Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03151995 BSC Minutes, ~ ~ BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION • SPECIAL SESSION 3800 UNIVERSITY BLVD. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1995 6:30 p.m. MINUTES The Building and Standards Commission convened in the Municipal Building, 3800 University Blvd. in the City of West University Place on March 15, 1995 for a special session with the following members present: Vice Chairman Craig DuCote, Jim McDaniel, James Collier, Evelyn Dravis, Craig Hughes and James Todd. Absent were Chairman Drew McManigle, Les Albin and Roy Harper. Present from the City were Dennis Holm, Chief Building Official and Susan Thorn, Building Secretary. The first item on the agenda was the Hearing of Residents: No one was present to speak on any matter other than the items on the agenda. The second item on the agenda was Consideration of Docket No. 95-04 concerning the property located at 5804 Community, Lot 4, Block 1, College Court Addition, a request for a variance on required foundation certification filed by Silvestri Investments, Inc. • Jim McVaugh of Silvestri Investments was present to explain his request for variance. Dennis Holm, Chief Building Official, first gave the City's point of view. Mr. Holm explained that he would first give the history of how this came about and then Mr. McVaugh would explain what he was willing to do to resolve the matter. Mr. Holm referred to the standard form letter required on all jobs. This letter is required after the Engineering firm has made inspections of the piers, grade beams, and slab, etc. This letter was formatted by the City's Attorney, Jim Dougherty. This is in accordance with Ordinance 1441. The section concerning with foundations states: (c) "The foundation or foundation repair shall be inspected by a registered professional engineer and the engineer's report certifying the proper construction shall be submitted to the Building Official prior to additional work being done." The foundation at 5804 Community is a post-stress slab instead of a regular standard engineered type of slab. The first City inspection is a pier inspection. During this inspection the inspector makes sure the correct amount of piers are drilled. It is the Engineers responsibility is look in the pier holes, check the bells and the steel, and take measurements. The next inspection the City makes is a foundation inspection. The City Inspectors check the forms to see if it in the right place, spot check the depth of the footings and check the steel. Mr. Holm explained that the first form survey that was received showed a side setback of 4.8'. A second survey was received that showed the correct side setback of 5.0' which was ~ certified by the surveyor Walter Sass. The next item that was received was a letter dated January 27,1995. This was received by the City of West University Building ~ Division on March 1, 1995. This letter referred to a second letter dated February 22, • 1995. The second letter was from Charlie Ehrlund, a Building Inspector who was no longer with the City. Copies of these letters are included as part of these minutes. In Mr. Ehrlund's letter he states "I was the inspector for West University at the time that the slab was done at 5804 Community. This slab has been rejected for various items that had been specified on previous reports. On the third and final inspection, I checked the string line, checked the location of the forms, checked bricks under the rebar, and measured the beams. Everything was satisfactory and I passed the slab inspection for pouring." Mr. Holm referred to copies of inspection information sheets showing on December 13, 1994 a inspection was made on the foundation and rejected because clay bricks were not allowed under the rebar and there was no blueline form survey on file. A second inspection was made on the same day and Mr. Ehrlund rechecked the foundation with a blueline form survey, questioning the 4.8' side setback shown on the south side. The clay bricks were still in the form. This inspection was also failed. A third inspection passed on December 14, 1995. Mr. Holm explained that there was a miscommunication by the Silvestri Groups person in charge of that inspection. The Silvestri Group was not aware that the Engineer needed to come back and make their own final inspection, in order to sign the City required foundation letter. At the time the letter from the Silvestri Group was received the slab had already been poured. When the letter was received the City put a halt to construction. By this time the house • was framed, there was a stud wall inside and the house was bricked. The foundation letter is required after the foundation is poured. The inspectors normally check to make sure that the letter has been received before the framing inspection is made. The Builder Mr. McVaugh also has provided a copy of a field observation report. It was discovered that the City did not have a foundation letter when a framing inspection was called. When the letter was received, it was discovered that the letter was not correct. At this point the house was already framed and the brick was already installed. Mr. Holm explained that the letter that was provided to the City had three deficiencies: 1) It was under inclusive certification which does not include everything that is required in the City's standard form letter. 2) The conditions on the letter involved the statements of a non-employee of TSG and 3) A registered professional engineer did not make a final inspection to make sure that the necessary corrections that were indeed made. Mr. McVaugh was asking for a variance because make the final inspection and cannot provide the required foundation letter. Evelyn Dravis asked if the items that were rejected were corrected. Mr. Holm stated that according to the letter the corrections were made. These items that were rejected are shown in the field observation report. A copy of this report is included as part of these minutes. ~ Mr. Holm explained that this foundation is a post-tension slab and it basically sits on the ground and there are tendons that run through it. The foundation company comes back ~ later and puts a machine on to put pressure on it, which pull cracks out of the concrete. This slab does not have piers. Mr. DuCote asked if the house was a spec house. Mr. McVaugh stated it was a spec home. Mr. DuCote asked if the person who purchased this house would be taking a gamble. Mr. Holm stated that not according to what Mr. McVaugh is going to explain in his presentation. Jim McVaugh of Silvestri Investments explained his request for a variance. He explained what type of foundation post-tension slab is. He explained that there are tendon cables that go through the slab part and what the bricks are supposed to do is to hold up the number five rebar when the slab is being poured. He explained how all this came about. He became aware of the problems after the second inspection. The Field Superintendent had the engineer come out and the engineer made the field report. The field report showed that all these items needed to be corrected. The clay bricks were replaced with concrete bricks, the string line was placed and all the items on the field report were corrected. After all the corrections were made, the inspection was called back in. The City came out made the inspection and said it was okay to pour. Mr. McVaugh stated he wasn't aware of the letter and the superintendent poured the slab not knowing to call back out the engineer to verify that the items were corrected. Mr. McVaugh explained that when the brick was being installed he was told • that he needed the slab letter. He explained that he obtained various letters, one letter about the stressing of the cables, and a second letter that states it was designed in accordance to the specifications. The engineer told Mr. McVaugh that if he had a letter from a third party, such as the letter from the inspector he would write the letter, but that he (the engineer) could not attest legally to something that he did not see, because his representative did not see that the final corrections were. The only difference in the letter is that the letter from TSG stated that the slab and grade beams were found to be installed in substantial compliance instead of the wording in the City's standard form letter stating that they were installed in compliance. The job was shut down three weeks ago when they found out they did not have the letter. Mr. McVaugh stated that as the Builder that they would be willing to warranty the slab, however the house has a warranty from Residential Warranty Corporation for ten years. He feels that the house is not going anywhere, it is a well built house. The slab also has rebar in addition to being post-tension to give it extra strength. Mr. McVaugh explained that this was about the ninth slab he has had poured in the last two and a half years. This is the first time a City has required a field observation report from an engineer. Craig DuCote asked that if this variance were denied would the house have to be torn ~ down. Mr. Holm stated if there was no relief they would have to go to great lengths to prove that the foundation was correct.. ~ James Collier stated that you could have the slab x-rayed to find out if the beams were • in the correct place. Mr. Collier asked when Ordinance 1441 went into effect. Mr. Holm stated that the Ordinance 1441 was passed on September 28th, 1992. Craig DuCote stated that the intent of the Ordinance 1441 was to improve foundations, because of so many foundation failures. Mr. Holm stated that this was a point of conjecture. Mr. DuCote stated that on his block there were three. Mr. Holm stated that he did not dispute what Mr. DuCote said, but these have not all been major failures. Jim McDaniel asked if what the Commission was being asked to do was to accept the certifications that the Builder has provided and give a variance to not have the City's required standard form letter. Mr. Holm stated that this was what the variance request was for. Jim McVaugh explained that Residential Warranty Corporation warranties the house for ten years and that he was not sure what all the warranty encompassed. Craig DuCote stated that he felt that because this house is on Community and it backs up to the railroad tracks that it will have a lot more vibrations as a result. The Board Members asked which foundation company did Silvestri Co. use. Mr. McVaugh stated that he used his own crews to build the foundation. • Jim Collier asked who the architect for this project was and if the engineer worked for the architect. Jim McVaugh stated Marion Spiers was the architect and that the engineer was a third party engineering firm. Mr. McVaugh stated that his superintendent had all these things done and that he stands behind his superintendent. The Board Members asked how long Mr. McVaugh had been in business. He stated Galleria Developments had been in business five years and Silvestri Investments had been in business for around 35 years. He explained that Galleria Developments was his company with Dan Silvestri and that the permits were in Silvestri Investments name. Mr. McVaugh stated that he and Silvestri Investments would warranty this slab and that if there were problems with the foundation he would pay to have a foundation repair company come out to make repairs. His question was how long would he be required to warranty the foundation. The Board Members asked how long did Mr. Holm think that it was before foundation problems occurred. Mr. Holm stated that every foundation was different. Jim McDaniel asked if the warranty would be written and placed in the City's records. Mr. Holm stated that he would have the City's Attorney look over any warranty that Silvestri gave them and to make sure it had the proper language. James Todd asked if • there was a way for the engineer to measure the beams would the City be willing to accept the letter. Mr. Holm stated that if the foundation were to be tested the engineer would still have to write a letter showing his findings and the letter would still not be in ~ the form required by the City. Mr. Holm explained that the Building and Standards Commission needed to make some kind of motion for what provisions were required and at a later meeting the Board would need to approve the warranty in a formal session. Jim Collier made a motion to have the Builder either 1) provide a warranty on the foundation for ten years and that it be filed with Real Property Records and come back before the board at the next regular session or 2) Have the engineer retest the foundation and provide the proper certification letter to the Board for the Boards approval. Jim McDaniel seconded the motion. Jim Collier amended his original motion to grant the variance pending the City Attorney's and the Building Official Dennis Holm's approval of the warranty as submitted by the Builder Silvestri Investments or if proper structural information is provided by the engineer, the variance will not be required. Voting in favor: DuCote, Dravis, McDaniel, Todd, Collier and Hughes. Voting against: none. ~ Jim McDaniel made a motion to adjourn the meeting. This motion was seconded by Evelyn Dravis. Voting was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ' CHAIRM N ATTEST: ~ Secretary r1 L..J