Publication Date: Wednesday, April 14, 2004
Council approves flood zone regulations
Council approves flood zone regulations
(April 14, 2004) Some property owners concerned changes will be costly
by Bill D'Agostino
A split Palo Alto City Council approved new regulations for buildings in the city's vast floodplain on Monday night, despite concerns such rules would increase costs for repairs and decrease property values.
The new regulations are designed to minimize damage from flooding and keep insurance rates low.
"Safety is our No. 1 issue," Councilwoman Yoriko Kishimoto said.
The new regulations effect the 4,000-plus homes and businesses subject to flooding in Palo Alto -- because they are either located near a volatile creek or the San Francisco Bay.
The city historically regulates building codes in regards to flooding in turn allowing property owners to participate in a federally-backed program that underwrites flood insurance. The Federal Emergency Management Agency administers that program.
Under prior regulations, property owners were required to raise the height of their buildings if they applied to make substantial improvements. The most controversial regulation the Council considered Monday night defined exactly when such a rebuild would be triggered.
When proposed improvements to buildings are deemed at 50 percent or more of the building's market rate value, the building must comply with more stringent regulations, and often has to be razed in addition to having its height raised.
At issue Monday night was the definition of a building's "market rate."
The city staff, prompted by a FEMA audit from 2000, recommended that the Council include a definition for that term. Prior to Monday night, a definition was not included in the city's code.
The Council, in a 5-3 vote, defined that term as the cost to replace the building, with some dollar amount subtracted for its age and condition.
Some commercial property owners warned that definition was too strict, and would force property owners to rebuild even when applying to make only minor repairs.
"One way to keep insurance costs down is to force people upgrading their properties to minimize their risk," Mayor Bern Beecham said, defending the new regulations. "That always works to the detriment of the person who, at any one point, wants to do the upgrading."
There was a considerable risk for not approving the changes since it could jeopardize the city's good standing with FEMA, Public Works Director Glenn Roberts told the council.
Currently, city property owners receive a 15 percent savings on flood insurance because the city's regulations go beyond what's required by the federal government.
Councilwomen LaDoris Cordell and Hillary Freeman wanted to vote after better understanding how the changes might affect some property owners. The city's Public Works staff insisted the alteration would be negligible.
Councilman Jack Morton also voted against the proposal, feeling the definition of market value had "no basis in reality," and would unnecessarily trigger mandated changes.
Morton asked the Council to consider a definition of market value that wasn't based on a building's age or condition.
The Council's conversation turned tense when Morton queried the FEMA representative who attended the meeting. At one point, Councilwoman Dena Mossar accused Morton of questioning the FEMA representative in a "really hostile" manner.
Other regulations the Council approved prohibit residential basements from being built in the floodplain, and will give exemptions to properties on the city's list of historic buildings.
Bill D'Agostino can be e-mailed at bdagostino@paweekly.com
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
