Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/11/13 Board of Appeals & Advisors Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 13, 1995 Conference Room No. 1 5:15 p.m. ... Session was not audio recorded due to technical difficulties ... MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Triplette, Vice-Chair Gingerich, Board Members Compton, Harter and Puzon MEMBERS ABSENT: Board Members Coleman and Fabrick CITY STAFF PRESENT: Director of Building & Housing Larsen, Assistant Director of Building & Housing Remp, and Administrative Secretary Uybungco CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Chairman Triplette called the meeting to order at 5: 16 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members present constituted a quorum. 1. DECLARATION OF EXCUSED/UNEXCUSED ABSENTEEISM: A) MSC Gingerich/Compton (5-0-2) (Coleman and Fabrick absent) to excuse the absence of Board Member Fabrick (Staff received notification from Board Member Fabrick requesting an unexcused absence due to health reasons.) B) Chairman Triplette decided to table the motion for Board Member Coleman's absence until the next meeting in order to allow Mr. Coleman an opportunity to present his reason for absence. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MSC Gingerich/Compton (5-0-2) (Coleman and Fabrick absent) to approve the minutes of October 9, 1995. Board of Appeals & Advisors -2- November 13, 1995 3. NEW BUSINESS: A. Approval for Use of Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride (CPVC) Piping Chairman Triplette open the item for discussion. Director Larsen introduced Assistant Director Remp and referred the item to Mr. Remp for presentation of the staff report. Assistant Director Remp summarized the staff report and informed the Board that formal adoption action must be taken prior to January 1, 1996 as required by AB-151 (Baca). Assistant Director Remp welcomed questions from the Board. Board Member Compton asked whether the original product was manufactured poorly or if it only occurred during a certain period of manufacturing time. Assistant Director Remp clarified that the product Board Member Compton was questioning was polybutylene plastic pipes and was not CPVC piping. CPVC is manufactured differently from that of PB piping. Dana S. Levy, Business Representative of Piping Industry Progress & Education (P.I.P.E.) presented opposition to approval for the use of CPVC. Mr. Levy informed the Board that the ability for jurisdictions to use alternate materials is currently contained within the California Plumbing Code. Mr. Levy pointed out that the Environmental Impact Report for the use of plastic piping for potable water systems has not been finalized. Mr. Levy stated that he felt the emergency legislation was an attempt to bypass the California Building Commission's process and cautioned the Board to not make an expedient decision. Vice-Chair Gingerich inquired whether CPVC was discussed at the San Diego Area Chapter, ICBO meeting. Director Larsen replied that the Chapter's subcommittee has elected to take a "no position" on the use and application of CPVC. The item was scheduled for another discussion at the meeting of November 14, 1995. Vice-Chair Gingerich informed the Board that he was aware of six homes within Chula Vista which were built with CPVC approximately 20 years ago. Vice-Chair Gingerich visited two of the homes and spoke with the property owners and was informed that the property owners have not experienced Board of Appeals & Advisors -3- November 13, 1995 any leakage or failure from the product. Vice-Chair Gingerich further stated that he felt the approval for use of the product had been delayed too long and that CPVC was a good product for the use intended. Chairman Triplette questioned whether the product had been used in other jurisdictions in California. Assistant Director Remp stated that the City of Colton, City of Lancaster and several other jurisdictions have continued to use the product which was approved prior to 1979. Chairman Triplette requested clarification of Mr. Levy's statement that the EIR had not been complete. The literature cited that the EIR had been challenged in court. Mr. Levy clarified that the entire EIR process had not been completed because it had not received final approval. Director Larsen further clarified that the EIR had been completed, but was challenged and has not been resubmitted for reconsideration. Mr. Levy stated that CPVC used inside the structure have different precautions than when it is installed outside. Assistant Director Remp informed the Board that additional safety requirements for both copper and CPVC pipes have been increased. Board Member Compton questioned why the product was approved for 49 other states, but not in California. Board Member Harter commented that the information provided by staff was very one sided, presented from the CPVC manufacturer's perspective. Board Member Harter further stated that he had personal experience in using CPVC for industrial applications for non-potable water. He believed that the product was difficult for inspectors to ascertain proper installation and creates solvents which are highly explosive. He stated that he did not see the need to adopt the product on an emergency basis and would prefer to see it go through the proper course for approval through the State. Vice-Chair Gingerich pointed out that he was aware of a hospital plumbed with plastic pipes and also the six homes in Chula Vista with successful applications of CPVC should be noted. Board of Appeals & Advisors -4- November 13, 1995 Board Member Compton stated that he was uncomfortable with the ten year Environmental Impact Report review process. MSC Compton/Gingerich (4-1-2) (Harter opposed) (Coleman and Fabrick absent) to approve the use of CPVC In accordance with the list of conditions as set forth in the staff report. 4. CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS/REPORT: None 5. DI RECTOR'S COMMENTS/REPORT: A. Director Larsen informed the Board that he had received a call from Ms. Vanderford (Karen Condominium Homeowners Association) regarding the window replacement project as discussed at the October 9, 1995 meeting. Director Larsen referred Ms. Vanderford to the Community Development Department for possible assistance for funding the project. A representative of the Community Development Department informed Ms. Vanderford that she may appeal the decision of the Board of Appeals & Advisors to the City Council. Director Larsen has contacted the staff member who made the statement and advised the staff member that decisions of the Board of Appeals & Advisors are final and may only be appealed to the magistrate. Director Larsen informed Chairman Triplette that Ms. Vanderford may be contacting him. Chairman Triplette will need to ascertain whether there may be items to be re-evaluated at his discretion to reopen the Appeal Hearing. B. Director Larsen presented the Department's financial picture for the month of October. The Department has seen a slight downturn in residential activity. The marketplace dictated some restructuring of product types. The current best selling properties are homes within the $180,000-$200,000 range. Homes in the low $200,000's and up are difficult to sell; however, homes in the $400,000's, while fewer on the market, appear to still be selling. C. The Process 2000 Report will be presented at the December or January meeting. Board of Appeals & Advisors -5- November 13, 1995 6. COMMUNICATIONS (PUBLIC REMARKS/WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE): A. Board Member Compton stated that he had seen a City vehicle pulling a trailer with graffiti removal materials within the City and inquired as to the use of the trailer. Director Larsen advised the Board that the trailer is available for use, free of charge, to any interested group in the community. B. Vice-Chair Gingerich wanted to state for the record that he had made inspections at 1948 Bucknell Street and 890 Stanford Avenue in preparation for discussion of Item 3A. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Triplette adjourned the meeting at 6:13 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for December 11, 1995. ~-W6 ~-- K NN TH G. LARSEN, C.B.O. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND HOUSING SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS " 'J +if~ -Á' 1'<-,-,,'1 C-L YEELlN UYBuN'GCO ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND HOUSING COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who require special accommodation to access, attend and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodation at least forty-eight (48) hours in advance for meetings and five (5) days for scheduled schedules and activities. Please contact Yeelin Uybungco, Administrative Secretary, for specific information at (619) 691-5007 or Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TOO) at (619) 585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing Impaired. /yu (B:\WP51\1113QSM) MEMORANDUM DATE: November 8, 1995 TO: Chairman Triplette and Members of the Board of Appeals and Advisors FROM: Kenneth G. Larsen, CoB.O., Director of Building and Housin~¡"'KGt-- Secretary to the Board of Appeals and Advisors SUBJECT: Staff Report. Chlorinated POlyvinyl Chloride (CPVC) Water Pipe ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Recommendation: Recommend the Board approve the use of Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride (hereafter referred to as CPVC) water pipe for Installation within buildings in the City of Chula Vista based on compliance with the following conditions: 1. Installation shall comply with all manufacturer's recommendations; and, 2. Installation shall comply with the I994 Edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code; and, 3. Installation shall comply with the specinc requirements contained in State Assembly Bill No. 151 (Baca); and, 4. Installation shall comply with the appropriate sections of the 1994 Uniform Building Code; and, 5. Authorization for new installations shall expire on January 1, 1998 as specined in AB I51. Introduction: The State of California recently approved Assembly Bill 151 (Baca) which repealed the existing restriction on the use of CPVe. As one of the conditions for authorizing use of CPVC, the Bill requires jurisdictions to take formal action to approve its use prior to January 1, 1996. Therefore, the Department is recommending the Board review and approve the use of this material within the City of Chula Vista subject to the conditions Identined above. Staff has reviewed the Information available on the subject and feels it warrants approval for use. Much of that information is contained in the attached manufacturer's brochure. In making a decision to support use of this product, considerable weight was given to both 1 the product's physical characteristics and it's affordability. CPVC water pipe conforms to all applicable ASTM standards, is approved by all the national codes, Is tested regularly and Is certified by the National Sanitation Foundation for water purity. In addition, studies have shown that CPVC pipe is on the average 20% to 43% less costly to Install than copper pipe. Staff believes the product will provide both good performance and meet the City's desire to be a leader in finding ways to enhance the affordability of new homes in the community. CPVC was originally approved for use within the City of Chula Vista when the 1979 Edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code was adopted. It's use continued to be authorized until the State of California amended the Code when it adopted the 1985 Edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code. While the Uniform Plumbing Code (published by the International Conference of Building Officials and used in approximately 2/3 of the United States) continued to authorize use of CP\'C, the State of California's adoption of the UPC included an amendment forbidding the use of CVPC pending publication and adoption of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR was intended to address potential dangers to public health and/or the environment that might arise from use of CPVC. The 1991 and 1994 Editions of the California State Plumbing Code also prohibited the use of CPVC water pipe pending final adoption of the EI R. This EIR has been published but it's final adoption has been challenged in court. Assembly Bill No. 151 (Baca) (Attachment # I) and the letter signed by Governor Wilson on October 12, 1995 (Attachment # 2) establish the Legislature and Governor's reasons for approving the product at this time and sets forth the specific conditions that must be met to authorize use. The Legislature depended heavily on the experience gained by the City of Colton's Department of Community Development. Confronted with widespread deterioration of copper piping systems due to the vel)' corrosive nature of the soils in a tract in the western part of that city and acting pursuant to a good-faith belief that CPVC piping was in compliance with state regulations, the City of Colton approved the use as an alternative to copper piping In 1993. Starrs contacts with representatives of the City or Colton have revealed that installation in both new single family dwellings and the retrofitting of existing homes has proven vel)' successful. As a result of this Bill, the City of Santa Ana, Madera County and San Joaquin County have already approved the use of CPVC pipe and other jurisdictions In San Diego County are currently considering such approval. BWRlbwr (c:lwpS 1 I"dlll i I1lcpvcboll) ATIACHMENTS: 1. Chapter 785 of the 1995 Statutes, Assembly Bill No. I51 (Baca) 2. Governor Wilson's letter approving Assembly Bill No. 151 (Baca) 3. Various Brochures on the use of CPVC Water Pipe 2