Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/16/2001 - Regular Minutes - Construction Board of Adjustments (2) "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" MINUTES CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS 16 July 2001 6:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Dan Sears, Vice Chairman George McLean, Board Members: Robert Mooney, Frank Cox, Kevin Kuddes, Larry Patton, Alternate Mark Clayton MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Glenn Thomas, Alternate Neal Nutall STAFF PRESENT: Building Official Lance Simms, Plans Examiner Carl Warren, Energy Auditor Brian Henry, Fire Marshal Jon Mies, Senior Assistant City Attorney Roxanne Nemcik,Assistant City Attorney Joe Jackson, and Staff Assistant Marla E. Brewer AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call meeting to order Chairman, Dan Sears, called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Consider request for absence No absent sheets were submitted. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Hear visitors for items not on agenda. No visitors chose to speak. AGENDA ITEM NO.4: Approve minutes from Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals meeting on Monday, April 30, 2001. Larry Patton motioned to approve the minutes. Frank Cox seconded the motion; and the board concurred, (7-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Public hearing for the consideration and possible action of Variance 01-1653 to request modification to Section 704.3 of the 1994 Standard Building Code. The applicant is Bruce Breening, Dan Sears asked staff to brief the board on the request. "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes Lance Simms took the floor. Lance referenced a site plan in the board's packet and said he would be using it to describe the situation. He said this case is for a new building containing two separate tenants (McDonald's and Blockbuster). Lance said the unique thing about this situation is that the applicants want to have the tenant or occupancy separation wall that contains a substantial amount of glass. He went on to say the Standard Building Code (SBC) requires a two-hour rated occupancy separation wall and a one-hour rated tenant separation wall for the proposed construction. He said in this particular case, a two-hour rated wall (the higher rating) would be required. Lance added that the SBC also provides for an exception that allows a building containing mixed uses(assembly and mercantile, in this case)to be considered a single occupancy if the entire building conforms to the requirements of the most restrictive occupancy. He said that this means that if the building meets the code requirements for assembly occupancy, the two-hour rated occupancy separation wall is not required. He added that the one-hour rated tenant separation wall is still required per the SBC. Lance said that he and a representative from McDonald's met concerning the code requirements and identified some options. Lance referenced his staff report and listed the options as: 1) provide a two hour rated occupancy separation wall between McDonald's and Blockbuster. 2) construct the entire building to meet the requirements for assembly occupancy (automatic sprinkler system, emergency lighting, etc.) and provide a one- hour rated tenant separation wall between McDonald's and Blockbuster. Lance said he told the applicant about a new product that looks like glass that will give you up to a three-hour rating. He said it is actually ceramic but it is clear like glass. He added that it is a very expensive product. 3) construct the entire building to meet the code requirements for assembly occupancy (automatic sprinkler system, emergency lighting, etc.) and apply for a variance to the one-hour rated tenant separation wall. Lance stated that the reason they discussed the variance as an option is because under the new 2000 International Building Code, if the building construction meets the code requirements for an assembly occupancy, the one-hour tenant separation wall is not required. Lance said the applicant chose to pursue the third option. He added that the applicant felt it was very important to keep the glass in the tenant separation wall and that he would let the applicant discuss the reasons for that in greater detail. Lance asked if anyone had any questions for him. George McLean asked if the cooking area would be handled by the sprinkler system if a problem arose? Lance said the cooking equipment would typically have a fire suppression system that is dedicated to it but that the addition of the automatic sprinkler system would help too. Mark Clayton asked if McDonalds was classified as an assembly? Lanced answered, yes it is classified as a small assembly. Dan Sears opened the public hearing. He asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the request. Bruce Breening, applicant, took the stand. He said he would like to explain why they feel it is important to have the visibility between the two businesses. He explained that this location was going to be the first McDonald's/Blockbuster Video combination in the country. He added that there are many benefits to this combination. He said that the peak times for McDonald's are the slow times for Blockbuster and vice versa so they compliment each other from a customer standpoint. Mr. Breening added that this is a test and could be something that happens in other locations. He said they feel the ability to easily see and walk between the two businesses without having to go outside is very important for the success and the test of this particular location. There was further discussion between the board members, Bruce Breening, and Lance Simms. Dan Sears asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition to the request? He then asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of or opposition the to request. 2 - 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes No one choose to speak. Dan Sears closed the public hearing. Larry Patton motioned to approve the variance as per staffs recommendation. Kevin Kuddes seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (7-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council concerning the adoption of the 2000 International Energy Conservation Code, with modifications to Appendix 7, Chapter 3, College Station Code of Ordinances, following a presentation from Brian Henry, Energy Auditor. Dan Sears asked staff to brief the board on the request. Brian Henry took the floor. He gave the board a handout and explained that the state passed a law that requires cities to adopted the 2000 International Energy Code by 1 January 2002. Brian told the board that the handout he gave them outlines the differences between the International code and our current energy code. He told them that one of the programs we have today is called the Good Cents program and the new energy code closely follows the same kind of guidelines as the Good Cents program does. He explained that the Good Cents program is for builders that choose to build a more efficient home then the standard home. Brian started the review of the energy code at Chapter 5 - Building Envelope. He said that the new code will require recessed can light fixtures to be sealed fixtures where the attic air cannot infiltrate into the home. He continued by saying all the exterior seams and penetrations in the building envelope must be sealed. He gave the example of plumbing and electrical penetrations that will be required to be sealed. Brian then said that the type of windows required by the energy code would be based on the percentage of glazing or glass to the gross exterior wall's square footage. He referenced a chart in the code and said the majority of the homes wilt require double pane windows. George McLean asked about the sealed recessed can light fixture. He asked about the heat generated by the lights. Brian told him that the kind of fixtures they use today are sealed in a manner where the light fixture is allowed to breathe and to eliminate heat buildup. Brian moved on to the Building Mechanical Systems. He said that the A/C & heating systems must have means of control for air distribution. He continued by stating that this means control dampers must be installed where the supply air enters the plum so you can modulate the airflow to each room. He added that our current code does not have this as a requirement. Brian continued by saying that gas fired furnaces should have a minimum efficiency rating of 78 to 80%. He said all duct collars must be sealed to the plenum, supply and return air joints must be sealed with welds, mastic or tapes. He added that our current code does not have this as a requirement. Robert Mooney asked if there were requirements for testing the ducts to ensure the joints are all sealed? Brain told him no. Robert Mooney then asked how would you know if the duct work is tight? Brain said if they are installed per the manufacturers specifications, the duck leakage should be minimum. Robert Mooney said he felt that there should be some regulation that requires testing. Brian stated that he would look into it. 3 - 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes Brian said that A/C systems must be 10 SEER or better. He said he was hoping that the new code would require a minimum rating of 12 SEER but it does not. He added that 10 SEER units should be phased out by 2006. He then said that multiple family dwellings must have a means of separately metering each tenant. He said even if a tenant has one system they must still have a method way of sub metering for each tenant in order to monitor the consumption for each unit. Brian them moved on to Chapter 6— Insulation Requirements. He said that the wall and attic insulation requirements are based on percentage of glazing to gross exterior wall square footage. He said that the majority of the homes would require R11 for walls& R19 for attic up to 20%. He said he was hoping this would be higher, good since homes require R13 in the walls and R30 in the attic. Kevin Kuddes asked what safety checks are in place to make sure the seal is tight so that you don't get a sick home where you don't get enough clean air coming in? Brian said there is some testing that could be done and gave an example of what the energy department does to test a Good Cents home. Brian said one of the other changes is the new energy code requires the R-value of insulation to be indicated such that the value can be identified during inspection. As an alternative, the contractor can submit a certificate confirming the R-value of the insulation installed. George McLean asked if the homeowner would get the certificate. Brain said yes, it must be posted in the house. He said another requirement in the new code is a provision for measuring the thickness of blown-in insulation. Brian said the new code requires that thickness markers be used every 300 sq. ft. in the attic to help identify the insulation thickness during inspection. George McLean asked if there was a system to assure blown in insulation doesn't get through the vents to the outside? Brain answered yes there are. Larry Patton asked Brian to define building envelope for him. Brain said it is the heated square footage. Larry Patton asked about the kind of recessed light fixtures that are not designed to be sealed. He asked how would these be sealed. Brain told him there were guidelines that explained how to seal those type fixtures. George McLean said he was concerned about the use of the word "tape", under Building Mechanical Systems#3, without a definition of the types of tape that was acceptable to use. Brain said that the kind of tape that is to be used by the A/C contractor is different then the kind of tape we could go buy in a store. He added that the state has requirements for the kind of tape they can use. He said that the tape has an identifying mark on it so we know if they are using an approved tape. Robert Mooney said he would like to see an amendment that would require testing to be done to ensure the ducts are sealed properly. George McLean agreed. Brain said he would do that. Dan Sears opened the public hearing and asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the request. No guests were present. Dan Sears asked if anyone would like to speak in favor or opposition of the item. No guests were present. Dan Sears closed the public hearing. Dan Sears asked if anyone was ready to make a motion. 4- 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes Robert Mooney made a motion to adopt the 2000 International Energy Code with an amendment to test the air ducts to ensure that there is no leakage. Dan Sears said he wasn't sure if they could do that. Lance took the stand and said yes the board could make that motion. He then asked if anyone has given any consideration to the costs associated with the testing. Lance also questioned the wisdom of stating that there should be no leakage in the duct system. Lance recommended that the board consider allowing a percentage of leakage and asked Brain if it is possible to achieve no leaks in a duct system. Brian answered that industry standard is 10% leakage. Lance said that he simply wanted the board to consider all the factors involved in duct testing before making a final decision. The board discussed this issue further. Brian explained the process involved in testing a Good Cents home for infiltration. After further discussion, the board asked Brian if he could look into the duct testing issue and come back before the board at a later date. Robert Mooney withdrew his first motion and made a motion to table the item until the amendment(s) could be addressed at a later daze. Larry Patton seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (7-0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council concerning the adoption of the 2000 International Residential Code, with modifications to Appendix 1, Chapter 3, College Station Code of Ordinances, following a presentation from Lance Simms, Building Official. Dan Sears asked staff to brief the board on the request. Lance Simms took the floor. Lance updated the board on the progress of the adoption process for the 2000 International Codes. He then told them that Governor Perry Signed SB 365 adopting the International Residential Code (IRC) as the residential building code for the State of Texas. He said the bill goes into effect on September 1, 2001 and gives cities until January 1, 2002 to transition and begin enforcing the new code. He said this means it is not a matter of if we will adopt the IRC but a matter of when. Lance started the review of the IRC with Chapter 1 —Administration. He referred to a handout that the board members had the compared the IRC provisions with the provisions of our current code— The 1992 CABO One and Two Family Dwelling Code. Lance said the IRC contains an expanded list of items not requiring permits such as sidewalks, painting, playground equipment, etc. He added it also includes an exception for accessory structures, such as a storage building in your backyard. He said he wants to amend this code section and stated that he would discuss it further when he reviews the amendments. Lance said the IRC also grants the Building Official authority to disconnect service utilities when necessary to eliminate an immediate hazard to life or property. He said the IRC also authorizes the Building Official to establish a permit fee refund policy. Lance moved to Chapter 2— Definitions. He said many new definitions were added to be consistent with the other International Codes. 5 - l3 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16. 2001 - Minutes Lance reviewed Chapter 3- Building Planning. He said the IRC requires handrails for all stairs with two or more risers; under CABO, it is three or more risers. He said the minimum handrail height is 34" in the IRC; it is 30" under the CABO. He continued by stating that the 1RC requires guardrails to resist the passage of a 4-inch sphere; it is a 6-inch sphere under CABO. He added that this tightens the gap up for safety reasons. He said the IRC also requires stair winders to have a minimum tread width of 10 inches at a point not more than 12 inches from the narrow end; it is 9 inches under CABO. Lance explained that a winder is a portion of a stair that curves so the treads actually taper from wide to narrow. Lance then said the next item is one of the more significant changes. He said the IRC requires smoke detectors in each sleeping room and outside each sleeping area; under the CABO you only have to smoke detectors outside each sleeping area. Dan Sears asked Lance how are we going to get this information out to the people? Lance said he usually allows a 60-day time delay before the ordinance goes into effect to allow for communication with the building community. He also stated that the inspectors and the plans examiner help communicate the changes to the builders in the field and through comments at plan review. Dan Sears asked if Lance was going to send a copy of the handout they received to the Homebuilders Association. He added that some of these changes would have a big impact. He said for example the stairs we order now from around the country are barely meeting the current code and he could see problems coming up for some contractors. Lance said he would be happy to send this information to the Homebuilders Association and that he will try to get the word out in other ways too. Lance returned to the review of Chapter 3. He said the 1RC requires a minimum stair tread depth of 10 inches; it is 9 inches under CABO. He continued, that the FRC provides requirements for a site address; however, he wanted to amend this and would discuss the amendments later. Lance said the next item is something that we have been interpreting in our current code to mean and the new code actually states it. He said it allows openings in exterior fire rated walls that are perpendicular to the property line. He continued by stating that the IRC includes three new hazardous glazing locations: (areas where safety glass must be installed). 1. Glazing in sliding and bi-fold closet door assemblies 2. Glazing that encloses swimming pools, hot tubs and spas meeting certain requirements 3. Glazing in walls enclosing stairway landings meeting certain requirements Lance then moved to Chapter 4—Foundations. He said there is a new method that's been developed since the '92 CABO, insulating concrete form foundation (ICF)walls. He briefly explained how ICF's work and stated that they are more energy efficient. He said the 1RC addresses ICF foundation walls where the CABO does not. Lance said that at some point we need to insert the existing minimum foundation standard in Section R403.1.3.2—Slabs on grade with turned-down footings, but stated that he would address that in the amendment section. Lance then said Chapter 5 addresses Floors. He said the IRC includes provisions for steel floor framing where our current code does not. He continued by stating that it also contains different span table for wood joists but spans tend to be consistent with CABO. Lance then moved to Chapter 6—Wall Construction. He said the IRC includes provisions for steel wall framing, ICF wall construction, and allows mineral fiber and fiberglass insulation to be used as fire blocking when meeting certain requirements. He said he thinks some of the builders will like new provisions for fire stopping. Lance said Chapter 7, Wall Coverings, had no significant changes. Lance then moved to Chapter 8—Roof/Ceiling Construction. He said the IRC also contains a different span tables for joists and rafters and tend to be slightly more restrictive than CABO. He 6- 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes said that purlins are required to be sized no less than the required size of the rafters they support. He told the board members that if they would like to see this section it was on page 217 of the IRC. Lance also referenced a diagram on page 235 of the IRC. He said the CABO allows 2x4 members as purlins however, the IRC requires a minimum size of 2x6. He said the new code also includes provisions for steel roof framing. Lance said Chapter 9 covers Roof Assemblies. He said the new code includes provisions addressing re-roofing. Lance said Chapter 10, Chimneys and Fireplaces, has no significant changes. Lance then moved to Chapter 11 —Energy Efficiency. He said Brian already covered this in his review and stated that one of the changes in the IRC is a requirement for markers for every 300 square feet of attic area that indicates the thickness of blown-in insulation. The board discussed this requirement for a moment. Lance then moved to Chapters 12 through 24—Mechanical Systems. He said the current code requires two openings when supplying combustion air to a gas fired appliance. The IRC allows the use of a single opening for combustion air under certain circumstances. He said in order to be consistent; he would like to delete the use of copper piping for gas by amendment. Lance said Chapters 25 through 32 cover Plumbing Systems. He said the new code requires a water pressure regulator when water pressure exceeds 80 psi. He said there are not many places in College Station that would not have to have a pressure regulator under this section. He said he checked the water pressure on some houses recently and the pressure was 110 to 120 psi. He told the board that he knew there were some areas in the city that are having water pressure problems to the point that it was affecting the lawn irrigation system. Dan Sears asked if this requirement would be retroactive? Lance said no. The board discussed this for a moment. Lance continued the review of the IRC by saying that there is a change in the way "elevation" for appliances installed in garages is worded. He said the current code addresses gas appliances but the IRC addresses any appliance that has an ignition source. Lance gave the example of an electric water heater that has an ignition source less then 18" and said that it would need to be elevated. Lance said that he has a proposed amendment concerning water service piping installed under concrete slabs that would be consistent with what the board discussed when reviewing the plumbing code. He then said that he also has a proposed amendment to require plumbing vents to extend a minimum of 6" above the roof. He said he would cover this when during the review of the proposed amendments. Lance then moved to Chapters 33 through 42—Electrical. He said that the IRC contains provisions from the National Electrical Code (NEC) that pertain to residential occupancies. He said we have several recommended amendments to make the 1RC electrical provisions consistent with the 1999 NEC. Lance said he would like to review the proposed amendments to the 2000 International Residential Code next. Lance said the first amendment deals with issuing permits. He said we currently have an amendment that allows one detached accessory structure per residential lot without a permit, provided the floor area does not exceed 100 square feet and the structure complies with all of the following; 1. The accessory structure is not located in a surface drainage easement. 2. The accessory structure is not permanently affixed to the ground. 3. The accessory structure is located in the rear yard. 4. The accessory structure is not provided with utilities (sewer,water or electricity). Lance referenced a section in the IRC and read what it stated: "Work exempt from permit; one story detached accessory structure provided the floor area does not exceed 200 square feet." 7 - 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes Lance said he was proposing to keep our current amendment and change our current 100 square feet requirement to 120 square feet. The board discussed this issue. Lance said that he would like to amend Section R105.2 by adding that uncovered decks less than 30 inches above adjacent grade do not need permits. Lance then said he would like to amend Section R105.2.4 to read: R105.2.4 Homeowner permit. A property owner shall obtain a building permit to perform work on a building owned and occupied by him as his homestead. He continued by stating that electrical, plumbing and mechanical systems must be permitted and installed by licensed contractors. Lance said he wanted to adopt Appendix G "Swimming Pools, Spas and Hot Tubs". He said that in order for an appendix to be adopted you have to actually state it in the adopting ordinance. Lance then said he would like to amend Section R310.1.1 to be consistent with our existing ordinance. He said this deals with the area of egress windows by replacing 5.7 square feet with 3.33 square feet. Lance said he wanted to amend Section R310.1.1 by deleting the exception. Lance then said he wanted to amend Section R325 to replace the site address requirement with our current addressing standard. Lance said he recommended amending Section R403"Footings," by adding Section R403.1.3.3 to read as follows: "R403.1.3.3 Minimum foundation standard. All foundations shall comply with the Minimum Foundation Standard as shown in Figure 1" and adding our current foundation standard as figure 1. Lance recommended amending Section G2413.5.2 "Copper tubing" by deleting the section in its entirety. He said that this would be consistent with the amendment discussed earlier to the International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC). Lance then said he would like to amend Section G2416.4 "Test Pressure measurement"to reference Section 406.4, 2000 IFGC and Section G2416.4.1 "Test Pressure"to reference Section 406.1.4, 2000 1FGC. Lance then moved to Section P2904.5 "Water distribution piping." He said he wanted to amend this section by deleting the reference to PB plastic pipe and by adding the following sentence to the end of the section: "Type M seamless copper water tube and type WM welded copper water tube shall not be used for water distribution piping." Lance moved to Section P2904.5.1 "Under concrete slabs." He said he wanted to amend this section by replacing type M copper tubing with type K copper tubing and deleting the reference to CPVC, PB plastic pipe, and galvanized steel pipe. Lance said he would like to amend Section P2904.5.1 "Under concrete slabs" by deleting the words"all to be installed with approved fittings or bends" and replacing with " all to be installed without joints or connections." Lanced moved to Section P3002.2. He recommended adding section, P3002.2.1 Depth of building sewer. He continued by saying it would state: "Building sewer pipe shall be installed with a minimum of twelve (12) inches of cover. Where conditions prohibit at least twelve (12) inches of cover, cast iron pipe must be used unless other approved means of pipe protection is provided." Lance said Section P3103.1, Roof extension is a section where the municipality is responsible for inserting the distance. He stated that our current code requires 6 inches and asked the board if 8- 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes they wanted to leave it as 6 inches or change it to another distance? The board decided to keep it at 6 inches. Lance said he wanted to amend Section E3306.2"Conductor Material,"to read as follows: "Conductors used to conduct current shall be of copper only." This will keep the IRC consistent with our amendment to the NEC. Lance then said he would like to add section E3501.8 to read as follows: "E3501.8 Meter mounting height. The Individual meters shall be mounted at a height not greater than 5'-6" nor less than 4'-6" above finished grade, measured to the centerline of the meter base. A meter pack shall be mounted with its horizontal centerline not greater than 4'-6" nor less than 4'-0" above finished grade. Exception: Meters and meter packs may be mounted at a different height by special permission of the Building Official or his designee when special conditions make the installation at the above height impractical." Lance said he wanted to amend Section E3508.2.1 "Rod and pipe electrodes" by allowing only copper coated electrodes. Lance recommended amending Section E 3602.5 "Branch circuits serving multiple loads or outlets,"by adding the following to the end of the section: "A circuit of twenty (20) amperes shall not serve more than ten openings." Lance moved to Table E3602.13"Branch-Circuit Requirements—Summary." He recommended amending the table by adding the following: "Reference the 14 AWG conductor indicated in the table with asterisks(***) and add this footnote to the bottom of the table *** Special note—except for fixture wires in UL or other listed fixtures and equipment, no conductor smaller than 12 AWG copper is allowed in branch circuit wiring." Lance recommended amending Section E3603 "Required Branch Circuits" by adding section E3603.7 to read as follows: "E3603.7 Separate circuit; A separate circuit is required for each appliance or other load exceeding six (6) amperes." Lance concluded his presentation and asked if anyone had any questions for him. Dan Sears opened the public hearing and asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the request. No guests were present. Dan Sears asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of or in opposition to the item. No guests were present. Dan Sears closed the public hearing. Dan Sears asked if anyone was ready to make a motion. George McLean made a motion to recommend to council the approval of the IRC and amendments as presented. Kevin Kuddes seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (7-0). 9- 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council concerning the adoption of the 2000 International Property Maintenance Code, with modifications to Appendix 6, Chapter 3, College Station Code of Ordinances, following a presentation from Lance Simms, Building Official. Dan Sears asked staff to brief the board on the request. Lance Simms took the floor and told the board that Jon Mies the Fire Marshal asked to speak briefly on this topic. Jon Mies took the floor. He said, one of the Council's Strategic Issues is stronger code enforcement in residential neighborhoods. He said one way of getting the council's input is by the adoption of this property maintenance code. He told them that he would be doing a survey and holding some focus groups to get input from citizens. He added that this input would help mold the amendments for this code. He said he wanted to let them know this because this code could change some by the time it goes to council. Lance Simms took the floor and said he wanted to re-enforce that the current Structural Standards and Property Maintenance Regulations are only addressed in Chapter 3 of our Code of Ordinances. He said the 2000 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) is a separate document that was written to complement the International code family. He stated that his recommendation was to adopt the IPMC. He continued by saying that there is no state mandate to adopt the IPMC, unlike the IRC and the IECC. Lance started with Chapter 1 —Administration. He said that the IPMC allows the city to make emergency repairs and recover the costs for such work from the property owner. Robert Mooney asked what would be considered emergency repair? Lance gave the example of a two-story building where the wooden stairs were in serious disrepair. Lance also said that he would contact the owner first to bring into compliance, but if the owners did not make the appropriate repairs, then the city would have the authority to do the work and charge the costs back to the owners. Robert Mooney said he was thinking of emergency as being something else such as storm damage. Lance said that could also be the case. The board discussed this for a moment. Lance said since "emergency" is not defined in the definitions section of the code, he would work closely with legal on any enforcement action involving emergency repairs. Lance said Chapter 2 is dedicated to definitions. Lance moved to Chapter 3—General Requirements. Lance said our current code requires screens on windows at all times when there is no central air or heat provided. He said the IPMC has a provision for the local government to insert dates for when insect screens will be required. The board discussed this for a moment. George McLean asked if this was retroactive? Lance answered yes, this is for existing structures. The board further discussed this issue. Lance reminded the board that this requirement is in our current property maintenance code. He said he handles these issues on a complaint basis only. He recommended that they discuss the dates when they review the amendments. Lanced then went on to Chapter 4—Light, Ventilation and Occupancy Limitations. He said the existing code gives a general statement about common halls and stairways where the IPMC provides detailed requirements for illumination of common halls and stairways. He said the IPMC addresses minimum area requirements of efficiency units where the current code does not. Robert Mooney asked how the IPMC addressed the minimum area requirements and asked if it would force people out? Roaxnne Nemcik, Assistant City Attorney, took the floor and said if you are talking about existing structures and modifying the size of them, when this code comes into 10 - 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes effect you cannot retroactively apply it to existing structures. She continued by saying that if someone were to want to remodel the structure then they would need to bring it to code. She gave the example of a water heater and said if it had out lived its usefulness and needed to be replaced then it would need to be installed to the current code. She said this is how these types of violations are cured. She added the only time other than that would be if it were a nuisance or if it is not working properly to the point that is unsafe. The board and staff further discussed this issue. George McLean asked if we had any hardship provisions for non-compliance on any of these things. He gave the example of someone that has a house without air conditioning and has to have screens, but because of a financial situation, they may not be able to meet a (hypothetical) 60-day notice. He asked if staff would give them another 30 or 45 days in a situation like he described. Lance said that it is not built into the ordinance, but staff typically works with someone that has a financial hardship. The board and staff discussed the feasibility of writing time limits into the ordinance but decided that it was probably best not to do so. Lance then moved to Chapter 5—Plumbing Facilities and Fixture Requirements. He said the IPMC addresses minimum plumbing facility requirements for hotels where the current code does not. He said the changes should not make an impact on local establishments. Lance moved to Chapter 6—Mechanical and Electrical Requirements. He said the IPMC provides for maintenance of elevators, escalators and dumbwaiters. He continued by stating that the board needs to determine the dates for required heat supply for residential occupancies and for occupiable work areas. He said he would review this when we go over the amendments in detail. Lance reviewed Chapter 7—Fire Safety Requirements. He said our current code does not address smoke detectors but the IPMC does. He said the IPMC requires smoke detectors to be installed per the International Fire Code for residential occupancies. He said new construction requires a hard wired primary power with a battery back up, but an existing structure can have a smoke detector power by a battery or be hard wired into the electrical system. Lance started the review of the proposed amendments to the IPMC. Lance said the first amendment is intended to be consistent with our plan to make all of our International codes reference the National Electrical Code rather then reference the ICC Electrical Code. Lance said he would like to amend section 111 by deleting the new code's "Means of Appeal"and replace it with our existing provisions. Lance said he would like to amend section 110 by deleting "Demolition" and replace it with our existing provisions. He said the IPMC gives the Building Official the authority to condemn and our current code gives that authority to the board. He said he would rather leave the authority to condemn with the board. Lance said there is a conflict in section 302.4,"Weeds",with our current ordinance. He said he would like to delete this section in the IPMC. Lance said he would like to amend section 303.3 by deleting "Premises Identification" and replacing with our existing standards. Lance said this next section, 303.14"Insect Screens", is the one that needs the dates inserted. He referenced the code and asked if the dates should be from March 15`to Oct. 315t or year round. The board discussed the wording of section with respect to screen doors and the purpose for ventilation. The board decided to have the dates be year round and confirmed that screens would only be required if the structure does not have central air. 11 - 1:3 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes Lance moved to section 602.3"Heat Supply." Lance said this section reads as follows: "Every owner and operator of any building who rents, leases or lets one or more dwelling units, rooming units,dormitories or guestrooms on terms, either expressly or implied, to furnish heat to the occupants shall supply heat during the period from date to date to maintain a temperature of not less than 65 degrees F (18 degrees C) in all habitable rooms." He continued asked the board what dates to inset in the section and recommended the dates of October 1 and April 30, respectively. The board and staff discussed the heating source and what heat supply meant. Lance read the current code requirement. The board discussed this issue further and decided to use the language in the current code with the exception that the temperature would be 65 degrees F as stated in the IPMC. Lance said the next section 602.4 "Occupiable work spaces," is not addressed in our current code. He recommended inserting the dates of October 1st and April 30th, respectively. The board talked for some time about this section and decided to delete this section in its entirety. Lance said the last proposed amendment is section is 604.2 "Service." He said this section is references the ICC Electrical Code and he would like to replace it with the "National Electrical Code" as adopted and amended by the City of College Station. Dan Sears opened the public hearing and asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the request. No guests were present. Dan Sears asked if anyone would like to speak in favor or opposition of the item. No guests were present. Dan Sears closed the public hearing. Dan Sears asked if anyone was ready to make a motion. Larry Patton made a motion to recommend approval of the IPMC as amended with the additions and deletions as directed by the board. George McLean seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (7 -0). AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Adjourn Dan Sears thanked the staff for the great job they did on the reviews and presentations of the codes. The board agreed. Frank Cox motioned to adjourn. Roxanne let the board know that Joe Jackson would be taking over attorney duties for this board. Mark Clayton seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (7-0). The meeting was adjourned. 12- 13 "SUBJECT TO APPROVAL" "CONSTRUCTION BOARD ❑F ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS July 16, 2001 - Minutes APPROVED: Chairman: ❑an Sears ATTEST: Staff Assistant: Marla E. Brewer 13 - 13