Athletic Center Lawsuits
Judge: Earthquake Zoning Act Applies to Athletic Center

A judge ruled Monday that the proposed construction near Memorial Stadium is subject to a law that governs construction near fault lines, a move opponents of the plan are calling a partial victory.

In a court order, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Barbara Miller ruled that the proposed construction of a $125 million athletic center is subject to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972.

The act prohibits alterations and additions to most buildings near active fault lines if the work exceeds half of the existing building’s value.

Stephen Volker, an attorney for the California Oak Foundation, one of the three plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said the order issued by the judge was a sign that the plaintiffs were going to win the case.

“We effectively won through the ruling,” he said.

The campus failed to adequately consider if the proposed construction was subject to the act or determine the value of the stadium, according to the order.

However, Miller said she was unable to determine if the center was an addition or a separate structure and requested that both sides submit expert testimony by Dec. 31.

“The court is not in a position to assess the quality of this evidence without the aid of expert opinion,” states Miller’s court order, referring to architectural plans submitted as evidence.

Plaintiffs say the proposed center is an alteration to the stadium which sits on the Hayward Fault and therefore is in violation of the act.

But if it is a separate structure, as campus officials claim, the act would not apply because the proposed center would be located more than 50 feet away from the fault.

Campus officials said they were not concerned with the judge’s request because expert testimony would only make their case stronger.

“As far as we are concerned we welcome the opportunity to submit expert evidence,” said Dan Mogulof, the campus’s executive director of public affairs.

While a final ruling is now expected by Feb. 6, Volker said he would likely request more time to submit the expert evidence because of the holidays.

Three parties, including the city of Berkeley, filed separate lawsuits objecting to the proposed construction a little over a year ago. A seven-day hearing was held in September and October.