BOOK 26_1955-11-28 to 1957-06-17

Browse Search

u 0 BUILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS REPORT ON BUILDERS EXCHANGE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING USE OF PLYWOOD IN INTERIOR FINISH. The Clerk read the following letter: "In reference to the request from the Builders Exchange as to the use of Plywood as an interior finish, no provision has been made in the Uniform Building Code covering the interior finish of dwellings in Fire Zone No.. 3. Chapter 42 of the Uniform Building Code pertaining to wall and ceiling finish makes provision as to its use under Fire Protection of various materials in all groups from "A" to "H" inclusive. ,Dwellings, which come under Group "I" have no restrictions.. However, there are some conditions that are created by the use of plywood that should be considered. Plywood burns rather readily and has very little fire-retardent qualities especially in the smaller thickness. The real hazard of plywood is the tendency to maintain the natural grain of the wood which is done by the use of waxes, plastic, varnish, shellac, lacquer, etc. These finishes are conducive to creating fast burning .surfaces when heat is applied, more so than on painted surfaces. The use of fire retardant materials behind the plywood will have no value in retarding the fast burning action of the above finishes and therefore there is very little gained by this procedure.. If it were possible to en- force the application of fire -retarding finishes on the plywood surfaces it would be ideal but the inspection problem would be. .tremendous and very. impractical. There is no question from a part of fire fighting control that the fire - retardant materials are safer, losses are kept, to a minimum and occupants have a greater degree of safety inc ase of hurried exits during emergenc- ies. The proposal as submitted by the Builders Exchange would be, to a small degree, helpful but questionable as to retarding factors on the living side of the wall. 9 It is our combined opinion that as long as this matter could be brought before the Pacific Coast Building Offcials Conference, it would be wiser for this group to study this matter and submit their findings for regula- tions. We also suggest that the request as submitted by the Builders Ex- change be forwarded to the Pacific Coast Building Officials Conference for their attention. Very truly yours, S. H. KREISS Building Inspector J. L. LODI Fire Chief Councilman Jones moved acceptance of the report, seconded by Councilman Britschgi and carried. WEED ABATEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT. The Clark read the following letter: "The Weed Abatement Investigating Committee met on November 25, 1955, to etermine the disposition of the attached Weed Abatement Assessments. The Following the investigation by the Park Superintendent and the contractor in the field, the committee made the attached recommendation." RECOMMENDED FOR CONCELLATION 1. Leonard Joestin Arb Blk 118 467 Avenue Del Ora, R. C. Arb Lot 8 S 7.67 2. Jos. & E. Mattarossi Arb Blk 283 2650 El Camino Real, R. C. Arb Lot 1-B D' 3, King Granger Arb Blk 400 1417 Middlefield Road, R. C. Arb Lot 9-A B 4. Joe Perez Arb Blk 253 1416 Oxford, R. C. Arb Lot 2-B D 5. N. J. & James R. Hedge Arb Blk 512-E 1681 Broadway, R. C. Arb Lot 3 B 6. Mrs. Brittain Arb Blk 110 2649 Brewster Avenue, R. C. Arb Lot 4 B 7. Robert M. & M. Wallis Arb Blk 286 410 N. Oakwood Blvd., R. C. Arb Lot 7 D 8, John Perata Arb Blk 674 649 Green Street, S. F. Arb Lot 1 S & D 9. Harold & Lydia Stephen Arb Blk 909 3548 Altamont Way, R. C. Arb Lot 18 D 24.52 11.07 5.57 4.57 7.8.2 19.82 15.75 9.97 1