HomeMy WebLinkAbout08311995 BSC MinutesBUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION
~ SPECIAL SESSION
3800 UNIVERSITY BLVD.
THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1995
6:30 P.M.
~
~
~
~
a
The Building and Standards Commission convened in the Municipal Building, 3800
University Blvd., City of West University Place on August 31, 1995, for a Special Session
with the following members present: Chairman Drew McManigle, Les Albin, James
McDaniel and Craig Hughes. Also present from the City was Dennis Holm, Chief Building
O~cial.
The first item on the agenda was the Hearing of Residents and no one was present.
Chairman Drew McManigle explained the purpose of this meeting was to review the
changes and provisions in the 1994 Building Code and if acceptable, make a
recommendation to the City Council for adoption.
Chairman Drew McMangile stated he would first like to discuss the St. Andrews Church
Renovation for the record. The Church's Representatives had agreed to upgrade certain
items in the Church to code or at least get them as close as possible to code since the
building is rather old. The upgrades were going to cost the Church an additional
• $200,000.00 to the original $1,000,000.00 contract.
The Chief Building Official felt the Building and Standards Commission needed to meet to
amend the original agreement. Chairman McManigle explained he felt formal approval was
not necessary, instead he requested Mr. Holm handle the matter in what is known in the
legal profession as a"negative notice" basis. Mr. McManigle wrote a letter to Mr. Holm
recapping St. Andrews agreement and asked Mr. Holm to distribute a copy to the Building
and Standards Commission members along with Mr. Holm's comments. If Mr. Holm
received no negative response from Commission members, then Mr. Holm could proceed
with the agreement between St. Andrew's and the City.
A number of upgrades were to be done immediately during the initial construction and
others during a three to five year period. The three to five year period would help St.
Andrews stay within their building budget. This extension did not affect the health and
safety for the project, but allows St. Andrews to make the upgrades in a timely manner.
At the last special workshop session on July 22, 1995 the Building and Standards
Commission reviewed the ordinances currently on file and the basic changes to the 1994
Building Code. After this review, the Commission made some recommendations regarding
clarification to some of the ordinances already on file. These recommendations were taken
to the City Attorney to determine what needed to be added or deleted from the code.
• Dennis Holm, Chief Building Official asked if there was any particular item the members
would like to discuss. Les Albin stated he would like to discuss stairways. Mr. Albin
• explained that several times over the past finro years discussions have come up regarding
fixed stairs versus pull down stairways. Mr. Albin stated he felt fixed stairs are typically
superior to pull down stairs. Fixed stairs are sturdier and are easier to negotiate when
hauling boxes, replacing a water heater or other cumbersome duties. Space is a
premium and the landing at the top or bottom is the first to go. Mr. Albin asked if the
stairway is purely for attic access, then, the Building and Standards Commission could
possibly loosen the requirements including rise and run requirements. He stated it should
be clear as to what could be allowed. He asked Mr. Holm if he had any suggestions.
Mr. Holm stated Mr. Albin was asking him to give prescriptive information and this would
be considered design criteria and could not give prescriptive advice. Alternatives to the
pull down stair are at times much sturdier, but not always necessarily meant for easier
carrying of items up and down. Landings at the top and bottom of stairs are for safety.
A landing at the bottom is not necessarily going to prevent you from ramming into a door
at the bottom of the stair if you were to miss the last step but would at least provide an
area to collect yourself before going out the door. Most older homes seemed to have
doors at the stairs with no landing, but over a period of time landings at the bottom and
top of a stair have become safety factors. An example would be if you were opening a
door at the top of a stair, you want a landing at that door. Mr. Holm has been asked if you
were coming down a stair out of an attic, not a habitable space, why couldn't you have a
door with the 6'8" clearance and a door that swings out? He said this would require a code
• change and perhaps this is something the Building and Standards Commission might want
to consider. The Building and Standards Commission would need to provide specifications
for the space remaining an attic, which is now is limited to 200 square foot floored attic
area.
Chairman McManigle stated the Building and Standards Commission could at a later date
discuss this matter and then make a recommendation to City Council for an ordinance
change.
Mr. Holm asked if the Building and Standards Commission were to make an ordinance
change, please provide him with guidelines to make certain this area stays attic space.
He stated at present more than the maximum of 200 square feet in the attic is considered
an attic story.
Les Albin said he came before the Building and Standards Commission on two separate
occasions asking for a variance concerning fixed stairs in lieu of the pull down stairs. A
variance was needed because of the landing situation or a different slope (rise and run)
to the stairs would be required. He stated it was the consensus of the Building and
Standards Commission at that time a fixed stair was better than a pull down stair. If that
was the case, the Building and Standards Commission could incorporate fixed stairs into
the code. This would save people from coming to the Building and Standards Commission
and asking for variances, and possibly make a better house.
r1
LJ
Chairman McMangile asked Mr. Holm's view on the landing issue.
• Mr. Holm stated if it were strictly an attic, it would present different connotations than a stair
to a habitable space. You would still have kids going up there, but only for brief periods
of time. If the stairway led to a habitable space, then landings would still be required. If
there was only attic space, then you could put a door at the bottom of the stair and relieve
the requirement for a landing at the top of the stairs through design. By eliminating the
requirement for a landing at the top of stairs to an attic space, you could put a fixed stair
in without much aggravation in most of these homes.
Craig Hughes asked if a residence catches on fire could a draftstop prevent a fire from
spreading?
Dennis Holm stated a draftstop is not a firestop. It's installation is meant to minimize the
flow of air that helps move fire from one place in the house to another . If you have
trusses and don't have draftstopping, the fire is going to move more quickly. Mr. Holm
hoped the Building and Standards Commission did not drop its requirement for
draftstopping. If there was a fire in the interior of one of these homes and you lost the
trusses, which are loaded right in the center, with the right conditions, the home would
probably collapse at the center. The draftstopping is not meant to stop the fire, it is just
meant to delay the fire long enough to get the people out. When you put up the
sheetrock, you are just holding the fire at bay for 20 to 30 minutes. If you have a second
• story, the place you might require sheetrock be installed is in the stairwell to the attic
space to the double plate level. By installing 5/8 inch sheetrock it would give you 20 to 30
minutes protection. Chairman McManigle stated that would be all you would want.
Mr. Holm stated the code does not require smoke detectors in an attic space at this time,
but the Commission might want to consider requiring a smoke detector all attic areas.
Craig Hughes stated the electrician is already required to install smoke detectors and the
security alarm company also installs smoke detectors; therefore, the smoke detectors are
being double stacked.
Mr. Holm stated the Building and Standards Commission could require a smoke detector
in lieu of the standard fire protection sheetrock; however, this in not a good trade-off. At
this time the Building Division does not require a permit for smoke detection systems.
Les Albin asked if the smoke detection system was inspected by the City.
Dennis Holm stated at this time, the Building Inspectors do not look at smoke detection
systems.
~
C
Drew McManigle requested the following items be placed on the agenda for the next
~ meeting:
1) Fixed Stairs versus the pull down stairs.
2) Requiring Security/Fire Alarm Companies to obtain permits for fire alarms.
Jim McDaniel explained after looking at the variance requests for the past two years he
compiled the following list:
4 requests for headroom on stairs
4 requests for finish out of third floor attic space
2 requests concerning sidewalks
2 requests concerning location of return air grilles
1 request for a circular drive
1 request for a variance on a fence surrounding a swimming pool
1 request for a variance on the maximum occupancy of a church
1 request for a variance on a handrail height
1 request for a variance on an engineers foundation certi~cate
Jim McDaniel made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 6, 1995 meeting with
changes seconded by Les Albin.
• Voting aye were: Jim McDaniel, Craig Hughes, Drew McMangile and Les Albin
Voting no: none
Jim McDaniel made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Les Albin.
Voting aye were: Jim McDaniel, Craig Hughes, Les Albin and Drew McManigle.
The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
SECRETARY
•