SR-416-003 (8)
City Council Meeting: October 8, 2002 Santa Monica, California
TO: City Council
FROM: City Staff
Subject: Resolution Making Findings Of Local Climatic, Geological And
Topographical Conditions As Required To Adopt Local Amendments To
The California Building Standards Code; Adoption of the California
Building Standards Code And Santa Monica Amendments To The
California Building Standards Code; and Resolution Amending the
Administrative Fine Schedule
INTRODUCTION
This staff report explains the adoption process for building standards; why and how the
City can amend these codes; and what amendments will benefit the City at this time.
The report recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution making
findings of local climatic, geological and topographical conditions, which State law
requires be adopted before the City can adopt local amendments to the California
Building Standards Code (see Attachment A). The report also recommends adoption of
the attached emergency ordinance that adopts the California Building Standards Code
and the Santa Monica amendments to the California Building Standards Code (see
Attachment B). Finally, staff recommends adoption of a resolution to revise the current
administrative fine schedule for the newly numbered code sections as a result of the
proposed ordinance and include additional special fines for violations of specified
municipal code sections (see Attachment C).
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to the Health and Safety Code, the California Building Standards Code applies
1
throughout the State of California. This set of building standards incorporates by
reference various model codes with amendments created by interested State agencies.
The California Building Standards Commission publishes amended codes once every
three years. One hundred and eighty days later, all cities and counties must follow the
published standards unless the local jurisdiction amends them as allowed by law.
During the period between publication of the California Building Standards Code and
mandatory local adoption, cities and counties may make amendments based on local
topographical, geological and climatic concerns. For amendments to be effective, the
local governing body must make specific findings that any one or more of the
aforementioned concerns is applicable, approve an ordinance adopting the
amendments and file a copy of the express findings and local ordinance with the
Building Standards Commission. These requirements apply to both new and previously
adopted local amendments.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
Major issues include incorporation and amendment of administrative provisions for the
technical codes (see Chapter 8.08), re-adoption of previous local amendments (see
Chapters 8.12 through 8.44 and Chapter 8.108) and adoption of new local
amendments. The new local amendments include provisions for:
Guardrails at openable windows (see Section 8.12.060)
?
Changes to Essential Facilities Designations (see Section 8.12.040)
?
Structural steel and earthquake design (see Chapters 8.16 and 8.20)
?
2
Electrical disconnects for solar photovoltaic systems (see Chapter 8.24)
?
Enclosures for refrigeration rooms (see Chapter 8.28).
?
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AMENDMENTS
Each of the main technical codes (Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, and Electrical)
contains administrative requirements that the existing municipal code adopts by
reference. City Council has previously amended these regulations related to the Boards
of Appeal and permit provisions such as expiration, fees, suspension and revocation.
The myriad sources for administrative regulations makes it difficult for staff and the
public to always locate and determine the applicable requirement. To solve this
problem, staff recommends incorporating all related administrative requirements into
one chapter of the municipal code (see Chapter 8.08).
Other problems exist in the current administrative requirements. These include time
limits for building permits and demolition permits awaiting planning approval for
replacement projects, criteria for fee refunds, special inspection and contractor conflict
of interest and the appeal process for security provisions and building numbering. The
new administrative chapter proposes amendments to address these concerns.
Time Limits for Building and Demolition Permits
The City has experienced a number of situations where minimal construction work is
performed under a building permit, and completion of the project stretches over a period
of years. This practice raises a number of concerns. Neighbors of such sites continue
3
to be impacted by noise, dust, safety and aesthetic impacts over a long time period.
Important changes in either building or planning ordinances may occur that make the
ongoing project inconsistent with public safety and community planning objectives. To
address these issues, Council adopted regulations that establish maximum time periods
allowed to complete construction, with varying time periods based on permit valuation.
Projects with higher permit valuations are allocated longer time periods to complete
construction.
After analyzing completed projects for the last five fiscal years, staff has noted that most
projects in the $1 million to $5 million value range cannot complete construction within
the required time period. This problem does not exist for projects in the other valuation
ranges. After review of sample projects involved, staff believes that the time allowed to
complete construction is too aggressive for projects in this valuation range and should
be increased from 30 to 36 months.
Another problem exists when construction projects are segmented into separate permits
for the convenience of the owner or tenant and yet remain codependent for completion.
A common example is when the owner completes the new building shell and tenants
complete their individual improvements. Under current law, each project has a separate
allowable time to complete. This requirement results in the granting of numerous permit
extensions due to circumstances out of the control of the permit holder with the smaller
valuation. Staff recommends that the time period for related projects be determined
based on the sum of all concurrent construction, which will treat concurrent tenant
4
permits as supplemental permits to base building construction. With this new provision,
all related construction will have one required completion date.
Current regulations prohibit issuance of demolition permits for structures in multi-family
districts unless a building permit has been issued for a replacement project. While
applications for demolition permits are normally valid for 180 days, the approval process
for the replacement project can take significantly longer. For example, applicants will
apply for demolition permits so that the Landmarks Commission can make a
determination on the significance of the structure before they are ready to obtain
building permits for the replacement project. As a result, applicants have found it
necessary to apply for demolition permits more than once during the lengthier
discretionary review process for their planning approval. Applicant frustration and staff
inefficiencies result.
Staff recommends that the maximum number of extensions permitted for demolition
permit applications submitted as part of a replacement project be increased from one to
three. This change will allow demolition applications to remain active during the
planning permit process for most applicants while requiring staff evaluation every six
months for changes in pertinent laws. This will also eliminate redundant staff and
applicant effort at the Landmark Commission.
Fee Refunds
Current administrative provisions require the filing of any request for refund within 180
5
days of fee payment. This is also the time period allowed to start construction unless an
extension of time is granted for an additional 180 days. Permit holders must decide at
the end of 180 days whether or not to file for a refund or an extension without the
possibility of a subsequent refund if they no longer wish to proceed with construction. To
solve this concern, staff recommends that the time period to apply for a refund be
increased to one year.
Fees are currently set by Council resolution but the administrative requirements do not
establish the criteria for fees and refunds. To insure conformity with state law, staff
recommends adding language clarifying that fees are based on the reasonable estimate
of the costs to provide the service and that refunds will be based on the estimated
reasonable cost of services not provided.
Special Inspection Process and Contractor Conflict of Interest
The Building Code requires owners to hire special inspectors who are to be
continuously present during critical elements of the construction. These inspectors act
as deputy inspectors for the City and are responsible for insuring that the specified
important elements of the construction comply with the related technical codes and the
approved plans and specifications. The Building Officer currently registers over 200
such special inspectors who are to be employed directly by the owner.
Several concerns exist with the current system. When special inspectors need to write
substantive corrections, owners can face considerable construction delays. The Building
6
Officer frequently receives complaints from special inspectors who are replaced on the
construction project after writing proper and significant corrections. Although the
Building Code prohibits it, owners often allow the contractor to employ the special
inspector directly because they believe that contractors may work better with special
inspectors they know. This may result in only cursory review of the contractor?s work.
Owners are also sometimes the contractor, which prevents the separation of
responsibility between quality control and construction as envisioned in the Building
Code.
Conflicts of interest exist when the special inspector is hired and paid by the person
whose work they regulate. The City?s legitimate concern for public safety and welfare is
not well served by a system that deputizes special inspectors who can then be removed
by owners for causing expensive corrections or delays. Staff recommends that the
current system be revised to authorize the Building Officer to hire the special inspectors
directly.
Appeal Process for Security Provisions and Building Numbering
Current law allows building permit applicants to file to the City Council for a hardship
exemption from the security provisions for commercial and residential buildings based
on practical difficulties. Security provisions are often codependent on other building
standards for light and ventilation, fire rating and emergency egress, which are under
the jurisdiction of the Building and Safety Commission. To simplify process and avoid
conflicts, staff recommends that the Building and Safety Commission act as the Board
7
of Appeal for security provisions instead of the City Council.
Current law permits only one address for any main building when newly constructed.
This requirement exists to facilitate emergency egress by public safety personnel and to
better maintain City records. Exceptions do not exist for these provisions. Recently,
large building projects that span an entire block have shown the advantage of separate
addresses for facilitating emergency personnel. Staff recommends that current law be
amended to allow the Building Officer to grant exceptions to the one address
requirement when requested by the Chief of Police or Fire Chief to facilitate emergency
services or record keeping concerns and clarify existing roles of the City Engineer and
Building Officer related to address assignment.
LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE
The following sections list the proposed local amendments to the building standards
found in the California Building Standards Code. These amendments are necessary due
to a number of unique local conditions outlined in the attached resolution (see
Attachment A). Existing local amendments that require readoption start with the word
?Continue? and new amendments start with the word ? Provide?. Discussion on the new
local amendments follows the list of both existing and new local amendments for the
technical code in question.
Local Amendments To The Building Code
?
Continue to require the engineer or architect of record to verify that their
structural designs are followed during construction (see Section 8.08.120).
8
?
Continue to adopt necessary appendices to the Building Code that include
provisions for Use or Occupancy, Aviation Control Towers, Sound Control
Transmission, Re-roofing, Structural Forces, Waterproofing and Damproofing
Foundations, Minimum Plumbing Fixtures, Membrane Structures, Excavation and
Grading, Existing Buildings, and Material, Testing and Installation Standards (see
Section 8.12.030).
?
Continue to establish Seismic Hazard Zones and Geologic Hazard Filled Area
Zones to require special design requirements (see Section 8.12.050).
?
Continue to require guardrails at openable windows and provide clarifying
language (see Section 8.12.060).
?
Continue to prohibit the use of non-fire retardant wood shingles or non-fire
retardant wood shakes for new or replacement roofing and require a moderate
level of fire retardant roofing as a minimum standard (see Section 8.12.060).
?
Provide for updated earthquake design provisions that properly account for dead
load effects during earthquakes, limit shear-critical behavior in concrete and
masonry shear walls and properly calculate the allowable story drift under
earthquake loading (see Section 8.16.020).
?
Continue to require improved connection of roofing to prevent slippage during
earthquakes and the associated falling hazards (see Section 8.16.030).
?
Continue to require all masonry and concrete chimneys to be structurally
designed by a licensed architect or registered engineer instead of by prescriptive
rules that have allowed failed performance in recent earthquakes, including the
Northridge Earthquake (see Section 8.16.040).
9
?
Provide the most current seismic provisions for steel frame and light gage steel
stud buildings that incorporate the lessons learned to date from the Northridge
Earthquake instead of the outdated Pre-Northridge reference standards (1992) in
the California Building Code (see Section 8.16.050).
?
Continue to require the most current seismic provisions for wood frame
construction to limit the use of materials that have proved ineffective in resisting
earthquake forces and require additional engineering analysis (see section
8.16.060 and Chapter 8.20).
?
Continue to require automatic fire extinguishing and detection systems in all new
construction and when there is a change in use to a higher classification (See
Section 8.44.050).
?
Continue to require automatic fire sprinkler systems for existing public assembly
spaces above 5,000 square feet that protect assembly areas and exit ways (See
Section 8.44.050).
?
Continue to require compliance with the high-rise provisions of the California
Building Code in new high-rise buildings with human occupancy above 55 feet of
the lowest level of fire vehicle access point in accordance with authority granted
to the City in the California Health and Safety Code Section 13216 (See Section
8.44.090).
?
Continue to require adequate seismic bracing of fire sprinkler installations (see
Section 8.44.120).
10
New Local Amendments for the Building Code
New Language for Openable Windows And Guardrails
Current construction design and practice seeks to gain the most benefit from local
climatic conditions of fresh air and cooler ocean-based temperatures by using windows
that open full or near full floor height. When the height of the floor exceeds thirty inches
above exterior grade, a guardrail is normally required for openings to prevent a falling
hazard. However, the present language of the code does not clearly require the
guardrail to be installed at openable windows. To provide for public safety and prevent
serious injury from falls, staff recommends continuing to adopt the amendment that
requires a guardrail when the openable portion of a window is lower than the required
height of a guardrail for the occupancy in question. Although the Building and Safety
Commission recommended the height of the guardrail in residential occupancies be
lowered from 36 inches to 32 inches at openable windows, staff believes that the
California Building Code and state law requires a minimum of 36 inches be provided
since cities are prohibited from adopting less restrictive standards than found in the
California Building Standards Code, of which the California Building Code is a part. Staff
has clarified the language as recommended by the Building and Safety Commission but
maintained the required minimum height of the guardrail to 36 inches in residential
occupancies.
Changes to Essential Facilities Designations
After the Northridge Earthquake, the Municipal Code was amended to list several City
11
facilities as critical to the City?s long-term community plan. Ordinance 1945 (CCS),
which became effective July 1, 1999, changed the status of these critical facilities to
essential building status under the Building Code. This status and the related
requirements are normally limited to police and fire stations and emergency operations
centers. Staff recommends amending the provision to include only those buildings
essential to emergency operations, which are the police and fire stations and City Hall.
New Structural Steel And Earthquake Design Amendments
The 1997 Uniform Building Code, which will no longer be printed, is the base document
for the 2001 California Building Code. This code contains structural steel design
provisions that predate the Northridge Earthquake and hence, does not contain
regulations based on the valuable lessons learned from the study of buildings damaged
during the earthquake. Since the Uniform Building Code will no longer be printed, these
subsequent gains in knowledge cannot be updated and included in the code, as would
normally occur. Instead, California cities and counties must adopt local amendments to
update this code, until the State chooses a more modern model code, such as the 2000
International Building Code, which is the successor code to the 1997 Uniform Building
Code.
Building Officials throughout Los Angeles County, in concert with the Structural
Engineers Association of Southern California, have agreed on the necessary changes
to update the seismic provisions of the 1997 Uniform Building Code related to structural
steel design and earthquake loading. These provisions further limit the use of steel
frame systems with limited ability to absorb and dissipate earthquake forces in
12
buildings. Staff recommends that these local amendments be adopted to protect the
public with the state of art seismic knowledge. Staff has also added clarifying language
for the testing information required for the use of shear wall systems constructed with
steel studs.
Local Amendments To The Electrical Code
?
Continue to ensure that any wiring not having metal protection over the
conductors shall be entirely concealed within the building structure to prevent
and inhibit tampering and restrict the use of aluminum wiring found to be
hazardous (see Section 8.24.030).
?
Continue to prohibit the sale and use of any electrical material, device, or
equipment unless it complies with provisions of this section, including rating and
conformance with national standards (see Section 8.24.040).
?
Continue to provide regulations for temporary service poles used on construction
sites (see Section 8.24.060)
?
Continue to provide regulations for underground concrete vaults and handholes
(see Section 8.24.070).
?
Provide proper disconnecting means for multiple arrays on solar photovoltaic
systems (see Section 8.24.080).
New Local Amendments for the Electrical Code
Solar Photovoltaic Systems- Disconnecting Means For Multiple Arrays
City sustainable goals promote the use of green building standards including the use of
13
photovoltaic systems. These systems range from simple single family dwelling units
rated at 48 volt, 2KW (2000 Watts) up to, and beyond the larger commercial units of 480
volt, 350KW (350,000 Watts). The California Electrical Code does not address the
disconnecting of the array conductors, when they are combined (series or parallel).
This combining produces circuits capable of the higher voltages and/or wattage with no
means of disconnecting the array (rooftop solar panel) at the source. Staff recommends
adopting the amendment that provides for an emergency disconnect and allows service
and repair of the system.
Local Amendments To The Mechanical Code
?
Continue to provide sufficient gage support of grease ducts during earthquakes
(see Section 8.28.030).
?
Continue to require the use of Type I fire protective hoods for all cooking ovens
that cook food with grease (see Section 8.28.040).
?
Provide for the use of refrigeration machinery rooms for all refrigerants in rooms
with over 100 HP motors above maximum threshold amounts instead of just the
least toxic and flammable (see Section 8.28.050).
?
Provide for the use of the proper table values from American Society of Heating,
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers to determine the allowable
quantities of the refrigerants R-123 and R-55 in Table 11-1 of the California
Mechanical Code (see Section 8.08.060).
14
New Local Amendments for the Mechanical Code
Increased Use of Machinery Rooms and Current ASHRAE Quantity Tables
The current California Mechanical Code requires a machinery room for equipment with
refrigerants other than A1. Since this section requires a machinery room for A1
refrigerants, if any equipment exceeds 100 horsepower, it is more important to require
protection for equipment containing refrigerants other than A1, as they are either toxic,
more flammable, or both. Staff recommends increasing the use of these separation
rooms to protect occupants during earthquakes from the more toxic and flammable
refrigerants and using the updated ASHRAE tables, upon which the current code is
normally based, for the proper amounts to trigger the enclosure requirements.
Local Amendments To The Plumbing Code
?
Provide for enclosures of water heaters to prevent associated fire hazards from
uncontrolled adjacent combustible storage (see Section 8.32.030).
?
Continue to prohibit water softener systems from using drywells to discharge
effluents in order to protect local ground water and the Santa Monica Bay (see
Section 8.32.040).
?
Continue to prohibit the use of combined storm drain and sewers to prevent the
possible future contamination of the Santa Monica Bay (see Section 8.32.050).
New Local Amendments to the Plumbing Code
15
Enclosure of Water Heaters
Current plumbing code does not require the enclosure of water heaters inside a
building. Often, particularly in residential garages, water heaters are surround with
combustible storage that presents a fire hazard. The water heater, when fired and
running, can present a source of ignition. To further separate the ignition source from
the combustible storage and thereby reduce the potential ignition, staff concurs with the
Building and Safety Commission recommendation to require the enclosure of water
heaters when located inside buildings.
Local Amendments To The Fire Code
?
Continue to require automatic fire extinguishing and detection systems in all new
construction and when there is a change in use to a higher classification (See
Section 8.44.050).
?
Continue to require automatic fire sprinkler systems for existing public assembly
spaces above 5,000 square feet that protect assembly areas and exit ways (See
Section 8.44.050).
?
Continue to require compliance with the high-rise provisions of the California
Building Code in new high-rise buildings with human occupancy above 55 feet of
the lowest level of fire vehicle access point in accordance with authority granted
to the City in the California Health and Safety Code Section 13216 (See Section
8.44.090).
?
Continue to require the connection with control valves on each floor level with full
automatic sprinkler systems in any new building with floors more than 55 feet in
16
height (See Section 8.44.090).
?
Continue to require adequate seismic bracing of fire sprinkler installations (see
Section 8.44.120).
Local Amendments to the Energy Code
?
Continue to require cost effective energy efficiency in multi-family residences,
hotels, motels, commercial and institutional offices, light industrial and retail uses
pursuant to the Green Building Standards (see Sections 8.108.040).
?
Continue to require additional mandatory energy efficiency measures for Solar
Water Heating, Pipe Insulation and Heat Traps in all buildings (see Section
8.108.060).
BUILDING AND SAFETY COMMISSION ACTIONS
On August 8, 2002, staff held a study session with the Building and Safety Commission
to review state laws that affect local adoption of building standards. After explaining the
code adoption process, staff informed the Commission of the existing local amendments
for the technical codes, including supplemental fire prevention and seismic safety
requirements. Finally, staff presented the draft ordinance and sought Commission
direction. The Commission gave no specific direction but did express concerns about
the appropriate use of building standards in mixed used buildings based on recent
appeals heard. Staff promised to place this concern and the proposed ordinance on the
agenda for discussion at the next regularly scheduled Commission meeting in
September.
17
On September 12, 2002, September 17, 2002, and September 26, 2002, the
Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance and resolution making findings regarding
local climatic, geological and topographic conditions. After discussion, the Commission
unanimously moved to recommend the City Council adopt both the staff proposed
ordinance and resolution with the following changes:
1. Require permits for all fences over 3 feet in height and for accessory buildings
and structures consistent with the zoning ordinance so that applicants will be
properly advised of setback and height requirements.
2. Allow 24 months to obtain a demolition permit for replacement projects subject to
Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.16.010.
3. Clarify Building Officer?s stop work authority for construction projects with
asbestos contamination.
4. Update current language to match recent changes in state law for approval of
architects prior to copying approved plans.
5. Clarify the role of the Commission on recommending ordinances.
6. Enclose water heaters in all buildings
7. Reduce the height of required guardrails at openable windows from 36 inches to
32 inches in residential occupancies.
Staff has incorporated these changes into the proposed ordinance, except for the
change in the required height of guardrails in residential occupancies for the reasons
discussed in the previous section on New Local Amendments For The Building Code-
18
New Language For Openable Windows And Guardrails.
NEW SPECIAL FINES FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT
The existing fine schedule for administrative citations does not include special fines for
Code requirements for public nuisances, construction inspection or best management
practices to prevent urban runoff pollution. Staff recommends adding special fines for
these Code sections to improve enforcement of the requirements.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no direct budget and financial impact to the City of adopting the 2001 edition of
the California Building Standards Code and local amendments. As a result of the
standards for seismic and fire life safety, the approval of this ordinance will increase
costs of construction and repair to certain structures, including City-owned structures.
The specific costs and cost sharing arrangements for City structure repairs that might
be mandated by the standards are not known at this time. Council will have the
opportunity to review such costs and cost sharing arrangements when repair contracts
are placed on Council?s agenda.
The proposed amendment to authorize the Building Officer to hire special inspectors
directly will result in increased expenditures for professional services and general fund
revenues from user fees. Authority to charge for this new service requires a separate
Council resolution to establish the additional administrative and overhead costs of the
City for procuring services and monitoring the work. Staff will address this concern in
19
the development-related fee study that will be presented for Council consideration in
conjunction with the FY 01/02-year end report.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Adopt the attached resolution making findings of local climatic, geological and
topographical conditions as required to adopt local amendments to the California
Building Standards Code.
2. Adopt the attached ordinance that adopts the California Building Standards Code
and Santa Monica amendments to the California Building Standards Code.
3. Adopt the attached resolution setting forth the administrative citation schedule of
fines for certain violations of the Santa Monica municipal code pursuant to
Ordinance number 2043 (CCS) and Chapter 1.09 Administrative Citations of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code, effective November 1, 2002.
Prepared by: Ettore Berardinelli, Fire Chief
Jim Hone, Fire Marshal
Jim Glew, Assistant Fire Marshal
Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning & Community Development
Jay Trevino, Planning Manager
Tim McCormick, Building Official
Attachment A: Resolution Making Findings Of Local Climatic, Geological And
Topographical Conditions As Required To Adopt Local
Amendments To The California Building Standards Code
Attachment B: Ordinance Adopting The California Building Standards Code And
Adopting The Santa Monica Amendments To The California
Building Standards Code
20
Attachment C: Resolution Setting Forth The Administrative Citation Schedule Of
Fines For Certain Violations Of The Santa Monica Municipal Code
21