Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/02/22 Board of Appeals & Advisors Minutes MINUTES OF A RESCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Eê~r~~ry_g?_12ªª____ÇQdfê~êÐ~ê_BQQ~_1._~~~liç_~ê~~i~~~_ª~i12iÐ9_____~~ºº_e~~~ MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Nash, Board Members Winkelman, Reynolds and McArthur MEMBERS ABSENT: Board Members Lee and Lo Cicero (Excused) Chairman Welsh arrived at 5:12 p.m. CITY STAFF PRESENT: Director of Building and Housing Larsen, Chief Building/ Housing Inspector Hansell and Fire Marshal Gove l. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Vice Chairman Nash called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m. and chaired the entire meeting. 2. ROLL CALL: Members present constituted a quorum. 3. INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND HOUSING LARSEN. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MSUC Winkelman/Reynolds (5-0) to approved the minutes of January ll, 1988 with the fOllowing corrections: (ar Page #2 (Case No. l-88 - 740 B Edgewater Drive) - Second Paragraph - The Board recommended that staff investigate the possibility of changing the pool fencing ordinance to "more adequately address the issue of portable spas" (not to exempt portable spas). (b) Page #3 (Case No. 2-88 - 550 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista Center) - Motion - MSC (Nash/McArthur) - The Board asked that the minutes reflect a 3-1 vote rather than a 3-2 vote. Recording Secretary's notation: Three members (Nash, Welsh and McArthur) voted in favor of approving the app1iants request; one member (Winkelman) abstained due to a conflict of interest; one member voted against approval (Reynolds) and one member (Lee) was absent. Thus, the motion failed as a minimum of our affirma- tive votes are required to carry a motion, regardless of the number of members present. 5. NEW BUSINESS: CASE 8-88 - 344 F St. - The Board concurred to discuss this item at this time. The applicant requested a height determination of a proposed building be not over 40 feet in height. Uniform Building Code, Section 507 allows a l-story increase for buildings with an approved sprinkler system as stated by the applicant. Section 508 provides that an approved automatic sprinkler system may be substituted for l-hr. construction where required by the Code. A Type V, l-hr. building, according to Table 5-D, is permitted to be 50 feet in height. However, the height increase may not be taken if the sprinkler system is other- wise required for the items listed under the exceptions. Section 409 defines the height of a building as the maximum height of any protion of the building. the roof appears to be a combination of a mansard and flat roof. BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS MINUTES OF February 22, 1988 Page 2 Measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof would be the distance measured to the top of the coping of the interior wall or parapet. This distance is 43 ft. above finish floor. In the opinion of staff, the building measures 43 feet in height. A Type V, 1-hr. building may be 50 feet high. If the building is being automatic sprinkled to meet another code requirement, the height increase man not be taken. The Board found that the building is in excess of 40 feet in height and therefore must be of type V, l-hr. construction in order to comply with table 5-0 for height. In this case the automatic sprinkler system may not be substituted for l-hr. construction because it is otherwise required in the building as stipulated in Sec. 508, UBC, 1985 Edition. MSUC Winkelman/Reynolds (5-0) to deny applicant's request. CASE NO. 4-88 - 344 F St. Request for approval of Type V, l-hour pedestrial walkway to the parking structure. This request was withdrawn by the architect as he is working with the City Attorney and the Agency to gain permission to support the walkway on the parking structure. No further action required. CASE NO. 5-88 - 344 F St. Request to substitute 2-hour roof assemblys for parapets. Section 1709(a) requires that parapets be provided on all exterior walls of buildings. Exception 2 provides that walls which terminate at roofs of not less than 2-hour fire resistive construction or roofs constructed entirely of non-combustible materials are not required to be provided with parapets. The generally accepted interpretation of the code intent of the above conception is that the entire roof must be either 2-hour construction or non-combustible construction in order to eliminate the necessity of parapets where required on exterior walls. On the basis of this interpretation, staff recommended against approval of this request. The Board found that the architect's proposed roof treatment as shown on Plan Sheet A6 in conjunction with the 1-hr. construction and automatic sprinklers, will provide an acceptable alternative to the parapet requirements of Sec. l709(a). MSUC Welsh/McArthur (5-0) to approve applicant's request. CASE NO. 6-88 - 344 F St. Request for approval of 13-foot curved stairway. Section 3306(i) states that there shall be not more than l2 feet vertically between landings. The curved stairway exceeds this requirement by one riser. At the foot of the stairway an elevator is located for people having difficulty in climbing. There are also 2 other sets of complying stairways available. BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS MINUTES of February 22, 1988 Page 3 Since the stairway exceeds the recommended maximum height by only 1 riser and there are other means of ascent to the same section of the upper floor, the intent of the code appears to have been met. Staff recommends approval of this request. MSC McArthur/Welsh (4-l) to approve applicant's request with Winkelman opposed. CASE NO. 7-88 - 344 F St. Request for approval of existing handicapped to serve a new building in the Town Centre area. At the request of the architect, the Board approved tabling this request until the architect has an opportunity to discuss parking with the Redevelopment Parking Place Committee. MSUC Winkelman/Welsh (5-0) to table this item to next regular meeting. 6. COMMUNICATIONS (PUBLIC REMARKS/WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE) Letter from Board Member Reynolds - Gas Mains ThroughChula Vista Shopping Center. Board Member Reynolds discussed his concerns regarding the gas mains running through the Chu1a Vista Shopping Center. He stated that after reading the letter from Bob Keithly, his concern was of a much lesser degree than it had originally been. "Mr. Robert Keithly from SDG&E explained how the location of the gas mains had worked. How the pipes are mechanically and cathodically protected, and how and why SDG&E approved the proposed installation. They discussed the State P.U.C. and Federal gas pipeline requirements and how these agencies check on the utilities to ensure that their guidelines are being met. Mr. Reynolds and the rest of the Board concluded that they were satisfied that the gas main is a safe installation and will not unduly jeopardize the public. 7. STAFF REPORT - None 8. ADJOURNMENT: Vice Chairman adjourned the meeting to the next regular scheduled meeting for March 14, 1988. J/Ûll i J/t[c.¿rJ/ , Secreta ry PLEASE NOTE: THIS MEETING HAS BEEN TAPED RECORDED. REFER TO TAPE #2-BA-2/22/88. TAPES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE BUILDING & HOUSING DEPT., PBS, 276 4th AVE., CV, CA