Orange County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
• Agency Response
Response to:
Wood Roofs Are Dangerous 02/10/03, 90K
City of Laguna Woods Bert Hack Mayor May 9, 2003 Bob Ring Mayor Pro Tem Brenda E. Ross Frederick P. Horn Councilmember*
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
Page 1
There is a lack of uniformity in local building codes involving roofs for identical environmental conditions within Orange County. Response: Based on the information provided within the report there would seem to be significant variation in roofing standards from city to city. The City has not performed an analysis of the roofing requirements for other cities in Orange County, nor is City staff familiar with the specific environmental conditions and microclimates that might impact roofing material codes from city to city. Therefore the City would not deny that there seems to be a lack of uniformity in local roofing codes; however the assumption that environmental conditions within Orange County are identical may be too broad.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Page 1
The testing and qualification standards of wood shakes and shingles are below the environmental conditions of Orange County. Response: The City of Laguna Woods has not undertaken a study or tested the specific performance standards of treated wood shakes and shingles. Wood shakes or shingles have not been proposed for use in the City of Laguna Woods; therefore, there has been no need for City staff to assess the effectiveness of those materials. Based on the report provided by the Grand Jury, it would appear that the statement by the Grand Jury is correct. 24264 El Toro Road • Laguna Woods, CA 92653 • Phone (949) 639-0500 • Fax (949) 639-0591 • Website: www.lagunawoodscity.org - - - .... City of Laguna Woods
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Page 1
The cities' and County's roofing codes do not adequately take into account the climate, particularly the Santa Ana winds, and topographical conditions unique to Orange County. Response: The finding is perhaps too broad in its assertion. The initial report and the first Grand Jury finding indicate that there are inconsistencies in roofing code standards among cities. This could suggest that many cities' roofing standards may not adequately address environmental conditions within Orange County, but perhaps many do. The City of Laguna Woods' Code included a provision for Special Fire Protection District as determined by the Fire Chief, and the requirements are for the installation of Class A roof coverings for all new structures and Class A roof coverings for re-roofing of ten (10.) % or more of the total roof area. These standards exceed the recommendations of the Grand Jury and do take into account environmental conditions.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Page 1
Fire conflagrations stress finite fire fighting resources especially during the period of Santa Ana Winds. Response: The City contracts with Orange County Fire Authority for emergency and fire fighting response and, therefore, is not able to directly comment on the commitment of fire fighting resources during a fire event. The statement seems correct and reflects a common sense understanding of the draw on fire resources during a fire event. The statement is supported by the increased alert status and preventative deployment of equipment during periods of Santa Ana Winds. Furthermore, the provision for the creation of a Special Fire Protection District, as determined by the Fire Chief, and included within the City Code, reflects an effort to reduce the demand on fire resources and supports the Grand Jury finding.
No recommendations for this finding
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.