#207 Feb 13, 2014
Why not in Montebello??
Santa Monica targets quake safety
City will become first in the state to identify potentially dangerous concrete buildings and require retrofitting.
Santa Monica will become the first city in California to inspect concrete, steel and wood-frame buildings and require seismic retrofitting for those deemed vulnerable during a major earthquake.
The city will spend more than $100,000 over the next year identifying potentially dangerous buildings, then property owners must show they are safe or fix them. City officials said they would determine over the next few months how much time the owners have to complete the retrofitting.
The survey is expected to cover hundreds of buildings, including steel office towers, older concrete buildings and wood multistory apartment houses that dot the city.
#208 Feb 24, 2014
The Cook-Hill Plan will probably pass the City Council this summer. I think the council has been constructed to get that done.
However, there will then be a Referendum by the people that will stop the project from ever proceeding.
Remember that even if houses are built, part of the site will continue pumping oil. That is even freely admitted by the developer. And Oil and People don't mix.
#209 Feb 25, 2014
The state division of oil and gas is opposed to building on ACTIVE oilfields.
#210 Feb 27, 2014
How many Unreinforced Masonry, stiff heavy concrete, un-reinforced tilt-ups, soft story, tuck under parking
are there in Montebello
#211 Mar 6, 2014
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has called older, poorly reinforced concrete buildings the top threat to human safety in a quake.
The city lags behind San Francisco by at least a decade in tackling two looming dangers: thousands of "soft-story" buildings, which sit atop poorly supported carports and garages - in L.A., mostly condos and apartments, including the famed "dingbats" -
and 1,454 "nonductile" concrete buildings built before 1980,
which lack sufficient steel rebar to meet quake standards.
Berkeley and UCLA researchers believe that, during a big quake, perhaps 75 of the city's 1,454 concrete buildings could collapse and far more could suffer major damage such as cracking and buckling, killing and injuring thousands of people.
At the same time, other scientists say thousands of soft-story buildings, including dingbat apartments housing thousands of residents, could collapse or suffer life-threatening damage.
(Among other things, San Francisco's far-reaching study showed that 85 percent of its vulnerable soft-story buildings, where 65,000 people live and work, could be rendered unlivable by a magnitude-7.2 quake, which could kill or injure thousands.)
The greatest motivator, Smith suggests, might be a widely viewed computer simulation (above) released online by scientists at Stanford (and reported by L.A. Weekly in " 'The Big One' Earthquake Will Hit L.A. Harder Than We Thought"), showing that a 7-magnitude quake on the San Andreas Fault in Palm Springs would funnel intense seismic waves along a 60-mile pathway directly into downtown L.A. The waves would shake most of the city like Jell-O.
"When the city has this [retrofitting] discussion again, all we need to do is show [them] that computer-generated view of the San Andreas quake coming from Palm Springs that scares the crap out of people," Smith says.
Stanford's scientists confirmed a 2006 supercomputer prediction Lucy Jones "Shakeout") that downtown L.A. would suffer three times more ground motion than surrounding areas of the L.A. Basin.
Montebello is in the path...
"The earthquakes [in modern times] have all been farther away," such as the 1994 Northridge and 1971 Sylmar quakes, "and produced relatively modest shaking. So really, those buildings haven't been tested."
A 1999 state law, AB 300, required the state to create a list of all pre-1976 concrete school buildings, but the law doesn't mandate retrofitting.
Check Montebello Jr and Sr High
But no matter how fast the city moves, it will be years before the buildings are partially torn apart and inspected - costly work that merely determines which ones contain insufficient rebar.
#212 Mar 8, 2014
Does anyone know what the strongest earthquake could happen in the Montebello hills? I seem to remember years ago that Cal Tech upgraded its potential, but don't remember the numbers.
Also, wasn't the most movement expected in case of the Big One in the San Gabriel Valley area at the intersection of the 605 and 60 freeways? Isn't that a little close to Montebello?
#213 Mar 9, 2014
Topix ate part one
Much more likely is a "Big One" on the San Andreas
The San Gabriel River Channel from the 210/605 to the 5/605 will be heavily impacted as will be the LA Basin Chanel along the 5 especially affecting South Montebello from the 605 to the 5/60/710 area
Montebello's water supply comes from the hard hit area
There will be over a Minuit of ground shaking at longer periods than the local events. Long period ground motion measured in feet.
Tanks and pipelines are very vulnerable-(see the Montebello Depended on Imported Water topix)
heavy stiff buildings such as Montebello jr and sr high and Montebello fire stations are vulnerable
New hazard data on San Andreas was not available (2005 Terrashake, 2008 Shakeout) when the Beverly Blvd bridge was designed- back then it considered too far away to really worry about whereas now it is the most likely hazard. Roaring rapids river channel, perfect storm reflection (energy hitting the hills!) and basin depth (bowl of jello, bathtub slop) amplification have now been computer modeled)
There could be considerable ground movement/ uplift in the Hills from any of these sources.
The Montebello hills were uplifted by the relatively small 1987 event)
The EIR inadequately looks at short period ground shaking (severely underestimates) and does not consider long period (San Andreas) ground shaking at all.
Fire, especially with a Santa Wind, could be a real problem for Montebello especially an upslope hillside development
The required residential Sprinkler system shown in the EIR is under designed and inadequate with inadequate storage, inadequate pipe flow for more than one fire at a time, and dependent upon electrical power an a water system which will not be available when it is needed most.
EIR does not consider "Montebello Fault" which could be activated by any of the other seismic sources (or all by itself. It runs East-West near the ridgelines- nothing should be built anywhere near (or below) it
It slopes north and appears to intersect with the Whittier Fault.
The EIR does not provide any Seismic imaging or geophysical analysis.
The "Three Monkeys" investigation
#214 Mar 9, 2014
There hasn't been a jr and/or senior high in Montebello since around 1974.
The Montebello and La Merced Intermediate Schools were built a little after the old jr high 1973 quake damaged building was demolished. At the time, these new school buildings were touted as being the most quake resistant in the MUSD. Are they now more vulnerable than other, older schools.
#215 Mar 9, 2014
The EIR referred to in above posts is the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on the proposed Montebello Hills Specific Plan (MHSP) which was released in March 2009. This was during the reign of Mayor Rosie Vasquez and in the time of the city council majority of the "gang of three" (Vasquez, Kathy Salazar and Robert Urteaga). All three supported the proposed project (facts be darned, right?). There was political interference in the preparation of the DEIR resulting in an inadequate and biased evaluation of many of the facets of the proposed project. Guess the would-be developer and the now voted out of office politicians thought that we in Montebello were a bunch of dummies who wouldn't do our homework.
The current danger to the long tem well-being of Montebello comes from the political influence of the Chamber of Commerce and real estate sales community. Their concern is for their members to profit. To heck with the seismic, fire and chemical contamination dangers to the well-being of any future residents of this unwise project proposed to be built on top of an active oilfield.
#216 Mar 9, 2014
The Chamber is also apparently saying to heck with traffic and objectively verifiable financial difficulties this project would cost the city and its residents, as long as its members (who mostly are NOT residents of Montebello) make some kind of profit.
#217 Mar 10, 2014
" Are they now more vulnerable than other, older schools. "
anything built prior to Northridge and Loma Prieta may not be adequate
Even before Whitier Narrows
Now we have the 2005 Terrashake 2008 Shakeout and later work which have even greater impacts for large (tall or long) buildings
Bridges, dams, water systems/ tanks etc
intermediate vs jr and sr high
a distinction without a difference
gimme a break
I'll redo part one when I get a chance
and thanks to whomever sent met the e-mail about this topix
#218 Mar 11, 2014
As there hasn't been a jr and sr high for about 40 years, those who came of age after that probably don't know the distinction or difference.
As not everyone who reads these posts are senior citizens like us, we should make our references understandable to those who are younger, and anyone can get used to a new name that is in common usage in 40 years.
#219 Mar 12, 2014
Wrong. Look up the Signal Hill housing project.
#220 Mar 12, 2014
Wrong. No such project by that name.
#221 Mar 12, 2014
I will post the Google Earth coordinates for the particular project tomorrow. See for yourself.
#222 Mar 12, 2014
I guess that oil and gas agency missed this one. And many more.
#223 Mar 12, 2014
I'm not going to install
Google Earth on my computer just to follow some red herring. If you don't know the name of the development, just say so. It's no great embarrassment to be ignorant of all the facts.
#224 Mar 13, 2014
As I said in another post: Promontory at Signal Hill. Active oil field. Home prices well above $1 million.
#225 Mar 13, 2014
What's the point Red?
Signal Hill uplifted by Newport Inglewood Fault
Montebello has three
Puente Hills Thrust under
Whittier next to
and San Andreas Channeling directly towards
Montebello Hills are growing/ uplifting
Active Anticline/ Synclines
No idea about Signal Hill
Two wrongs do not make a right.
I'm going to e-mail Thelona Ranger and have her re-post to a question in another thread
#226 Mar 13, 2014
Only that there are a few people around here throwing out red herrings. For instance, Long Beach Observer: "Signal Hill knows that three active wells make land unfit for residential development " The Promontory project shows that's not the case. Then there's Reality Check: "The state division of oil and gas is opposed to building on ACTIVE oilfields." The Promontory project - and many others - suggest the state oil and gas division didn't get the memo.
I don't take anyone's word on its face. I research. There are many communities in Southern California on active oil fields. Many of them have existed for years without a problem.
All of southern california sits on a web of faults. So what? Are we supposed to shut down the southern california economy forever because we all live on a bunch of faults? Never build a new house? Should we evict everyone and bulldoze all the houses that do exist for fear of the Big One?
I have lived in Montebello for going on 36 years. The city is dying. We need a transfusion. The hills project is that transfusion.
Add your comments below
|Trump||43 min||Patrick Aei||2|
|election best candidate trupp||45 min||Patrick Aei||2|
|Baldwin Park City Manager Finished||55 min||City hall insider||5|
|Some say it's time California had statewide rul...||1 hr||Le Jimbo||1|
|LMSA Soccer (Feb '10)||5 hr||LM Mom||6,654|
|Helicopter Cruising Banned by Pico City Council||8 hr||Mrs Felkner||2|
|Batman Farts at Awards Luncheon, Turns Red (Jun '15)||9 hr||Halfvagina Earlypoop||7|
Find what you want!
Search Montebello Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC