Loading...
0001-051 (RPL)LICENSED CONTRACTOR DECLARATION I hereby affirm u5`er penalty of perjury that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter`s (com"mencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professionals Code, and my License is in full force and effect. License # Lic. Class Exp. Date ,57.11,27 A 0813VW 6 Date `*`� Signature of Contractor OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: ( ) I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business & Professionals Code). ( ) I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business & Professionals Code). () I am exempt under Section B&P.C. for this reason Date Signature of Owner . WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECLARATION I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury 'one of the following declarations: ( ) I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self -insure for workers' compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. Se( )sl"have and will maintain workers' compensation insurance, as required by ction 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation insurance carrier & policy no. are: Carrier - e lryY Policy No. This section need not be completed if the permit valuation is for $100.00 or less). ( ) I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the workers' compensation laws of California, and agree that if I should become subject to the workers' compensation provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor. Code, I shall rthwith comply with thhose.provlslons: Date: + Applicant ' Warning: Failure to secure Workers' Compensation coverage is unlawful and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to $100,000, in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor Code, interest and attorney's fees. IMPORTANT Application is hereby made to the Director of Building and Safety for a permit subject to the conditions and restrictions set forth on his application. 1. Each person upon whose behalf this application is made & each person at whose request and for whose benefit work is performed under or pursuant to any permit issued as a result of this applicaton agrees to, & shall, indemnify & hold harmless the City of La Quinta, its officers, agents and employees. 2. Any permit issued as a result of this application becomes null and void if work is not commenced within 180 days from date of issuance of such permit, or cessation of work for 180 days will subject permit to cancellation. I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all City, and State laws relating to the building construction, and hereby authorize,representatives of this City to enter upon the above -mentioned -property ffor-inspection purposes. , Signature (Owner/Agent) Date PERMIT# • ° BUILDING PERMIT ung-�.Iz DATE ' (fin s+ VALUATION s� %,�ti,��": LOT TRACT JOB SITE tO-145 Wk;SWIVAII"�` iD HO DROVE E APN ADDRESS .-/ OWNER CONTRACTOR / DESIGNER / ENGINEER I�:In t11F17 C'f'�('1�1.A1i': Y�'it�' d FIV r♦ai\..f •9 _� Vii R4. t �'j°T T+1 PC' i}V 4"04'.("4.1 (lt"yT,74."'t)1 �/',)'rt Vki !"Mr a U Vli Jtr 80-245 W1»S INVAM) HO DWE 73011 C0t NTP1V +~: [.UB 1.`R., : Uir1.*E F1 LA.QUijNTA CA 42253 PAt.i191k,'8f10.' CA 922oO i 760)34o-4037 f BL M0 USE OF PERMIT I'01)), A;<j!.%XAL NI3A POOL cos SPA UISIl; Y-dL1r.Ai,�,fwiB.l.;AiZRi0k;i «dfA. L K14, iN .rj,AC'jl: Xi i- R.v. i)I.A..VLAt _ I►. c.cii�l3 P0,0i spa I)X a SPA. 17,0+ 0,00 L COME, 101" t,� :ts' a.�:.i��..`.P�. ��AV A?/ 5i.iI'l PLAlvCHECK YrE 101-014C)439-318 S1221AS ("ON4"t'RO('11014I�T-F i,ffi f-4{Sb(Mlil r . plK'+.f(lufl tSLiif.•`i`tZkt t�L S':�i�. -- ,!'�N.il. jl�t-lJ�-�IZii-lJ1iQ 9°I? 4it1 ' PIAINIf INO FEE a -f ,cai� 1151-ia��N ►,U{1tf a°r.�lt, _ :ffft=i'£tiI'<�t.CCf',I.STRIV;ION ANI) fx1-AN Ef"OF(7 E ` 0 AIII, PEffit1fJ 11.4VON 014,, NOW 4� i7.t1 RECEIPT DATE �V-r� d DATE FINALED INSPECTOR INSPECTION RECORD OPERATION DATE I INSPECTOR OPERATION I DATE I INSPECTOR BUILDING APPROVALS MECHANICAL APPROVALS Set Backs Underground Ducts Forms & Footings Ducts �4 Slab Grade Return Air Steel Combustion Air Roof Deck Exhaust Fans O.K. to Wrap F.A.U. Framing Compressor Vents Insulation Fireplace P.L. Grills Fireplace T.Q. Fans & Controls Party Wall Insulation Condensate Lines Party Wall Firewall Exterior Lath Drywall - Int. Lath Final Final POOLS - SPAS BLOCKWALL APPROVALS steel Set Backs Electric Bond Footings Main Drain Bond Beam Approval to Cover Equipment Location Underground Electric Underground Plbg. Test Final Gas Piping t PLUMBING APPROVALS Gas Test Electric Final Waste Lines Heater Final Water Piping Plumbing Final Plumbing Top Out Equipment Enclosure Shower Pans O.K. for Finish Plaster Sewer Lateral Pool Cover Sewer Connection Encapsulation 7 - Gas Piping Gas Test Appliances Final COMMENTS: ` Final Utility Notice (Gas) ELECTRICAL APPROVALS Temp. Power Pole Underground Conduit Rough Wiring Low Voltage Wiring Fixtures Main Service Sub Panels Exterior Receptacles G.F.I. Smoke Detectors Temp. Use of Power Final Utility Notice (Perm) Dt)CIC�. . .. da rarr�tlms. faia lwae Ynes ar d,rulrcAIWA 289 PENETER 73 ' - DEPTH 3X5 4 tlmc XID. fh. armor GROUP 3 a .'roo Z .COPING CANTILEVER m _ DATEal , snature .I [Jh7T'E - - cAP9CLTY..._. 103 tp4f I . .. • .. .. .. NDTbii HP' - — Is G- J GOLF COURSE MOTOR HP NP m %TER 'STA RRE 300 sq FT 0 NOTIFADDVLM FILM RATE 107 IF" BACY14M ACCESS STACK ON HEATER NTe R 6e C d7 .- 4QQ KU P PROPOSED 31' RET&GNG WALL - _ NO R&R BY OWNER _ StcnoN I R&q ._—._:. 2 Rcc _. _ _ T 3 -SIfJMMER PL KM AMERICAN . - ('HFflf Val VP YES . ... - GA9JNE BY SDC F. 145. C . p . .. POOL LOff 400 W C].000 L7 . .. ELECTRICAL BY. SDC: IT 100 fA . v_ .. _ fM1[Mafs�at•ta ram Z I1N-3101. - - WA RITE �'-3• 3 Prt .. OEM BY Soo SQ 4000 o oEtx TYPE SLT FNS![ N[RL GREY . r Rw-w STEP FT. IA SPASPECB. DECO DRAM RAISED IP3qq- FREEFOM- 0 WATTSKOINF SEATS 22'24. 27'GAS ..-.. W -DAT6'X6 FT. t E -TIN W�—:7 - - -1-�TOP S M 3 'X 1'-. WIDE _REAS �" - j .� •• Nam, HAL AND DEBBIE COIffON d T 30' - - - BD-245 WEST WAROHD m . Q%: LAQUINT'A -W TRACLL4I A RESIDENCE ��...:: .. CD 0 :r APAVAT Poo/s N PALM DESERT TEMECULA- • 73-011 CDtXM 28910 RANCHO - CUIB DR. STE F-4 CAUFOO W RD. •. ,. U8'=L' SCALE PALM OESFRT CA. STE 20 . l{O[E LAPiDSCAPEAND FURNrrURE 92260 EMECLA CA. ARE SHOWN FOR LLLLWrRATLON . 2590 f7601 346-4032 (9091076-SWfI I ONLY AND ARE NOT MMUDED.- T SPA :VERTICAL FINISH i DECK DECK VENEER �t CONTRACTOR cannot assume rec on ibili v for GENERAL. SPECIFICATIONS.- ? damage to curbs, sidewalks, driveways, cementSIZE . : Is abs, sewers. lawn ,trees, fences, r ainina ' walls. sprinklers, telephone lines or shrubs. AREA 289 PERIMETER 73 } t . When access is made throughh a ne'Lhb—or— s DEPTH 3X 5 property it is understood that You the owner, CHOICE - GROUP 3 have that nei hbor s permission and assume full RBB, - _ + responsibility. COPING CANTILEVER DATE i signature PO L CAPACITY GALS PUMP CAPACITY 103 GPM ` MOTOR HP 1.5 GOLF -COURSE. MOTOR HP HP '. FILTER STA RITE 300 SQ FT NOTE:ADD VENT FILTER RATE 102 GPM BACKHOE ACCESS STACK ON HEATER T I 400 BTU - AIRPIPE PROPOSED 24" AINING WALL TURNOVER 2 HRS BY OWNER - . NO R&R E 2 5'-0 { _ = RETURN LINES _ 2 SKIMMERAMERICAN CHECK VALVE YES � R3'-6" GASLINE BY SDC FT. 145 5'-6" P/L i AQUA SWITCH_ 7'-3" ----WATERBRITE - _ POOL LIGHT 400 W CLOCK ELECTRICAL BY. SDC- 100 14'-3"1 " _5 _ 38'-3" CHEM,D WATERBRITE 0 -0 P/L � PLASTER COLOR WHITE 12" Y Db K SDC SQ. 400 3 DECK TYPE SLT FNSH NTRL GREY +6" i28'-6" `STEP FT. 22'-9 DECO DRAIN SPA SPECS. 30 9 FREEFORM � DESIGNER SIZE 7 RAISED 12" — — RT- " LITE 100 WATTS — (_ JOHN/EV TRI LEVEL SEATS 22" I ISTI ONC EK GAS 60' DATE ' DAMWALL 6 " X 6 FT. DAMWALL TOP TIL3 . T MAIN ('ki1-4-00 SPILLWAY SIZE 3 !,X 12 WIDE 7'-0" 22�-3" 22'-9" Y 4 REVISED SPILLWAY XX OPEN CLOSED # ETS 4 UPER LOWER 21'-6" 14'-0" _ ' Named. HAL AND DEBBIE COMPTON LECT 30' , �� Address: 80-245 WIO \ , �. s -r w (U%0 tom+o Qlt L LA QUINTA i TRACT LOT# �5 N ESIDENCE L YE Db dso w10 i poo/s .O CI OF LA QUINTA _ TtoN FEE of $so .` - • • A RE1NSPEC , BUILDING .& SAFETY DEPT. WILL BE,CHARGED IF THE APPROVED , PALM DESERT TEMECULA APPROVED PIANS AND 106 CARD ARE NOT ON � 73-011 COUNTRY 28910 RANCHO THE SITE ECR A SCHEDULES 1/8"=1' SCALE CLUB DR. STE F-4 CALIFORNIA RD. FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION. PALM DESERT CA. STE 206 .NO EXCEPT TEMECULA CA. / NOTE: LANDSCAPE AND FURNITURE 92260. 92590 DATE �II �_ BY t ARE SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATION (760)-346-4032 (909)676 -SWIM ONLY AND ARE NOT INCLUDED. IC #A-574127 - CCTV op= I A 01 INTA RONALD K. GRANIT Attorney at Law JUN 13 RECD 3999 Atlantic Avenue BUILDtt�t� ,-+sac., ��,�-� Long Beach CA 90807-2907 T� (562) 988-1413 Telephone (562) 492-6800 Facsimile June 9, 2003 City of La Quinta PO Box 1504.;, 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta CA 92253 Attention: Tom Hartung, Director of Building and Safety Re: 80-245 Westward Ho Drive Our Clients: Mr. and Mrs. Hal Compton Dear Mr. Hartung: Mr. Grant is currently, engaged in a two week trial in Orange County, California..I notified him of your letter and he informed me that-he would review the case of Burchett v. City of Newport each (1995) 33 CA4th 1472, and meet with the Comptons. He would then be in contact with you before the end of June to work out the details of this matter. Very truly you DI 1BRA Q. DENNY Paralegal to RONALD K. GRANIT, ESQ. :dqd cc: clients P.O. Box 1504 78-495 CALLS. TAmpico (760). 777-7000 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253' FAX (760) 777=7101 c June 5, 2003 1. Mr.. Ronald K. Granit, Esq. 3999 Atlantic Avenue Long Beach, CA 90807 ' Re: 80-245 Westward Ho Drive Dear Mr. Granit: I am in receipt of your letter of May 1, 2003, regarding the pool Fencing at the abovementioned property. Our records show that the encapsulation inspection was conducted on March 7, 2000. However, as'a result of a subsequent record. check, it was pound that the pool at the above address had not received a final approval from this . .department. Accordingly, in April of 2001, 1 attempted to notify the Comptons. at the Westward Ho address by certified mail, but- was unsuccessful. Subsequently the contractor was notified and an inspection was conducted on May 9, 2001. A correction list was. generated and among the items listed was the requirement for fencing around the pool. As of March, 2002, the pool had still not been finaled. A Long Beach address was obtained for . the Comptons and they were- notified by certified mail on March 18, 2002 of the deficiency. On March 26, 2002, I was contacted by phone by Mrs. Beverly Compton. I also had phone conversations with Mrs. Comptoneon April 26, 2002, April 29, 2002 and May 23, 2002. During those conversations Mrs. Compton assured me that.she was working .o resolve the problem and would . keep me apprised of her progress. The May 23, 2002 phone call was the last contact I had with Mrs: Compton. On April 22, 2003 the Comptons were again notified. by certified! mail that the fencing issue had still not been resolved and that failure to do so would cause the City to initiate legal action. After leaving several phone messages for each other, I spoke with Mr. Compton for the first time during this case on April 30, 2003.. At no time did we discuss litigation or whether or not Mr. Compton had received misinformation from the City regarding pool fencing requrements. He Page 2 June 5, 2003 did state that he -contacted his attorney and that I should expect correspondence concerning this issue. Finally, your statement that the fencing requirement is not related to safety, is not accurate. Safety is the only issue. The .City adopted the requirement for fencing around swimming pools in 1985 to ,protect children from 'accidental drownings. As with most Code adoptions, it was not made applicable retroactively to existing pools. The..pool without a fence next to your clients' house was built prior to the incorporation . of the City and therefore was :not required to have a fence. As I have explained .to your clients, I am sorry for any inconvenience which may have occurred as a result of the pool plans being approved without showing the required fencing. However, this does not relieve them from the responsibility to construct one. Our City Attorney, M. Katherine Jenson of Rutan &Tucker, suggested that you read Burchett vJ 'City of Newport Beach (1995) 33 Cal.App.4' 1472, a_ case that she personally litigated on this.point. The fencing requirement is not subject to variance or waiver. Your clients were informed on April 22, 2003, that they had 30 days to address this situation'or be subject to further legal action'by the City. The City has been ; more than patient in allowing your :clients to resolve this issue, but since the violation has existed for more than three years, 1 -have no choice but to seek further legal remedies in an attempt to rectify the situation. Sincerely, Tom Hartung Director of Building and Safety C M. Katherine Jenson, City Attorney, Rutan &(Tucker. - of i Building Department x M.emo _ r• ,. To: Greg Fox ; From: Greg Butler, Building & Safety Manager Date: May 8, 2001. Rei , Dodson Pools - Final Inspections ` Per Tom Hartung, in the interest of getting•things off the 'books, it is °acceptable -_o perform Final Inspections at the following pools when requested: 43-676 Alba Court (9910-073) 45-415 Ashwood (0003-081) " 80-245 Westward Ho Drive (0001-051) . The reason that you were unable to find the permit is that it was on Tom's desk. Thee is an issue at that property of which you need to be aware. We accidentally issued that pool permit without requiring a fence: The only place that fences are not required is in a walled country club or sii-nilar community (LQMC §8.06.040(b)(2)). While4his community is on a'golf course, it is not walled aid therefore not exempt from the wall requirement. The pre -site was approved in error, and there are ether pools in the neighborhood without fences. However, those were, built prior to the City's incorporation. While it may become a contentious situation, please perform the inspection when requested and make `sure.that you write at least one correction -the one requiring the fence. See me for the permit card and other information if necessary. Thanks, S Page 1 - Cay RONALD K. GRANIT RAV ATTORNEY Ai LAW d 7 RCCD 3999 ATLANTIC AVENUE /�+,�Fp�)r ped [(� LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90807 �•YP-=TELEPHONE 915 62) 988-1413 FACSIMILE (562) 492-5800 May 1, 2003 Tom Hartung Director of Building and Safety City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta CA 92253 Re: 80-245 Westward Ho Drive Our Clients Hal and Beverly Compton Dear Hartung: I represent Mr -and Mrs. Compton in regard to the request by the. Building and Safety Department that a fence'be installed:'between my`clients',backyard.pool and the ,adiacent golf course`behind their"home. My clients and I, would like to work, cooperatively with you. ,In `the interest ;of"starting *a dialogue for resolving this matter, I would like to.provide you with some of the histoncal_background: in this matter. BACKGROUND Mr. and Mrs. Compton purchased the house in La Quinta in 1999.'W Compton personally called the City of La Quinta and asked if he needed to have a fence around the pool.. The City informed him that after ascertaining that there were locked gates on both sides of the front of the house, and that the back of the house is on the golf course, he did not need a fence. Mr. Compton contracted with Dodson Pools. Dodson Pools provided a rough drawing of the pool and Jacuzzi. Dodson Pools completed the pool, and filled it with water. When Dodson was paid they gave the Comptons the plans and the inspection card. The plans were approved by the City of La Quinta on January 12, 2000. The plans call for a 24" retaining wall by the owner. However, the City approved plans did not call for a fence. The Comptons have the City of La Quinta Building & Safety Inspection card in their possession. On January 25, 2000, the Pre-Gunite was signed off by the City Inspector. On January 18, 2000, the rough electrical, plumbing and rough gas and gas test were signed off. On March 7, 2000, the requirement for Pool Pre Plaster and Pool Fence and Gate were signed. off by the City.Inspector. Approximately, two years. passed, and the .Comptons. received a call from a representative of the City, of La Quinta informing them that they needed to put a fence around the pool. This evidently stemmed_ from the fact that.the pool was never finalized by Dodson Pools. Apparently, Dodson Pools was aware _ of this requirement, yet failed to inform the Comptons, and failed to get a final permit. Dodson Pools subsequently filed for bankruptcy, and we can no longer find a phone number for them in Palm Desert. RONALD K. GRANIT ATTORNEY AT LAW _ City of La Quinta/Director of Building& Safety Re: Hal and Beverly Compton (80-245 Westward Ho Drive) May 1,2003 Page Two When the City of La Quinta was provided with this information, you told Mr. Compton that you knew that he was told that he didn't need a fence, but that the City of La Quinta errored in telling him that he did not need a fence. You then told Mr. Compton that it was "too bad," but that he could not sue the City. To further complicate matters, when the Comptons built the pool they also built a retaining wall because their property line was three feet above the golf course. When Roger Snellenberer purchased the golf course, he revamped the entire course which included backfilling the three foot drop. The City informed the Comptons that the rule is that the fence needs to be five feet above the adjoining ground (golf course). Had the Comptons known they could have placed a two foot railing on the retaining wall and complied with the requirement. Apparently, the fence is not a safety issue. If it were, the next door neighbor would be required to put a fence around her pool, but there is none. We are told that she built her pool prior to 1999, and it is Grandfathered not to require a fence. Therefore, we fail to see where the fence is a safety issue. PROPOSAL The Comptons built the pool in its present location because a fence was not required, the pool could have been built to the side of the residence. A fence would obstruct the Comptons view and adversely affect the value of their property. Therefore, some reasonable accommodation should be possible. It is the Comptons' intention to make this home their retirement residence; and would like to maintain a positive relationship with the City of La Quinta. The Comptons would like to know if a variance could be applied for in this matter to allow them to maintain, the property in its current condition. Please contact me so that a mutually agreed upon plan may be implemented in this matter. Very truly, y rs, i J d Oila t P.O. Box 1504 .78-495 CALLS TAMPICO. (760) 777-7000 / LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 (TDD) (7 6:0) 777-1227 April 12, 2001 Mr. and Mrs.; Compton 80-245, Westward Ho Drive La Quinta CA 92253 .Subject: Permit #0001-051 Pear Mr. and Mrs. Compton: According to our records, the above mentioned permit for a pool and spa has not been finaled. It has also been discovered that the project was approved in error because a five foot fence surrounding the pool and spa is not indicaled on the plans. I apologize for this oversight and realize that there-are existing pools in your neighborhood which were built without fences before the. City incorporated. However, the City's ordinance requires that all pools that are not within a gated community be enclosed by a five foot fence for safety purposes. Would you please contact me at your earliest convenience so that v%Ae may discuss- your iscussyour options for the resolution of this issue. I again apologize for any inconvenience,this may cause. Sincerely, Tom Hartung, Director of Building and Safety 777-7013. f March 15, 2002 Mr. and Mrs. Compton 4425 Atlantic Avenue Suite A15, Long Beach, CA 90807 Subject: Permit #0001-051 for poor at 80-245 Westward Ho Drive Dear Mr. and Mrs. Compton: According to our records, the,above mentioned permit for a pool and spa has not been finaled. It has also been discovered that the project was approved in error because a five foot fence surrounding the pool and spa is not indicF-ted on the plans. I apologize for this oversight and realize that there are exist ng pools in your neighborhood which were built without fences before the City incorporated. However, the City's ordinance requires that all pools that are not Within a gated community be enclosed by a' five foot fence for safety purposes. Would you please contact me at your earliest convenience so that we may discuss your options for the resolution of this issue. I again apologize for any inconvenience this may. cause. Sincerely, Tom Hartung, Director of B.uilding and Safety 760-777-7013 JCUUUII JGV I'Glllall�. (a) Public and Semi -Public Swimming Pools — Minimum fencing requirements shall be those set forth in Chapter 2-90 of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These requirements are to be enforced by the Riverside County Health Department. (b): Private Swimming Pools — The following fencing requirements shall apply to private swimming Pools: (1) Pools located on individual residential lots not within the boundaries of a country club or similar walled residential development project. Every person who ownsor who is in possession of land upon _ which a swimming pool that exceeds 18 inches in depth is located shall construct and maintain in good condition, completely surrounding such parcel of land or the swimming pool itself, an enclosure not less Ithan five (5) feet in height, consisting of a fence, wall, buildings or a combination thereof. The enclosure Quinta 9-99) 180. shall be constructed of chain-link fencing of not.less than 14 -gauge and 2 -inch mesh, or concrete, wood, wrought iron, or other substantial material, with openings of not greater than four (4) inches, designed to withstand 15 pounds per square foot of uniform horizontal load and shall be constructed so as to discourage climbing by small children. The space between the bottom of the enclosure and the ground shall not exceed two (2) inches. All gates or doors through the enclosure shall be equipped with a self -latching device not less than five (5) feet from the ground that keeps such gate or door securely closed, or shall be securely .locked at all times when the pool is not in use. (2) Pools located within the boundaries of a country club or similar walled residential development project. Exempt. (Ord. 85 § 1, 1985; Ord: 84 § 1, 1985: Ord. 68 § I (part), 1985) 8.06.050 Additional safety requirements. In addition to the requirements in Section 8.06.040, all private pools located at a single-family residence constructed after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section shall contain at least one of the following safety features: A. The pool shall be isolated from access to a home by an enclosure that meets the requirements of Section 8.06.040: B. The pool shall be equipped with an approved safety pool cover. C. The residence shall be equipped with exit alarms on all doors providing direct access to the pool. m . An exit alarshall be defined as a device that makes an audible, continuous sound when the door which it is monitoring is opened or left ajar. Exit alarms may be battery operated or may be connected to the electrical wiring of the building. D. All doors providing direct access from the home to the swimming pool shall be equipped with a self- closing, self -latching device with a release mechanism placed no lower than. fifty-four inches above the floor. E. Other means of protection, if the degree of protection afforded is equal to or greater than that afforded by any of the devices set .forth in subsections A through D of this section inclusive, as determined by the building official. (Ord. 311 § 1, 1997)