Earthquake retrofit - sanity check
Hey Everyone,
I currently live in a SFH with an in-law unit that I use for rental income. The house is an old victorian, built ~1900 and does not currently have any sill bolts, cripple wall bracing, etc. I was recently selected for the SF Earthquake Brace and Bolt program which gives a grant of $3k to bolt and brace the perimeter of the foundation. I just learned however, that because I have cripple walls taller than 4 ft. my house requires an "engineered solution that meets Chapter A3" to qualify for the grant money. I had an engineer over last week who told me that in order for my retrofit to be code compliant (Chapter A3) we will have to add an additional shear wall under the house, which will be big $$$.
I'm currently working through my options, and was hoping to get some insight from the forum on what my best path forward is.
1) Do nothing and leave the house as is. Based on what I know, I think this is a bad idea.
2) Skip the grant money and just bolt and brace the existing exterior walls. From what I've gathered, hiring a handyman to do this will cost ~ $4k. I've had a few contractors give ball park quotes around $10k
3) Proceed with the code compliant retrofit. $4k for the engineered plans, $700 for the permit, and (according to the engineer) $20-$25k for the work itself. I do get $3k in grant money from the EBB program if I go with this option.
Is it worth an additional $15k to add the shear wall? We plan to live in this house another 3-7 years but will most likely keep it forever as a rental. I am leaning towards option 3 but I want to make sure I'm not crazy before moving forward with this large of an expenditure.
What do other SF investors do with their non-retrofitted structures?