HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01171989 - T.2 T. 2 & 3
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUN'T'Y, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on January 17 , 1989 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson and Schroder
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-------------
SUBJECT: Administrative Appeals of Hillside Covenant Church in Walnut
Creek and of William Maguire, Architect for Dow Chemical at
Pittsburg.
Thils is the time set by the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors to hear the administrative appeal from the decision of the
Director of Building Inspection and the Chief of the Contra Costa
County Fire Protection District of the Hillside Covenant Church in
Walnut Creek, and the. administrative appeal from the decision of the
Director of Building Inspection and the provisions of Ordinance 87-100
of William Maguire, Architect for Dow Chemical at Pittsburg, , with
respect to the provisions of Ordinance 87-100 relating to the
requirement for fire sprinklers in buildings over 10,000 square feet.
The Chair requested staff to explain exactly what is being
appealed.
Mr, Victor J. Westman, County Counsel, advised that the
dispute is whether the fire sprinkler ordinance (Ordinance 87-100)
applies to albuilding that exceeds 10,000 square feet if it is
improved or added to, or if a building is less than 10,000 square feet
and is remodeled or added to, does the sprinkler ordinance require
that in addiction to the new area added to the building or the
remodeled area being sprinklered, does the existing structure have to
be brought u�p to code requirement and have sprinklers added to it.
MI. Westman advised that the Ordinance can literally be read.
to require installation of sprinklers in an existing building if an
addition results in the building exceeding 10,000 square feet. He
noted this Is the case whether or not the existing building exceeds
10, 000 square feet. He also, indicated that the ordinance could be
applicable only when the new construction or addition exceeded 10,000
square feet He further noted, however, it is up to the Board as a
matter of administrative interpretation to determine what the Board
intended when the ordinance was adopted..
Mr. Robert Giese, Director of Building Inspection, advised
that his interpretation of the ordinance is that it is not
retroactive, however it does have quite an impact on existing
buildings and structures. He noted that although the ordinance is not
retroactivel, it provides that any building over 10,000 square feet now
must be sprinklered, and therefore, an addition resulting in a
structure exceeding 10,000 square feet would require that building to
be brought into compliance.
Mr. Giese noted that the two projects, the Hillside Covenant
Church andlthe Dow Chemical project, have additions that might be
considered insignificant, but would bring the structures into the
10, 000 square foot range requiring sprinklering. He noted that this
could be extremely costly on an existing building and that is why the
Board has these two appeals before it.
Chairman Torlakson inquired if it were Mr. Gieses ' s
interpretation that the ordinance would apply to the sprinklering of
1
i
the balance of the building when an addition triggers this over 10, 000
total squarefootage for the building.
Mr. Giese stated .that that was his administrative
interpretation of the ordinance.
Board members discussed at length, among themselves and with
staff , the various interpretations of Ordinance 87-100 , and whether or
not the ordinance imposes sprinklering on the entire building or just
the additionor remodeling, or whether it was intended only for new
buildings. I
Chairman .Torlakson invited County Fire Officials to testify
before the public testimony began.
Mr. William Maxfield, Chief of the Contra Costa County Fire
Protection District, agreed that this ordinance does impose 'an
interpretation dilemma. He discussed the various circumstances where
the law could1be circumvented by phasing of projects, and also the
expectations lof the public that the fire departments would not allow
construction �of public buildings that were not safely sprinklered. He
commented that it is clearly a policy issue.
Mr.I Mike Ryan, Supervising Inspector of the Contra Costa
County Fire Protection District, described the position of the Fire
Chiefs in the County relative to this ordinance. He noted that as the
authors of the language of the ordinance, they did not intend that all
existing buildings would be required to retrofit fire sprinklers, nor
was it the intent to require that fire sprinklers be installed in
existing buildings undergoing remodel or alterations where no
additional square footage is added, however, it was their intent that
buildings be retrofitted with sprinklers when the existing building
and additions exceed the maximum of 10 ,000 square foot allowance for
non-sprinkleied buildings.
Inspector Ryan noted that the work being done on the church
represents al 44 percent increase to the current structure, which is
slightly larger than 10,000 square feet, and this clearly is not a
simple remodel , but a significant addition to an existing building.
Inspector Ryan noted that the subject addition would violate
section 104B of the Uniform Building Code. He stated that it is the
District' s contention that the addition to the subject non-sprinkleied.
building would cause the existing building to be in violation of. the
code as amended by Ordinance 87-100, as well increasing the fire
protection hazard, and therefore the Fire District respectfully
requests a denial of the subject appeal on the Hillside Covenant
Church.
Board members further discussed with the Fire Officials the
intent and application of Ordinance 87-100 .
John Milgate, attorney for the Hillside Covenant Church,
stated that lthe project included both remodel and addition to the
structures, and advised that George McCain of the church's building
committee would give a brief orientation.
George McCain, 1516 Gilboa Drive, Walnut Creek, explained
the projectl, and provided a pictorial of the existing building and the
4, 400 square foot addition, as well as the proposed remodeling, noting
that the addition was not 44 percent, but rather 23 or 24 percent. He
stated that the church was not aware of the sprinklering requirement
until they ,received their plans back from the Building Inspection and
Fire Departments after the plan check, and at that time they learned
of the requirement that they install sprinklers in the entire
building. IHe noted that the cost would be in excess of $100,000
without aesthetics to cover the exposed pipes.
Mr. Milgate questioned the intention of the ordinance with
respect to new construction, remodeling and additions, and urged the
Board to make explicitly clear what its intentions are as to the
ordinance, particularly with respect the issues of the application of
2
the ordinance to existing buildings subject to remodeling, additions,
and repairs, and in the meantime the Board allow Hillside Covenant
Church and other projects which are proposing the addition or
alternation of existing structures to proceed pursuant to the
provisions related to sprinklers which occur in the Uniform Building
Code.
Mr. Bob Humphrey, 5 Poco Lane, Walnut Creek, a member of the
Hillside Covenant Church, elaborated on his letter of January 14, 1989
protesting the requirement for automatic sprinklers throughout the
existing church as a result of the addition and remodeling proposed
for the structure, and urged provision for discretion.
Mr. William Maguire, P. O. Box 30342, Walnut Creek 94598 ,
Architect for Dow Chemical, Pittsburg, advised that he had been hired
to design a 500 square foot addition to Dow' s existing reception lobby
in its administrative office complex in Pittsburg. He advised that
the existing administration building is in excess of 25,000 square
feet and is unsprinklered. He stated that he had no knowledge of the
87-100 ordinance until he submitted the plans for review. at the very
end of the design process. He commented that the cost of retrofitting
the existingladministrative office area would be in excess of
$125, 000, while the low bid for the addition without sprinklers was in
the neighborhood of $150 , 000.
Mr. Maguire also questioned the provisions and requirements
with respect to area separation walls and the disallowing of same
unless the area is sprinklered.
Chairman Torlakson commented on possible need for additional
notification process for ordinances such as this.
Mr. Ed Lucas, Chief of the Moraga Fire Protection District,
commented that he believed the Uniform Building Code, prior to the
adoption of Ordinance 87-100, would have required the sprinklering of
this building, since the requirement was for 12 ,000 square feet for a
single story11 and in his opinion Ordinance 87-100 just reduced the
square feet to 10, 000 .
Mr. McCain declared that this is the fourth program in eight
years that the Hillside Covenant Church has had, that they previously
submitted pllans and specifications that were approved without any
mention of si,prinklers in the building, that this is the first time
this has happened, and if the requirement did exist in the old code,
everybody missed it.
Chairman Torlakson asked the Director of Building Inspection
to respond io Mr. McCain.
Mr. Giese advised that it was his understanding that the
church on one floor would still not exceed 12,000 square feet and it
would not have been required to have been sprinklered under the old
ordinance; that he was not that familiar with the Dow project, that
under prior Icodes there were provisions for separations, etc. and a
building could get to a pretty good size if there were no buildings
within approximately 60 feet of the building.
Mr. Giese further advised that he did not wish to take a
position either for or against a particular concept, that he was
concerned with the enforcement of the concepts. He discussed the
various consequences of the enforcement of Ordinance 87-100 with
respect to Ithe larger industrial facilities in the County.
Chairman Torlakson inquired if the Board wished further
review of the matter or if it desired to take action this day.
Supervisor Powers declared that he was of the opinion that
the Board should take action today. He moved granting the appeal in
both cases land not requiring the sprinklering of any portion of the
buildings at this point, and then directing staff to put some
clarifying language in the ordinance.
3
Supervisor -Schroder seconded the motion, commenting that
further consideration should be given and suggested that it be.
reviewed by the Internal Operations Committee. He expressed concern
about not weakening the requirement of the sprinklering of buildings
in the County,; but that he felt that there is some reasonable area
that has to be addressed. He noted that he had enthusiastically
endorsed the ordinance but that these situations did not come .to mind
and that many more such instances could occur. He commented that he
did not want to repeal the ordinance, but that he felt that it needed
to be reviewed to provide equity and latitude to the fire service in
enforcing it. l
Board members discussed with County Counsel its discretion
in the interpretation of the ordinance and the need for an amendment
for future guidance to staff.
IT IIS BY THE BOARD ORDERED THAT the appeal of the Hillside
Covenant Church and the appeal of William Maguire, Architect for Dow
Chemical, ARES HEREBY GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ordinance 87-100 is REFERRED TO
the Director of Building Inspection, County Counsel and the Contra
Costa County Fire Chief ' s Association for review, report and
recommendation, including a report covering clear guidelines and case
examples as to how the ordinance is interpreted. The report should be
submitted to the Internal Operations Committee as soon as possible.
I hereby certify t -t th!,r Is a true &r!d correct copy of
an action taken and cnisre,i cn the r tinu;e3 at :hr
Board of Superviaors On,-he date home.
ATTESTED:
Rt i'L SA H LC J.C- of the 0oard
of Supervisors and County Administrator
By- Deputy
cc: John Milgate for Hillside Covenant Church
WilliamIMcquire for Dow Chemical
Director of Building Inspection
County Counsel
Contra Costa County Fire Chiefs Assn.
County Administrator
Internal Operations Committee members
4