Re: Alquist Priolo Occupancy[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Re: Alquist Priolo Occupancy
- From: BCainse(--nospam--at)aol.com
- Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:21:45 EDT
Under the Alquist-Priolo Act and the policies of the State Geology Board, the cities and counties have primary responsibility for implementing the zoning regulations and they can be more stringent than state law. You should contact the local building department or planning agency where the project is located to determine their requirements.
Steve Grodin makes some good points on the moral arguments against creating such a ramp in his email responding to your query. The policies developed under the law suggest that cities or counties can be liable for death and injury from earthquakes if they don't carry out there responsibilities under the law. I'm sure a smart lawyer could extend that reasoning to the Engineer without much effort.
The Cities of Oakland and Berkeley have had exemptions written into the law exempting properties damaged by the 1991 Firestorm even though they may be in the fault zone.
Note also that the zone is defined as within 50 feet of an active trace so you really have a 100 foot wide zone, centered on the fault restricted from buildings for human occupancy. If there are multiple traces, which are not uncommon on the Hayward Fault in the S.F. Bay Area, the zone can be even wider.
Bill Cain, S.E.
In a message dated 6/22/2005 2:52:01 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net writes:
- Prev by Subject: Re: Alquist Priolo Occupancy
- Next by Subject: RE: Alquist Priolo Occupancy
- Previous by thread: RE: Alquist Priolo Occupancy
- Next by thread: Re: Alquist Priolo Occupancy