HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/27/1971
::,~ ~~.,..
.
.
.';
!'inutes of the Fort A~eles Board of Appeals meetin;t of December 27
~19?1., '
Present: Hunt (Chairman), Sannes, Treat, McHone, Anderson, Dillin,;,
Young and Secretary 'nIlsen.
Absent: ~NOnB
The meetin, was opened at 9:20 P.M. in the Uunicipal Chambers for the
purpose of hearin~ the Appeal of Dr. R.E. Lit t,le.iohn.
The chairnnn read the letter of Dr. Li ttlejqhn requestin;: a variance from
the roofin: re,Ulations of the 1970 UBC a~ pertained to 2nd Fire Zone.
The secretary )Vas then rec:uestcd to prcNi~e back~round information
relative to the apneal.
Briefly, the circumstances had developed since the ap?lication for a
buildin,e permit had been received to construct three new buildin~s at
~e San Juan Apartments. Since the property is located ~n the 2nd Fire
Zone, Sec. 1603 (a) para. 3 pg 91 requires fire res~stive roofin,;
Sec 3203 (e) (4) pa~e 436 requires Class A or B prepared roofin: for
fire resistive roofin~ ~hterial. The table on pa:e. 429 Vol. I UBC
1970 Edition lists the referrals for Class A,B & C comp05iti'~ roofing
in UEe St-ndards as 32-7. This referral, found st;~rtii:t, on paee 'Ti0
of the Buildi~ Code St~ndards, spell10ut the specific requirements for
each Class designation (Flame exposure test, Flame ~p.J~e~test ani Burnin,
brand test).
I
The secretary explained, in the orii:inal buildin~ perrni t application, the
classification-.pf Dr. Ii tllejohns roofing material had not been welled
out by his desilner. Subeequently, an addendum was received which
specified an approved roofin, material. The building permit was duly
issued and construction pro~resserl;~oward the final sta~es. On one
inspection, the building inspector found bundles ofl Class flCH shingles
on the job. Further inquiry det~ned that the same shinlles had been
used for roofin: the structures. Dr. Littlejohn wap notified, by
certified mail, 0 f the deficiency and advi~ed the building could not
be accepted with such roofini' At this point, Dr. Littlejohn had
requested a hearin~ before the Appeals Board. topies of all correspond-
ence, specification addendumsand labels were made ~vailable to the Board.
Chairman Hunt then asked Dr. Li~tlejohnJwho was in 'attendence, to
present his 5j~e of the situation.
Dr. Littlejohn concurred with the secretary's vers~on of the back:round
circumstances. He was further un~~le to explain at what point in the
procurement of ma~erials and awardin, of sub contracts the Class C
roofing was substituted for the Class A specified, or who was responsible
for it. Dr. Littlejohn requested the roofin~ installed be accepted and
allowed to remain.
~ernbers discussed the matter among themselves and questioned Dr.
Littlejohn further.
It was determined that, wi thin the authority granted the Board of Appeal:;}
IIhey fOlil1d no errors in the Inspectors inter'''retation of the buildin~
code requiremenb. Furt,heI7Tlore, Class C prepared ~oofing could not be
t'*- ~ ~
.
....','
~
.
lJinutes-Port hn,eles Planninc Commission-December 27, 1971r pafe 2.
accepted as an alternate bul1din~ material for Clas$ A Prepared roofin:.
It was there~ore voted to deny the Appeal nnd Dr. Littlejorm was
advised the roofing would have to be a conforrr~n, roof material, such
as these specified in the ap~lic:tion for the buildin: permit.
Dr. Littlejohn. then inquired if he could overlay the existing roof
material wi th a Class l1AlI l"oofin~. The question wa$ referred to the
secretary who indicated he had no objections, provid~d the constr.uction
of the sup.~ortin~ elements was sufficient to carry the present 235#11.
materiali plus the 325# Class "A" roofin, specified; and still provide
the required mar:in for live load support of snow and wind. If Dr.
l.ittlejohn's desi:ner would submit verification the structure would
perform satisfactorily under these conditions, the inspector felt
an overlay cQ!.lld be accepted.
The next question posed by Dr. Littlejohn ~as relative to the time
li~it involved. The Planninc ComTassion indicated they could not
eive an open-end time period, or until the present (15-20 yeat) roof
had to be replaced, since this would be tdntarnount to &ivin~ approval
to violate thecode for the next 15-20 gears. The B~ldin: Inspector
indicated he would not expect workman to go on these roofs under the
cu:rrent winter weather conditions, but would exnect'the situation to be
corrected as soon as practicable in the sprin:_ Dr. Littlejohn commented
that II springU ran from March 21 to June 21st and he would avail himse If
of this period of time to accomp]~h the correction.
Members i.nquired about the appeal of MI'. Pete Capos.ret:aTding his
buildin: at 135 West Front Street which was tabled until the ]jth of
January 1972. The secretary reported Mr. Capos had not contacted him
since the meetine of November 8, 1971.
No further business was scheduled and the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M.
~~~~
H. Hunt, Chair .
'. .
... ~
c 1