Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02091995 BSC Minutes~ • BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION • REGULAR SESSION 3800 UNIVERSITY BLVD. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1995 6:30 P.M. MINUTES The Building and Standards Commission convened in the Municipal Building, 3800 University Blvd. in the City of West University Place on February 9, 1995 for a continuation of the February 2, 1995 Regular Session with following members present: Chairman Drew McManigle , Les Albin, James Todd, Evelyn Dravis, James McDaniel and Craig Hughes. Absent were Vice Chairman Craig DuCote, Roy Harper and James Collier. Also present from the City was Dennis Holm, Chief Building Official and Susan Thorn, Building Secretary. The first item on the agenda was the Hearing of Residents. No one was present. The second item on the agenda was the continuation of the hearing concerning the consideration of the property located at 3765 Plumb, Lot 5, Block 1, Sunset Terrace addition, filed by Mark Brooks, a request for a variance to allow a stairway greater than 4" in width to have only one handrail instead of the two required by the Building Code. • It was explained by Mr. Manigle that during the last meeting that it was determined that the Board Members needed to actually see the staircase before making their decision to grant the variance. Pat Brooks, Architect for the project explained that he was present to represent Mark Brooks, Owner of the property along with Norma Brooks, wife of Mark Brooks. Pat Brooks explained that he was no relation to the Owners of the property. Mr. Dennis Holm gave the City's point of view. Mr. Holm explained the 1991 Standard Building Code requires two handrails to be placed on any stairwell which is 44" or greater. In the 1994 Standard Building Code under 1007.5 there has been an exception placed that allows the removal of the second handrail for Single Family Residences no matter what the width of the stairway. Mr. Holm explained in order to familiarize himself with where this came from, he spoke with several of his business associates. Mr. Holm provided a copy of pages from the 1991 SBCCI Blue Book to the members and explained that in that in 1992 during a Hearing of Code Proposals the BCMC "mainstreaming" proposal transferred accessibility provisions from ANSI A117.1 into a general code. Mr. Holm explained that in ANSI you are always required to have two handrails and there are no allowances for exceptions to not have two handrails. He had spoken to Charlie Everly in Sarasota, Florida who had sat on the Board For • Coordination Of Model Codes along with Ken Green from SBCCI. Mr. Everly advised Mr. Holm that many times these reasons do not fit all the things that they are trying ~ • change. Mr. Holm explained that in his reasoning this is wrong. He stated they should • specifically identify the things they are trying to change and leave the other things for another reason. Mr. Holm explained that in his opinion this is absolutely wrong to change the handrail requirements and reference something in ANSI which is a contradiction in facts. He explained that its not wrong to put a single handrail, its the reasoning behind it. Mr. Holm explained this is why it is so important for him to attend these meetings. Even though he is from a small city and he has only one vote, you would be surprised that the changes that could come about from a mutual understanding from all size cities, it isn't just the larger cities that run the show. He explained that this is the kind of things that take place unless they are looked at scrutinized closely. In his opinion this change was wrong and he is going to fight it. Mr. Holm explained that he has already expressed his concerns about stair safety. He has no objection to these stairs. He explained that the second handrail would only have to go up to a certain point. The portion where the intermediate landing is in the present code you only have to have a second handrail if you have more than three steps and this has changed in the new code to four. He explained that not in all cases even though its wider than 44". Mr. Holm referred to a handout from the pages of the code. This is included as part of these minutes. Mr. Holm explained that in Single Family Dwellings you don't have thunderous herds of people trying to come down the stairs at the same time, but what it does do is provide a person who might take a spill it would give them something else to catch. Mr. Holm explained that the average person • who purchases an average home in the United States does not have as nice as a stairwell as this. Drew McManigle explained that when he went over to house and took a look at the stairs and he measured from the handrail from to the wall and to look at what is usable stair, it measures around 43". Mr. Holm explained that this is means of egress and that you are allowed to encroach into this with a handrail and this narrows it down and this is why it is measured from the wall to end of the tread. Pat Brooks, Architect explained that he always looks at the code as a public safety issue and look as why is it written this way. He explained that if you go to the front of the code it defines stairway as a passageway, not as the width of the tread. The true area that the person is going to use is the passageway. He tried to show that the he has an equivalent to the 44" and that they have met the life safety issue. Mr. McManigle explained that after going to view the stairs and trying to imagine how what it would be to be shorter or what less and try to use the handrail. He explained that this would a penalty to the Owners if the Commission denies this variance and make them install a second handrail and next year they adopt the 1994 code and the can retrofit it and take the second handrail out. • • • Norma Brooks, owner of the property presented a letter from her and her husband Mark • Brooks explaining their variance request. A copy of this letter is included as part of these minutes. In their memorandum Mr. & Mrs Brooks summarized in their request that their Architect designed the stairway under his interpretation of the code, which would emphasize the distance from the wall to the handrail rather than to the outside edge of the stair tread. The Uniform building Code adopted by the city of Houston, the City of Bellaire, and other municipalities exempts dwellings from the two handrail requirement. The 1994 edition of the Standard Building Code also now exempts dwellings from the two-handrail requirement. Because of the design of the stairway, it would be very difficult to accommodate a two-handrail requirement. The Brooks requested that the Commission consider the Architect Pat Brooks interpretation of the code and grant the variance. This would not set a precedent, because the City could required two handrails on the plans before approval of the plans where a stairway exceed's 44" width (assuming the City does not adopt the 1994 version of the Code exempting dwellings from the two-handrail requirement), and a stairway can be designed to accommodate the City's interpretation before it is constructed. Craig Hughes expressed his concerns about the intermediate landing. When he measured six feet across. He explained that when to reach that intermediate landing there is nothing to grab a hold of . Pat Brooks explained that is why he placed the landing there. He felt that is the place • where a person could get their bearing. Mr. Holm explained that once something is in the code like this it is very hard to change it back to the way it is. Les Albin explained that the upper landing did not give him a very comfortable feeling. Mr. Albin felt that there was no practical way to fix this. Evelyn Dravis asked if the landing was considered part of the stairway. Dennis Holm explained that this was a landing, but a handrail is not required on a landing. Craig Hughes objected. He felt that this was very unsafe. He stated that a continuous handrail is should be required on the entire stair. Dennis Holm explained that on the other there is a continuous handrail. Craig Hughes stated that he felt the landing was very unsafe. Les Albin felt that the variance should be granted based on the fact that in the 1994 SBCCI Code this is going to change anyway. • i • • Evelyn Dravis made a motion to grant the variance to have a single handrail. This motion was seconded by James Todd. Members voting in favor: Dravis, Todd, McManigle, Albin Members voting against: McDaniel Alternate Craig Hughes did not vote Jim McDaniel made a motion to approve the January 5, 1995 minutes. Les Albin seconded the motion. The minutes for the February 2 and this meeting will be approved at the next regular meeting. Voting was unanimous. Jim McDaniel made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by James Todd. The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. C~ CHAIRMAN ATTEST: SECRETARY •