HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-12-13 City CouncilCity of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
DECEMBER 13, 2004
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
CMR: 482:04
1
SUBJECT: UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS (URM)
This is an informational report and no Council action is required.
BACKGROUND
In January 1986, Palo Alto adopted the Seismic Hazard Identification Program (PAMC Chapter
16.42). The process of drafting an ordinance began in 1981 in response to the 1976
Comprehensive Plan Seismic Safety Element. The original staff proposal was a mandatory
retrofit ordinance following the examples adopted in the cities of Los Angeles, Long Beach and
Santa Rosa. At a Council meeting in April 1982, the staff proposal was rejected and staff was
directed to "establish a citizens’ committee to recommend an economical, practical, and cost-
effective method of reducing seismic hazards in Palo Alto:"
The citizens’ committee included representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of
Realtors, Downtown Merchants Association, California Avenue Association, Planning
Commission, Architectural Review Board, Historic Resources Board, Structural Engineers and
an Architect. Over a fifteen-lnonth period the committee developed the policies to be included in
an ordinance to be presented to the Council Policies and Procedures Committee followed by the
full Council. The Committee also identified the negative impacts of a retrofit ordinance and
developed a laundry list of potential mitigation measures.
Based on the connnittees’ recommendations the 1986 Ordinance contained the following basic
elements:
c~ Three categories of buildings are contained in the scope of the ordinance
1.Category I - Unreinforced masonry buildings greater than 1600 square feet in
area.
: 2. Category II - Buildings constructed prior to January 1, 1935 containing one
hundred or more occupants.
CMR: 482:04 Page 1 of 3
3.Category III- Buildings constructed prior to August !, 1976 containing three
hundred or more occupants.
The ordinance requires a mandatory structural analysis of the building within a specified
time line.
[]Decision to retrofit is voluntary on the part of the owner.
[]Unreinforced masonry building is defined as buildings containing walls constructed
wholly or partially of unreinforced masonry.
DISCUSSION
It is widely known that unreinforced masonry buildings are potentially the most dangerous
building type in the event of a moderate to significant earthquake. While retrofitting may not
prevent damage, it will reduce the potential for collapse. ’This is especially true in unreinforced
bearing wall brick buildings.
At the tilne Palo Alto’s ordinance was enacted there were 46 unreinforced masonry buildings
identified. All but 3 are located in the University Avenue downtown area. All building owners
were notified and were given an eighteen-month time period to submit their engineering analysis
as required by the ordinance. All reports were received, reviewed for compliance with the
ordinance and accepted. The following table summarizes the actions that have taken place as of
November 2004:
Action Number .Percent
Retrofitted 20 43
Demolished 10 22
URM removed 2 4
Vacated 1 2
Exempt 1 2
No action 12 26
Total 46 100
An incentive to encourage retrofitting was added to the zoning ordinance in 1987. This
amendment allows a square footage increase of 2,500 square feet or. 25% of the existing square
footage, which ever is greater, following a seismic retrofit. This additional square footage can be
added on site or sold to a receiver site (TDR program). To date, eight properties have taken
advantage of this incentive.
CMR: 482:04 Page 2 of 3
PREPARED BY:
FRED
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW
//~FTEVE ’,LIEDirector of Planning and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR: 482:04 Page 3 of 3