HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/12/1998 - Regular Minutes - Construction Board of Adjustments "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL"
MINUTES
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS
January 12, 1998
6:00 Q.M.
Training Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Dan Sears, Vice Chairman James Holster,
Board Members Glenn Thomas,Robert Mooney,
Bill Lewis, George McLean, Steve Abalos(alternate)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Board Member alternate Wick McKean
STAFF PRESENT: Building Official Lance Simms, Fire Marshal Jon Mies,
Plans Examiner Carl Warren,Building Technician Lisa
Hankins, Senior Secretary Melissa Rodgers
AGENDA ITEM NO, 11 Call meeting to order
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dan Sears
AGENDA ITEM NO.2: Hear visitors for items not on agenda
There were no visitors
AGENDA ITEM NO.3: Approve minutes from Construction Board of Adjustments and
Appeals Meeting on Monday,November 17, 1997.
Robert Mooney motioned to approve the minutes, George McLean seconded the motion,The
Board concurred, (7-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.4: Consider Variance request 98-001 to request modification to
Section 504.1,"Commercial Hoods", 1994 Standard Mechanical Code. An exhaust hood shall be installed
for all commercial,industrial, institutional and other food heat-processing equipment producing smoke or
grease-laden air. The applicant is James Holster for Peace Lutheran Church.
Dan Sears asked for staff to explain the variance request.
Jon Mies,Fire Marshal took the floor to explain the variance request to the board members.
Jon told the board that the applicant submitted plans for remodeling the existing kitchen of the Peace
Lutheran Church. The plans indicated the proposed expansion of the kitchen with the
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
January 12, 1998
Minutes
"SUBJECT TO APPROVAL,,
relocation of existing appliances and the addition of classrooms.
Jon said that when the church was originally built,the cooking equipment was installed without a fire
suppression system. However,since a church is considered a commercial building, it is the fire
departments interpretation of the code to require a commercial vent hood and fire suppression system for
the kitchen cooktop. Jon told the board that all the churches that have been built in the city within the last
15-20 years complied with this code requirement.
Jon Mies said the Fire Department did not support the variance request.
Dan Sears opened the public meeting.
Board Member,James Holster abstained from voting because he was speaking on behalf of the applicant
for this variance request. Mr. Holster took the floor to explain that even though the church was going to
be expanding the existing kitchen,they were not planning on installing new kitchen equipment. Members
of the church who handle most of the cooking for various church functions,agreed they would use the
existing cook-tops and oven. He said most of the time,the members bring a covered dish prepared from
home,and do not use the appliances in the kitchen.
Mr. Holster said that he understood the Fire Departments concern regarding life-safety and fire protection,
and he agreed that all churches are considered commercial buildings, however, since the cooking
equipment is residential in nature, the code requirement for a commercial hood should not apply in this
situation.
Dan Sears closed the public meeting.
The board held discussion on this variance and directed questions at staff.
The board members verified with the applicant that the existing residential kitchen appliances would
remain,and that no commercial cooking equipment would be installed. They asked about the cost of
installing the vent hood and the fire suppression system for the church,which staff said varied from
building to building. The board members asked staff about existing safety features existing in the kitchen.
Glenn Thomas made a motion to grant the variance with the condition the church install a
40 BC fire extinguisher in the kitchen area in addition to any code required fire extinguishers.
George McLean seconded the motion, the board concurred, (6-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.5: Consider Variance Request 98-002 to request modification to
the 1994 Standard Building Code, Section 1006.2.4. Exterior stairs shall be separated from the interior of
the building by walls with a fire resistance rating of not less than 1 hour, with fixed or self-closing opening
protectives as required for enclosed stairs. This protection shall extend vertically from the ground to a
point 10 ft. (3048 mm)above the topmost landing or the roof line,whichever is lower,and horizontally 10
ft(3048 mm)from each side of the stairway.
Openings within the 10 ft(3048 mm) horizontal extension of the protected walls beyond the stairway shall
be equipped with fixed 3/4-hour assemblies.
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
January 12, 1998
Minutes
page 2
"SUBIECT TO APPROVAL"
EXCEPTIONS: 1)Exterior stairways may be unprotected when serving an exterior exit access balcony
which has two exterior stairways,remotely located as require in 1006.2.2. 2) Such protection is not
required in two story buildings where there is a second exit remotely located as required in 1006.2.2.
Dan Sears asked staff to explain the variance request.
Lance Simms, Building Official, took the floor to explain the variance request to the board members. He
said the applicant approached him about constructing a 10 unit apartment addition to an existing 8 unit
apartment building at 701 A Balcones Drive. According to the code,a building with a single exterior stair
requires a separation of the stairway from the interior of the units. Lance displayed a copy of the building
plans to the board and explained what the code was referring to on the variance. He indicated that the
proposed stairway balcony was the only entrance and exit to the second floor units. In the event of a fire,
there would be no other balconies or stairways to exit from, possibly putting the occupants in a hazardous
situation. Lance said that because of this building floor plan,the code required a one-hour separation for
the walls,and 45 minute rated doors, door frames and windows that surround the stairs.
Lance Simms confirmed that existing apartment buildings were allowed to be constructed without the
required rating because the Building Department was only recently aware of this code requirement. He
said the applicant was willing to rate the walls,doors and frames,however, he was requesting a variance
for the window rating because of the expense involved.
Lance said staff recommendation was to grant the variance since the applicant agreed to rate the walls,
doors and door frames. He said he felt that Building Staff was partially responsible because they had not
previously discovered this code requirement, and the applicant was allowed to construct other apartments
without the required separation.
The board members directed questions at building staff.
They asked about changing the location of the living room windows. Lance said that was an option,
however, that would require a complete change to the building. The board members verified cost of fire
rated windows,which proved to be expensive.
Dan Sears opened the public hearing
The applicant,Joe Courtney, took the floor to speak on behalf of the variance request. Mr. Courtney
said that they had agreed to rate the walls,doors and door frames, however to rate the windows would add
too much cost the project. Also, he said it was not practical to change the floor plan because this was an
addition to an existing building with the same floor plan as the previously constructed. Mr. Courtney
asked the board for the variance request on the windows,and to allow the construction of the building as
the plans were submitted.
Dan Sears closed the public hearing.
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
January 12, 1998
Minutes
page 3
-SUBJECT TO APPROVAL"
The board members asked aft the possibility of installing another set of stairs behind the building,but
Lance said that would interfere with the rear setback.
The board continued to discuss different scenarios regarding fire hazards,escape routes and other options
to the rated walls and doors. Some of the board members thought the building would be safe in the event
of a fire,saying there would be ample time to escape the building. Other board members thought it was too
risky to leave the building designed as is.
After further discussion, George McLean made a motion to deny the variance,Robert Mooney seconded
the motion, the motion failed by a vote of 34.
Glenn Thomas then made a motion to grant the variance,James Holster seconded the motion,the board
voted 4-3 in favor of granting the variance.
AGENDA ITEM NO.6: Other Business; Discuss minimum foundation requirements
in reference to updating the latest standards.
Lance Simms took the floor to brief the board members on the process of updating the minimum
foundation standards. This briefing was a follow-up from the March 1997 Construction Board Meeting
where Lance initially presented the updated proposed foundation standards.
Lance handed out information to the board members that included the existing foundation standards,
proposed foundation standards and an outline of the updating process. Lance reviewed the information
with the board and requested a formal vote so he could inform the council of the Construction Boards
recommendation.
George Mclean motioned to submit the revised foundation standards to City Council as presented, James
Holster seconded the motion,the board concurred,(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM NO.7: Adjourn
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
January I2, 1998
Minutes
page 4
"SUBJECT TO APPROVAL"
APPROVED-
Chairman: Dan Sears
ATTEST:
91744Let_
ding Technician: Lisa Hankins
CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
January 12, 1998
Minutes
page 5