He respected Mr. McFann and Mr. Gutleben but did not agree with their support of this program. He believed the relaxation of plumbing and electrical upgrades was unwise. Ms. Kevis Brownson, 1554 Everett Street, noted that she was a member of Alameda Architectural Preservation Society, and thanked Mr. Gutleben for bringing this issue to the City's attention. She supported this program, but objected to exempting homeowners from design review. She believed that design review also protected the historic resources. She disagreed with exempting the front space from the setback limitations, which she believed may result in paved front yards and would be a detriment to Alameda. She agreed with facilitating low interest loans to perform the retrofit. Mr. Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society, agreed with the last two speakers, and had concerns about a design review exemption. He noted that he did not hear Mr. McFann's and Mr. Gutleben's presentations. He noted that a design review was much less expensive than a seismic retrofit. He noted that the past discussion of lifting buildings and the Golden Mean was valuable. He was inclined to discourage exempting design review as an incentive. Mr. Bob Allegrotti believed that a severe earthquake is due, and that when the Hayward Fault is hit, a lot of Alameda would be damaged. He was somewhat concerned about design review, and believed that a fast track rather than exemptions would be more realistic. He believed that guidelines for the historic buildings would be appropriate. He suggested preinspections for habitable space. Mr. Dick Rutter noted that he was an architect and lived in a nonseismically upgraded home built in Planning Board Minutes Page 13 April 24, 2006 | PlanningBoard/2006-04-24.pdf |