Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout25 Regular Meeting 9.28.76CITY OF COLLEGE STATION POST OFFICE BOX 9960 11 0 1 TEXAS A VENU E COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 7 7 840 MEMORANDUM TO : Building Code Bo a rd of Adjustment FROM : Building Official SUBJECT : Meeting of September 28, 197 6 1 . Mr. Earl Merre l l requested a change to be made in the Building Code i n College Station to a ccomodate the Bank of .A&M Building and simila r type constructi on. The Council declined to change the Code, but in light of information ga thered since your l a st meeting, they have referred the variance ba ck to t he Buildi ng Code Board . 2. We have checked with the Bui lding Officials in Da llas, San An tonio, a nd Aust i n, all of which use the Un iform Building Code and we found t hat all but San Antonio would a llow a stair between t h e ground floor a nd next adjacent floor to be un-enclosed . 3 . We ha ve checked with the techn ical staff of t he Southern Building Co n gress a nd find t ha t The Southern Bui lding Code requi res enclosure, but that the staff recomme nds tha t we submit a change proposa l to t h e Congress along the lines that Mr. Merrell proposes . 4. The Fire Chi ef and Fire Mars hal have re-examine d the proposed buildi ng and have found tha t it would present no problem as proposed, and feel t hat some of the requirements made on May 7 could be eliminated. 3306·3308 bottom of ramps shall have a dimension in the direction of ramp run of not less than 6 feet. Doors in any position shall not reduce the minimum dimension of the landing to less than 42 in c hes and shall not reduce the required width by more than 3 Y2 inches when fully open. (e) Handrails. Ramps having slopes exceeding one vertical to 15 horizontal shall have handrails as required for stairways, except that intermediate handrails shall not be required . (f) Construction. Ram ps shall be constructed as required for stair- ways. (g) Surface. The surface of ramps shall be roughened or shall be of nonslip materials. Horizontal Exit Sec. 3307. (a) Used as a Required Exit. If conforming to the provi- sions of this Chapter, a horizonta l exit may be considered as a required exit. (b) Openings. All openings in a wall which provides a h orizontal exit shall be protected by a fire assembly h a ving a fire-resistance rating of not less than one and one-half hours. Such fire assemb ly shall be main taine d self-closing or shall be au tomatic closing as provided in Section 4306 (b). (c) Discharge Areas. A horizontal exi t shall lead i nto a floor area having capacity for an occupant lo ad not less than the occupant load served by such exit. The capaci ty shall be determined by allowing 3 square feet of net clear floor area per ambulatory occupan t and 20 square fee t per nonambulatory occupant. The area into which the horizontal exit leads shall be provided with exits other than additional h orizon tal exi ts as required by Section 3302. Exit Enclosures Sec. 3308. (a) General. Every interior stairway, ramp, or escalator shall be enclosed as specified in this Section. EXCEPTIONS: I. In othe r than Group D Occupancies, and enclo- sure will not be requ ired for a stai rw ay , ramp, or escalato r serv in g on ly one adjacen t floor and not con nected with corridors or stai rw ays serving other floors. Fo r enclosure or escalators servi ng Groups F and G Occu- pancies, see Chapter 1 7. . 2 . Stairs in Group I Occupa ncies and stairs within individual apa rt- ments in Group H Occupancies need not be e ncl osed. (b) Enclosure Construction. Enclosure walls shall be of not less than two-hour fire-resistive cons truction in buildings more than four stories in height and shall be of not less than one-hour fire-resistive construction elsew here. (c) Openings into Enclosures. There shall be no openin gs into ex it enclosures except exit doorways and openings in exterior walls. All exit doors in an ex it enclosure shall be protected by a fire assemb ly having a fir e-protection rating of not less than one hour where one-hour shaft 483 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 September 23 , 197 6 MEMORAl.'JDUM TO: Honorable Mayo r and City C01.rn.c il FROM : Bu ildin g Official SUBJECT: Proposed changes in the Bu ilding Code (1) This office made tel ephone inquiri es to other jurisd ic t ions and asked the following questions : --Under what code do you operate~ --Are unenc l osed monumental stairs a llowed to be used as required exits in your jurisd ic t i on ? --Do you have any spec i a l provi s i on for v ented multi story atriums or garden lobbies? (2) The San Antonio Bu ild ing Officia l said that San Anton i o u ses the Uniform Bu i lding Code, that two enclosed exits are required in add ition to any monumental stair in every c ase , and that they have no special provision for a garden lobby as is proposed here . The Ch i ef Bu ild ing Inspector (Bu ild ing Offi c ial) in Dallas says that Dallas operates under the Uniform Co de , bu t he says that an enclosed stair i s never r equired between a first and second flo or . Mon umental stairs as propos ed here do not have t o meet any special provisions. Th e Bu ild ing Direc tor of Aus tin says that they u se t he Uniform Code and that enc l osure i s not required for stairs between two adjacent floors . No special provi s i ons are needed whether or not the stair ends in a garden lobby. Mr . R.J. Whalen , a staff memb er of the Southern Building Congress in Birmingham , says that similar questions have c ome up before, but that no member jurisdiction has proposed a change . He was impre ssed with the safeguards pro- vided by this proposal and asks that we submit it as a proposal for the 197 7 revi s i ons of t he Standard Code . He d oes not encourage the adoption of ind i- vidual changes by membe r jurisdictions , but h e feels that t he governing body could grant a varianc e on appeal from the deci sion of the Bu ilding Code Board of Adjustment . (Over) Mr . Claycamp of t he Bu ilding Co de Board of Adjustment does n ot feel that it wo uld be a dvi sable to make a change in the Code at this time . Chief Lan dua does not favor the co d e provi s i on as vir itten, but feels that the c onstruction as proposed would be satisfactory i f the smok e -proof doors are r e tajne d in the second f l oor corridor s and a smoke activated system exists to shut down air handl er systems . (3) It is my r ecommendat i on that t he Council c ons i der gra..nting a vari an ce for the completi on of thi s structure in accordance with the terms of the proposed amendmen t and the Fire Ch ief's recow.mendat ion, reject the proposed ordinance, and a llow the proposal t o be s u bmitted to the Southern Building Con gr e s s as a revis i on to the text of the Code. The variance wou l d r evise the decision of the Board on May 7, 197 6 by deleting the r e qu irement for wire glass. This rec ommend ation is based upon t he examinati on of the Unif orm Building Code and other jurisdictions ' interpretations of it, information which was not available to the Board of Ad justment on May 7 . If this building were to be built in Austin or Dallas , or any City und er the Uniform Code without special amendm ent, it wou ld not be required to have vent jng, smoke control, or any type of en clo sure and it would not be limited as to construction type. Our Fire Depart men t fin ds no problem with the build ing proposed . The City 's intention to propose a chan ge to the Building Con gres s would provide some justification for consi deration of a variance, \Nh ich justi f ication did not exist when the Board of Adjustment con s i dered the matter . ... T I I I I ~ I I I I i I l I I ( ( MEMB ERS PRES EN T: MEMBERS ABSENT: VISITORS PRESENT: MI NUTES BU ILDI NG COD E BOARD OF AD J1 3TMENT Se p tember 28 , 197 6 Chairman Clayca.:ip; Members Hirsch, Riley ; Council Liaison Halter; Building Officia l Koehler; Fire Marshal Davis. Sorenson, Ma.son Dennis Goehring, Earl Merrell Koehler explained that t he matter of stairwells in the Bank of A & M building was subject to reconsideration due to f urther investigation of other standard codes, practice in other jurisdictions, and the City's intention to propose a change to the So u thern Building Congress. Davis stat ed that the Fire Department felt that there was no need of wire glass enclosure s and that a smo k e de tector system rather than an extensive fire alarm system would be a de quate. Claycamp suggested that t he Board de t ermine whe t her or not it was neccessary to vent the stairwells and lobby, whether or not tempered glass could be substit u t ed for wire glass, and whether or not the s moke doors would be r equire d in the second floor corridor. By unanimous consent t h e Board agreed that manually op erat ed vents or scuttles be provided over each stairwell and at one point in the lob by roof for smoke removal purposes; that wire glass not be required a t any point in lieu of t em pere d glass; and that t he smoke doors in the second floor corridor be retained. Claycamp suggested that unusual types of cons t ruction should be dealt with by individual variance rather than specific code changes, and re- quested that if such changes were to be made, t h e Board be given ade- quate time to consider i t s recommendations. There being no other bUsiness, the meeting was adjourned. We .the undersigned members of the Building Cod e Board of Adjustment of the City of College Stat ion, having been present at the meeting of the .Board on September 28, 1976 do hereby cert ify t hat the above minutes accurately reflect the decision rende red and the vote of the undersigned on the question.