Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03051992 BSC Minutes. ,~ . • BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1992 3800 UNIVERSITY BLVD. HOUSTON, TX 77005 6:30 P.M. The Building and Standards Commission convened in the Municipal Building, 3800 University Boulevard, in the City of West University Place, on March 5, 1992, for a Regular Session with the following members present: Nicholas Ashliman, Chairman, Dale Reid, Susan Freeman, Jeann Howse and Carolyn Hodgins. Ed Beasley, Building Official and Susan Thorn, Building Secretary were present from the City. HEARING OF RESIDENTS: None present CONSIDERATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3713 PLUMB: The owner of the property, G. Alan Rafte was not present. He was represented by Robert Machill and Leland Harris with Jonathan • Marshall Homes, Builder. The request was for a variance on the interior stair width which it between 35 inches and 35.5 inches rather than 36 inches specified as the minimum stair width in the Building Code. Robert Machill and Leland Harris explained that stairs were dimensioned 3' 4", however when sheetrock, wood trim and handrails were installed the stairway was 1" too narrow. If sheetrock were removed and replaced with 1/4" sheetrock the problem could be corrected, but the baseboard would have to taken off. Leland Harris explained that when the problem was discovered, it was brought to the attention of the Building Official immediately. Ed Beasley, Building Official explained that in 1112.6 of the Southern Standard Building Code that "Stairs serving as required means of egress shall be clear of all obstructions except that handrails attached to walls may project not more than 3 1/2 inches at each side within the required width" and 1112.62 states that "width of stairs shall not decrease in the direction of exit travel". Mr. Beasley explained that the stairway would be too narrow after handrails are installed and that another problem with the stairs is that they decrease in the direction of exit travel. He also explained that on the plans the dimensions were measured from the interior wall to and exterior wall and that this is not a normal procedure. ~ • Robert Machill explained that the error was discovered after the sheetrock was installed and that it would be too costly to correct. Different sheetrock could be used, but the stairs would still be too narrow at the bottom portion and they would have to start carving on the wood in order to increase the width. Nick Ashliman explained that the three primary requirements to be met in issuing a variance as as follows: 1) Applicant has made earnest good faith effort to comply with requirement. 2) Applicant brought matter to attention of City. 3) Alternative method or procedure will achieve same or substantially the same result. Nick Ashliman stated that he felt that the applicant had met these three requirements. Also to be considered are the following: 1) Whether the imposition of requirement cause exceptional hardship. • 2) No reasonable or feasible method or procedure currently available. 3) Alternative procedure has been considered and a reasonable or or feasible solution has been not been accomplished. 4) Would not increase or pose any threat to the safety of the occupants. Dale Reid made motion, seconded by Jeann Howse to grant variance on the basis that the matter had been brought to the attention of the Board, that good faith effort had been made to comply with the code and that to bring stairway into compliance would pose a financial hardship. All voting aye. Voting No: None • u CON5IDERATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4217 RUSKIN: Rod Kellums and Hope Northrup, owners explained that they are requesting a variance to not have a sidewalk, as many houses on their street and in Colonial Terrace do not have sidewalks. There are trees on the side facing west that would interfere putting in a sidewalk. They spent over $2200.00 attempting to protect trees on their property. Two houses at one end have sidewalks (west ) and 2 at east end. Adjoining property on east side has no sidewalk. The owners wish to a least wait until after the time the sewer line is installed by the City in the front so that the sidewalk will not have to be torn up. Mr. Beasley felt that this did not meet criteria to not have sidewalk. The sidewalk can be allowed to curve around trees. When the new sewer line is installed only one joint of the sidewalk be affected. It would be three to five years before sewerline will be put in. A tree company recently designed a sidewalk to go around trees at another address. Nick Ashliman explained that this does not meet criteria in recently proposed sidewalk ordinance. • Carolyn Hodgins made motion to decline request as this does not meet any requirements i.e. hardship. However, they would be allowed to have the sidewalk end at the driveway to avoid the trees. Motion seconded by Dale Reid. Voting Aye. Voting No: None DISCUSSION OF FOUNDATION REPAIR: Ed Beasley explained that he had spoken to Mr. Menville about the proposed changes. Some of the proposed changes would be to require the foundations to be designed, approved and inspected by a structural engineer. The permit would based on estimated cost. A soils report would be required for a 2-story structure, but for foundation repair it would not be required. A soils reports runs approximately $350.00 for one or two test holes. After some discussion by Mr. Beasley and the Board Members, revisions were made to the wording of the proposed changes. A revised copy is included with these minutes. Ed Beasley also explained that he would be contacting other cities to find out their requirements for foundation repair. • • APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Jeann Howse made motion, seconded by Dale Reid to approve minutes with corrections. All Voting Aye. Carolyn Hodgins made motion to adjourn, seconded by Dale Reid. All voting aye. Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. • ~ ~ C I ATTEST SECR ~ Y ~ i Suggested changes to Chapter 6 Section 6-52 (2) Delete Section 6-52 (2) completely and replace it with the following: (2) All foundations for new construction and foundation repairs involving the installation of piers shall be designed and inspected by a registered professional engineer. a. The foundation or foundation repair shall be illustrated in complete plans and specifications signed and sealed by the registered professional engineer. b. The foundation design for new construction shall be determined by a soils "SR" report prepared by a recognized and reputable soils investigation agency or firm. EXCEPTION: Foundations • for single story accessory structures containing less than four hundred and fifty (450) square feet of gross floor area. c. The foundation or foundation repair shall be inspected by the registered professional engineer and his report certifying proper construction submitted to the building official prior to acceptance by the city. •