CC MIN 1974 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

._.. ...__... i.rrriw - -- M_ .. . _ . . _. . . ... .... _..___.. , ... ... .-- ,., -_.'-___--^�_ .., ..__._._ _. _ ._..__.�, . . .:,.-.. .—. �...—�-.--�.. ..�.s,�-- ..,....,�..r...- -- A � � V City Manager Fales referred to his report of November 1, 1974 covering sta.ff response to City Council questions raised at the meeting of October 1� when the proposed ordinances were introduced for first readi.ng. Chief Buil.ding Official Gyselbrecht described the pro- cedure followed by his office and by the Board of Build- � ing Review in preparing the updating of City Codes, I stating that Mobil Oil, the building trades a.nd many . --� ; other organizations have been notified of the pending � updating, and no communications have been received re- � garding any suggested adverse effect of the proposed { ordinances. � � Mayor i�Teymouth invited anyone present who wished to � speak to do so. � Don Warren, Mobil Oil Estates (Redwood) Ltd. , distri- ` bute�Tc. cop es o a le er da e Novem er i, 1974 to Mr. kGyselbrecht from John B. Rutherford, Rutherford & � Chekene, consulting engineers, with attachments, regard- { ing the proposed Building Code ordinance and expressing � full agreement with the ordinance with the request that ` � consideration be given to two specific provisions. He commended Mr. Gyselbrecht and his staff for their work. I I Mr. Warren stated that his organization supports the � proposed ordinance and referred Council to page 3 of � the Rutherford letter which contains a Table indicating � the Estimate of Proposed Code Change Costs for Detached, � Single-Family Dwelling. �** � Discussion followed and Mr. Warren replied to questions �.,.:t� from Council and staff regarding details of the Table . John B. Rutherford, Rutherford & Chekene, consulting eng neers, sta e that he was asked to look at the � economic impact of the proposed changes, particularly with regard to Redwood Shores. He commended Mr. � Gyselbrecht, Mr. Bruce and their staff for their work � on the proposed ordinance. F I 4 Mr. Rutherford stated that he wishes to call Council attention to the "waterproof inembrane" requirement, � noting that it is almost impossible to make any mem- brane truly waterproof under all circumstances. k Mr. Rutherford also stated that if more steel is re- i quired than is actually needed with regard to �+.C. in � the Table relating to minimum reinforcement for flexural t sections, the cost of the single-family dwelling would � be increased unnecessarily. j Mr. Gyselbrecht explained the difficulty in using a � term other than "waterproof" for materials intended to � keep dampness out under reasonably predictable circum- """"" E stances, noting that the use of the term is not new to the ordinance . With re�ard to the reinforcement of ��r� � flexural sections, he noted that the orginance permits I design to take care of specific requirements and sug- gested that a change in wording might be considered � after investigation. � -2- Reg.Mt . 11/�/7� . F 3 � _.____ __ � _._..r, r_.....---' . - _ . .... . -�,,..�---.�.. e...a,«...r�-----�--:,�r�.M.�' -'-�--r-;:^..,-,. _ . .._ .,�,