mark handler
SAWHORSE
Leave building code alone
In a recent column, Michael Fitzgerald wrote about the inadequacy of a proposed change in the building code on single-family residences in Stockton.
The Climate Action Plan, which addresses this change, is part of a legal settlement with the Sierra Club as well as the State Attorney General whereby the city agreed to consider green policies in its updated General Plan.
If approved as proposed, Stockton would be in the top 25 percent of cities in California with the strictest residential environmental building requirements.
The proposal impacts not only new homes but remodels exceeding $20,000. It is estimated that these new standards could add $2,000 to $5,000 in additional costs to a home remodel. The potential result of the changes would be to discourage neighborhood revitalization and encourage urban sprawl, exactly what the settlement was trying to discourage!
The current California Energy Building codes already places energy and greenhouse gas reduction costs on new and existing houses. That code is slated to become ever more restrictive in subsequent years.
I have to ask, considering the economic hardship our community has endured and the planned zero impact of the California Energy Building Code in less than 10 years that will be prescriptive: does it really make sense to require our citizens to be the poster child for the most energy efficient home in the state just because they wanted to remodel their kitchen?
The proposed requirements are to be presented to our city council for their action on Tuesday. The settlement agreement allows the council to accept or deny the proposal in whole or in part. If you own your own home or hope to in the future, I would urge you to contact your council member. Let's not change the direction of Stockton's economic and real estate recovery. Ask them to reject any provision in the proposed Climate Action Plan that applies to existing homes.
Jim Hanley
Stockton
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20131215/A_OPINION02/312150305/-1/A_OPINION
In a recent column, Michael Fitzgerald wrote about the inadequacy of a proposed change in the building code on single-family residences in Stockton.
The Climate Action Plan, which addresses this change, is part of a legal settlement with the Sierra Club as well as the State Attorney General whereby the city agreed to consider green policies in its updated General Plan.
If approved as proposed, Stockton would be in the top 25 percent of cities in California with the strictest residential environmental building requirements.
The proposal impacts not only new homes but remodels exceeding $20,000. It is estimated that these new standards could add $2,000 to $5,000 in additional costs to a home remodel. The potential result of the changes would be to discourage neighborhood revitalization and encourage urban sprawl, exactly what the settlement was trying to discourage!
The current California Energy Building codes already places energy and greenhouse gas reduction costs on new and existing houses. That code is slated to become ever more restrictive in subsequent years.
I have to ask, considering the economic hardship our community has endured and the planned zero impact of the California Energy Building Code in less than 10 years that will be prescriptive: does it really make sense to require our citizens to be the poster child for the most energy efficient home in the state just because they wanted to remodel their kitchen?
The proposed requirements are to be presented to our city council for their action on Tuesday. The settlement agreement allows the council to accept or deny the proposal in whole or in part. If you own your own home or hope to in the future, I would urge you to contact your council member. Let's not change the direction of Stockton's economic and real estate recovery. Ask them to reject any provision in the proposed Climate Action Plan that applies to existing homes.
Jim Hanley
Stockton
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20131215/A_OPINION02/312150305/-1/A_OPINION
