|
<br />,...
<br />
<br />lB9
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />6/1/70
<br />
<br />The staff believes that a uniform code is desirable throughout the nation. The Community Goals and
<br />policies of the City state that we should adopt and support only construction standards and codes
<br />which are officially recognized minimums for fire, durability and safety, and should discourage local
<br />amendments which would increase the cost of construction on r~sidential housing. The workable pro-
<br />gram is violated when requirements are more restrictive than national standards. The basic disagree-
<br />ment between the two proposals is in the provision of expansion capacity in electrical installations
<br />and the requirement that capacity be built into installations which the buyer may not need or want.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />Mrs. Betty Niven, Chairman of the Joint Housing Committee, reminded those present that costs are con~'
<br />stantly increasing in housing, and that the average apartment unit has almost doubled in permit value.
<br />She said the Council had adopted a statement with respect to codes, and that this meant not just
<br />electrical codes, but all codes. She felt, that conventional housing should be competi~ive with mobile
<br />homes. She suggested that the code should 'be writt'en' to do what' was necessary for safety, but no
<br />more.
<br />
<br />Mr. John Breeden, Director of the Home "Builders Association~ sai'd that 'his as'sociation was very much
<br />in favor of the staff proposal, and tl:1at the lo<::al .codes are a problem as, fat;, as cOlilt :is concern~d,
<br />and that the minimum 'Nationai Electric' Code is a' safe code and not a minimum code.
<br />t ". .".. J . .
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />The City Manager commented that the League of Oregon Cities had adopted' a resolution which asked
<br />that the State give 'consideration to the 'establishment of uniform codes throughout the state because
<br />competition from mobile homes and between cities and the areas outside them makes this a matter of
<br />more than city concern.
<br />
<br />Fire Marshall Wendell Wick said that there was not much difference 'between the number of electrical
<br />fires caused from faulty wiring outside the city or in the city. He felt that conduit wiring might
<br />be desirable in commercial buildings.
<br />
<br />. ,
<br />Mr. Carrol Colvin said that the't'ee schedule proposed "by the city was identical to that propos'ed by
<br />the committee. They have i~c1uded in their' code the 'provision for "t1he city inspector to' act as an
<br />ex officio member of the Board.
<br />
<br />Mr. Mitchem said the national code is made up of,city ~rdin~nces, and that these have been proven
<br />by cities to be good.
<br />
<br />Marion Wiley said that he did 'not agree that the c~st of wu~ng was goili1g higher, and ScUd surveys
<br />show that 'the inflation of building lots and material has increased the cost of housing.
<br />
<br />,Mr. Hamilton asked about the repealing 'of license examinations for electricians. He said that the
<br />
<br />national ele~trical contractor attC?rney dicl not agree with the City, Attorney memorandum. He felt
<br />
<br />tfrere'should be 'a discussion before :the :exaniinatiQn :1s :dll,s:C'~nt'imu)'d'.:, ,:; . < =-- : ',' C,E--'"
<br />, . : 4 --...;.. _', _ -'--.- . - - _ . . : - . ~.,. ~ ......:...- -- :..----..;~. ""':"::...... .-' - ---' -----:.-.-
<br />
<br />Mr.~. Mitchem felt that th~ .1icensJng~ PJ;,2~p:apl. J~.ad been in effect - in Eugene' for a good many years, and
<br />. ,,;....,;0. ." :OJ- - - ~-- .
<br />".that it was a good thl..ng. - '. -; "-'-, 'f
<br />_- '~'____ .......--~~ ~,' J-
<br />
<br />1-
<br />
<br />..;..
<br />
<br />Mr. Tom Hedgpeth felt that safety was very important in wwting, and that the code proposed by the
<br />Electrical Board should be adopted.
<br />
<br />The City Fire Marshall commented that tne insurance rates in tne city were not affected BY the code,
<br />but the base rating was figured on the number of inspections made.
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />The Building Inspector commented that the code would not prohibit more elaborate w~r~ng designs,
<br />but would not force them. He said that the National Electrical Code w~~ continuallY,upgraded.
<br />
<br />Councilman Teague, Chairman of the Council subcommittee, said the Electrical Board'had been appointed
<br />for several duties,- among them to update the revised electrical,code, write the supervisory examina-
<br />tion, give advice on technical problems, etc. 'Mr. Teague outli~ed the numerous meetings held and
<br />said that the committee had not been able to reach a unanimous decision regarding the diverse codes.
<br />They, therefore, requested the Council to hold a public hearing.
<br />
<br />Mr. Teague could not see that the National Code could fit si,tuations in various. cities, and felt it
<br />would be a step backward to depend entirely on the NEe,' and' that amendments wouid insure greater
<br />safety and less expense in overall cost. Mr. Teague said that the electrical committee had worked
<br />out a compromise which had been circulated to the Council be'f~re' this' meeting. . . ,
<br />
<br />Councilwoman Hayward said that she and Mr. Gribskov had agreed that what the staf~ proposed was
<br />adequate. They f~lt that increased service could be provided foi, but should not be required.
<br />
<br />Mr. Williams said this was the first time he had 'seen the proposed compromise, and that he was con-
<br />cerned about the single, main disconnect.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />6/1/70
<br />
<br />2
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />II
<br />;1
<br />~i'
<br />
<br />I'
<br />,j
<br />
|