Department of Building Inspection

PRESENT:

Daniel Shapiro, Chair

Ann Cervantes, Member

Mel Cammisa, Member

Dick Glumac, Member

Joseph Cassidy, Member

CITY STAFF:

Wing Y. Lau, P.E., Chief Building Inspector, DBI
Carla Johnson, Senior Building Inspector, DBI

1.0

Call to Order and Roll Call.

Chair Daniel Shapiro called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.

Roll was called and a quorum was established.

2.0

Review and Approval of Minutes of June 17, 2003 Meeting.

Board Member Glumac made a motion to approve the minutes as written.  The motion was seconded by Board Member Cammissa and passed unanimously.

2.1

Review and approval of final resolution.

Board Member Glumac made a motion to approve the decisions for Case numbers 2003-03 and 2003-04.  The motion was seconded by Board Member Cammissa and passed unanimously.

3.0

Public Comment

There was no public comment.

4.0

Old Business

There was no old business.

5.0

New Business

Appeal No. 2004-01 567 Sanchez

Chief Building Inspector Wing Lau summarized the issues. 567 Sanchez is a permit proposal for a new three story Type V-N single family dwelling to be built over a basement garage of Type I construction.  The proposed development is situated on a steep up-hill slope.

Section 1004.2.2 of the San Francisco Building Code requires a second means of egress for any floor level located above or below the first floor.  Exceptions #1 and #3 waive the second exit requirement on the second floor and basements in dwelling units based upon an occupant load less then ten.  Similarly, Exception #4 waives the second exit requirement from the third floor if the floor area served does not exceed 500 square feet.  The proposed master suite on the third floor at 567 Sanchez is approximately 640 square feet with an additional deck area of 260 square feet. Since the third floor area exceeds the restrictions in the exception, then a second means of egress is required.

The designer’s original proposal offered sprinkler protection for the building in lieu of the required second exit.  The Deputy Director for Permit Services, William Wong rejected this proposal in a letter. The modified proposal that was subsequently submitted for consideration in this appeal before the Board offers both sprinkler protection plus the installation of a Jomy foldout fire escape ladder.  Chief Lau was careful to note that the Department of Building Inspection used to routinely accept a Jomy foldout fire escape ladder as an acceptable second exit for the third story of both new and existing dwelling units. The San Francisco Building Code changed however in the last major code review cycle, and Jomy ladders are no longer accepted as equivalent to a required second exit without special consideration.

Pat Buscovich, engineer and consultant for the owner Ed Hardy, proceeded to give an informational account of the background behind San Francisco’s substantial changes to the building code which occurred in response to concerns from the State Fire Marshall.  Mr. Buscovich argued his point that although the Jomy ladder could no longer be allowed prescriptively, it could still be permitted on a case-by-case basis depending upon the mitigating factors.

Brett Gladstone, the attorney representing the owner, then introduced Ed Hardy (owner), Pat Buscovich (engineer), Jerry Veverka (architect for the project), and Robert Fuller (fire code consultant).  Ed Hardy described a seven-year process to design and permit his dream home.  Pat Buscovich gave a visual presentation of the design using a scaled model, and argued that the area calculations were very close to 500 square feet once allowable deductions were made. Robert Fuller discussed the merits of sprinkler protection and the relatively low risk in single-family dwellings.  Brett Gladstone offered to install additional smoke alarms wired to a fire protection company in addition to the sprinklers and Jomy ladder.

Chair Shapiro asked if the owner would agree to draft a restriction to be recorded with the deed addressing the supervised smoke alarm.

Robert Fuller clarified that supervised systems are not typically recorded on the deed as a requirement.

Board Member Cervantes asked why a conventional stair could not be built instead.

Pat Buscovich explained that a stair would intrude into the required rear yard setback.

Jerry Veverka elaborated that Planning would require the rear yard extension to be set back five feet from property line.

Chair Shapiro asked if the code defined how you calculate floor area.  Discussion followed between Wing Lau, Pat Buscovich, Jerry Veverka, and Board Member Cammissa. In the end it was agreed that the floor area was still over 500 square feet and thus subject to the second exit requirement.  In addition, there was discussion about another project recently approved at 4516 - 20^th Street, which was allowed to install a Jomy ladder in lieu of the exit.  This project was presented for consideration as a precedent.

Board Member Glumac then made a motion to approve the proposal subject to the conditions in the appellant’s letter, which offered to install the Jomy expandable fire escape ladder, fully sprinkle the building according to the NFPA 13D, with the clarification provided that this decision is for one time only and shall not be construed as precedent setting.

Board Member Cammissa amended the motion to include the additional smoke alarm protection in the vestibule, closet, and hallway and elsewhere per DBI as described in the appellants letter with a diagram on the plans showing the hook-up to the alarm company.  The amendment was accepted.

The motion to approve the appeal was seconded by Board Member Cammissa and passed unanimously.

6.

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.