BOARD OF APPEALS

The City of By The City of Oklahoma City Office of the City Clerk at 3:50 pm, Aug 07, 2025 OKLAHOMA CITY Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals AGENDA 1:30 p.m. August 13, 2025 Kyle Lombardo, Chairman Tommy Willis, Vice-Chairman Jim McWhirter, Member Austin Burton, Member Patrice Zimmerman, Member Anh Weber, Member Vacant, Member City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor, 200 N. Walker Ave. • A public hearing will be held by the Board of Appeals of the City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma on Wednesday, August 13, 2025, at 1:30p.m. in the City Council Chambers. • Those interested in the case may appear at the hearing and be heard, or written protest or petitions may be filed with the Clerk of said Board at any time prior to the hearing. • If you need a sign language interpreter at the meeting, or if you need the agenda in alternative format, please contact the Clerk of the Board at 405-297-2979.  AGENDA Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals Wednesday, August 13, 2025 Council Chambers (1:30 P. M.) I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (July 9, 2025) III. NEW CASES – NONE IV. CONTINUED CASES – CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00002. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 3809 S. HUDSON AVE. CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00003. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 400 SW GRAND BLVD. CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00004. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 404 SW GRAND BLVD. V. ADJOURNMENT ALL BOARD MEMBERS: Upon receipt of this document, please notify our offices as to your availability to attend this hearing (405-297-2979). AGENDA - BOARD OF APPEALS August 13, 2025 Page 1 of 1  MINUTES BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS WEDNESDAY JULY 9, 2025 COUNCIL CHAMBERS (1:30 P.M.) The meeting of the Oklahoma City Building and Fire Code Board of Appeals was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 200 North Walker Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Notice of the meeting and agenda were posted on the Council bulletin board 48 hours prior to the meeting. I. ROLL CALL Members Present: Kyle Lombardo, Chairman Tommy Willis, Vice-Chairman Patrice Zimmerman Ron Rocke Anh Weber Austin Burton Members Absent: None, Vacancy Staff Present: Scott Wise, Development Center Manager – Development Center Chris Moses, Plan Review Supervisor – Development Center Raymond Howard, Chief Plans Examiner - Development Center Brock Rowe, Development Services Director - Development Services Mike Willson, Fire Protection Specialist – Fire Department Richard Jackson, Fire Protection Specialist – Fire Department Steven Barker, Assistant Municipal Counciler II, Municipal Councilor’s Office II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (March 12, 2025, Meeting) APPROVED. MOTION: WILLIS/ZIMMERMAN TO APPROVE THE MARCH 12TH, 2025 MINUTES. AYES: LOMBARDO, WILLIS, ZIMMERMAN, MCWHIRTER, BURTON, WEBER. NAYS: NONE. III NEW CASES CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00001. The appeal of Evan Sack (representing Taft Middle School, Independent School District No. 89) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 11, Section 1106, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for storm shelters necessary for Educational Use facilities at the time of occupancy for 2901 NW. 23RD STREET. … MINUTES – BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS July 9, 2025 Page 1 of 2 FAILED. MOTION: LOMBARDO/WEBER TO APPROVE APPEAL GRANTING TCO FOR THE ONE YEAR DIFFERENCE IN TIME BETWEEN THE COMPLETION OF PHASE 1 AND THE COMPLETION OF PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION BY UTILIZING EXISTING AREAS OF REFUGE. AYES: LOMBARDO, WILLIS, WEBER. NAYS: ZIMMERMAN, MCWHIRTER, BURTON. APPROVED. MOTION: BURTON/ZIMMERMAN TO CONTINUE CASE AND TO REQUIRE THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE A SQUARE FOOTAGE AND OCCUPANT LOAD CALCULATION FOR THE EXISTING BASEMENT AND HALLWAY REFUGE AREAS AND TO PROVIDE THE EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. AYES: LOMBARDO, WILLIS, ZIMMERMAN, MCWHIRTER, BURTON, WEBER. NAYS: NONE. CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00002. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 3809 S. HUDSON AVE. (Packet B) CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00003. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 400 SW GRAND BLVD. (Packet B) CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00004. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 404 SW GRAND BLVD. (Packet B) APPROVED. MOTION: BURTON/ZIMMERMAN TO CONTINUE CASES BOAB-2025-00002, 00003, AND 00004 SO AS TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION AMONG CITY STAFF REGARDING NEW REVALATIONS RELATED TO CONFLICTING CITY AMENDED LANGUAGE ADOPTED INTO CODE. AYES: LOMBARDO, WILLIS, ZIMMERMAN, MCWHIRTER, BURTON, WEBER. NAYS: NONE. V. CONTINUED CASES – NONE VI. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE APPROVAL OF BI-LAWS (amended for 2025) NO MOTION. CASE CONTINUED BY BOARD CHAIRMAN WHILE CITY STAFF AND BOARD MEMBERS CONTINUE MEETING WITH CITY LEGAL COUNCEL ON PROPOSED LANGUAGE. VII. ADJOURNMENT APPROVED. MOTION: WCWHIRTER/ZIMMERMAN TO ADJOURN. AYES: LOMBARDO, WILLIS, ZIMMERMAN, MCWHIRTER, BURTON, WEBER. NAYS: NONE. MINUTES – BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS July 9, 2025 Page 2 of 2 STAFF REPORT Board of Appeals August 13, 2025 I. CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00002. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 3809 S. HUDSON AVE. CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00003. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 400 SW GRAND BLVD. (Packet B) CASE NO. BOAB-2025-00004. The appeal of Trey Maston (Capitol Hill Apartments) from a decision of the Code Official for noncompliance with Chapter 3, Section 302.7, with supplement, of the International Existing Building Code 2018, as adopted by Oklahoma City pertaining to the requirement for fire suppression systems for Residential Use structures for 404 SW GRAND BLVD. II. Building Code: The appeals involve a request for variance to the requirements listed below: IEBC 2018 (with supplement). Chapter 3 – Provisions for All Compliance Methods 302.7 Fire Protection. When a building permit is required in accordance with Section 105, that portion of the building shall be brought into compliance with Chapters 2 through 33 of the 2018 International Building Code (IBC) in regard to fire protection requirements, including but not limited to fire resistive construction and fire protection systems. Where fire alarm or suppression is required in Group R occupancies, the system shall be installed throughout the entire fire area. Exceptions: 1. For work of a minor nature where approved by the Board of Appeals, except for the following: a. Where the work changes the layout of the space or the use or occupancy, b. Where the scope involves structures classified as a high-rise, c. Where the scope involves any room or space as listed in the 2018 International Building Code (IBC) table 509 for incidental use. 2. Where a permit is required for exterior work only and the work area is open to the elements and cannot be defined as Fire Area.  Chapter 13 – Performance Compliance Method 1301.2 Applicability. Existing buildings in which there is work involving additions, alterations, or changes of occupancy shall be made to conform to the requirements of this chapter or the provisions of Chapters 3 through 12. […] IBC 2018, 903.2.8 Group R. An automatic spinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings with a Group R fire area. 903.3 Installation requirements. Automatic sprinkler systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with Sections 903.3.1 through 903.3.8. 903.3.1 Standards. Sprinkler systems shall be designed and instal.ed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 unless otherwise permitted by Sections 903.3.1.2 and 903.3.1.3 and other chapters of this code, as applicable. 903.3.1.2 NFPA 13R sprinkler systems. Automatic sprinkller systems in Group R occupancies up to and including four stories in height in buildings not exceeding 60 feet in height above grade shall be permitted to be installed throuhout in accordance with NFPA 13R. … III. Applicant's Statement: 1. The Code Establishes Chapter 13 as an Alternative Compliance Pathway The 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC), as amended and adopted by Oklahoma City on February 27, 2024 (the “Code”), provides multiple compliance pathways for evaluating alterations to existing structures. These include the Prescriptive Method (Chapters 3–12), the Work Area Method (Chapters 6–12), and the Performance Compliance Method (Chapter 13). Importantly, all buildings addressed in this appeal have been acknowledged by the Code Officials as meeting the performance requirements of Chapter 13 and are considered safe, even without automatic sprinklers. The City’s adopted version of Section 1301.2 of the Code explicitly states: “Existing buildings in which there is work involving additions, alterations, or changes of occupancy shall be made to conform to the requirements of this chapter or the provisions of Chapters 3 through 12.” This provision is substantively identical to the model 2018 IEBC (with the City substituting “Chapters 3 through 12” in place of “Chapters 6 through 10”), and plainly allows an applicant to elect Chapter 13 compliance as an alternative to the other methods. Once that election is made, the balance of Chapter 13 governs. Section 1301.3 further provides that “compliance with this section shall be accepted by the code official.” 2. Code Officials Acknowledged Full Compliance with Chapter 13 Appellant submitted full documentation and scoring under Table 1301.7 of the Code. Each building at issue meets or exceeds the required point totals for all three life safety categories: Fire Safety (FS), Means of Egress (ME), and General Safety (GS). The City’s own staff has acknowledged that these buildings satisfy the performance thresholds of Chapter 13. Moreover, during the June 2025 hearing, the Development Services Director confirmed that Chapter 13 is a valid and independent compliance path, and that the buildings satisfied all scoring requirements. Nevertheless, the Code Officials have continued to withhold approval, asserting that Section 302.7 mandates automatic sprinklers regardless of Chapter 13 compliance. This interpretation is unsupported by the text and structure of the Code. 3. The City’s Concession Undermines the Basis for Denial The Code Officials have expressly acknowledged that the buildings at issue satisfy the required scoring thresholds under Chapter 13 of the Code and are safe for occupancy, even without automatic sprinkler systems. This concession is not merely procedural—it is central to the performance-based compliance method. Chapter 13 does not exist to replicate prescriptive requirements. Rather, it empowers designers and owners to implement alternative life safety strategies that achieve equivalent safety outcomes. The City's refusal to approve the project, despite acknowledging both compliance and safety, is inconsistent with the Code’s intent and undermines the purpose of the performance pathway. It also creates regulatory uncertainty for future applicants by suggesting that successful compliance under Chapter 13 is meaningless if City staff later impose conflicting prescriptive requirements from other chapters of the Code. 4. Project Overview and Code Official Concession on Compliance The buildings at issue in this appeal (404 SW Grand Blvd, 400 SW Grand Blvd, and 3809 S Hudson Ave) are two-story, quadplex residential structures with direct exterior egress and no common interior corridors. They are classified as R-2 occupancy and fall well below the thresholds that would otherwise trigger automatic sprinkler requirements under IBC §903.2.8 (i.e., three stories, more than 16 occupants, or interior corridors). The applicant submitted full scoring under the Table 1301.7 Performance Compliance Worksheet. Each building exceeds the minimum required point totals in all three safety categories: Fire Safety (FS), Means of Egress (ME), and General Safety (GS). These results reflect credit for substantial life-safety upgrades, including installation of fire-rated assemblies, direct egress from each unit, smoke/CO₂ detection systems, and upgraded electrical systems. The City’s own staff acknowledged that the score sheets were valid and that the performance thresholds were met. 5. Section 302.7 Is a City-Created Provision That Cannot Override the Chapter 13 Method Section 302.7 does not appear in the 2018 IEBC. It is a local amendment adopted by Oklahoma City to require compliance with IBC Chapter 9 (which includes automatic sprinkler requirements) for all alterations unless otherwise specified. Even if this section were validly adopted, it cannot override the plain language of Section 1301.2. Oklahoma City itself edited Section 1301.2 to allow alternative compliance with Chapter 13 in lieu of Chapters 3 through 12 (including Chapter 3) and any provisions therein added by the City. In other words, the City’s own custom language in Section 1301.2 renders its custom addition of Section 302.7 inapplicable when Chapter 13 has been elected. To argue otherwise would effectively repeal Section 1301.2 and eliminate the Chapter 13 compliance option. Such an interpretation would violate fundamental canons of statutory construction, which require harmonizing the Code’s provisions and giving effect to all parts. 6. Section 302.1 Cannot Be Read to Repeal or Override Chapter 13 Election In denying the applicant’s request, the Code Officials have also relied on Section 302.1, which states that Chapter 3 applies to all alterations “regardless of compliance method.” However, this argument fails for several reasons. First, Section 302.1 is not new; it appears in the unmodified IEBC. Its general language must be read in harmony with Section 1301.2, which explicitly allows for alternative compliance. The specific controls over the general. Second, the official commentary to Section 1301.6.17 (“Automatic Sprinklers”) in the 2018 IEBC recognizes that Chapter 13 projects may proceed without sprinklers if sufficient points are achieved elsewhere. The commentary states: “The criteria used to determine when an automatic sprinkler system is required are tied to the same requirements for new construction in Section 903.2 of the IBC. These guidelines for sprinklers allow for a more equitable evaluation of the contribution of that feature to overall building safety. This factor encourages the installation of automatic sprinkler systems in existing buildings by providing substantial negative and positive points.” Thus, even if sprinklers are “required” under prescriptive methods, Chapter 13 accounts for that risk by imposing steep negative points. Applicants may still meet the required safety score by enhancing other systems, just as was done here. 7. Conclusion The applicant has satisfied all requirements under Chapter 13 of the Code, and the Code Officials have conceded as much. Their continued reliance on other provisions, particularly a local amendment not found in the IEBC, is inconsistent with the structure, purpose, and plain language of the Code as adopted by the City. The Board of Appeals should reverse the decision of the Code Officials and direct that the applicant be allowed to proceed under Chapter 13, as authorized by Oklahoma City’s adopted version of the 2018 IEBC. IV. Staff Analysis: The applicant’s request pertains to the fire suppression requirements outlined in Section 903.2.8 of the International Building Code (IBC), as referenced by Section 302.7 of the International Existing Building Code (IEBC), which directs compliance with applicable fire protection provisions in IBC Chapters 2 through 33. Chapter 3 of the 2018 IEBC is titled Provisions for All Compliance Methods and applies universally to projects using one of the IEBC’s three compliance methods: the Prescriptive Method, the Work Area Compliance Method, and the Performance Compliance Method. Each method is intended to address varying conditions and levels of complexity in existing structures: • The Prescriptive Method may be most suitable for relatively recent buildings with minimal modifications. • The Work Area Compliance Method often benefits projects involving localized renovations. • The Performance Compliance Method is typically reserved for older or more complex structures where prescriptive requirements pose challenges. Regardless of the chosen method, Chapter 3 requirements apply uniformly to all projects. This is affirmed by Section 302.1 of the IEBC, which states: “The provisions of Section 302 apply to all alterations, repairs, additions, relocations of structures, and changes of occupancy regardless of compliance method.” Oklahoma City’s local amendment to Section 302.7 was adopted around the time of the 2003 IBC, with the specific intent to ensure full compliance with fire protection requirements, regardless of which compliance method is selected. This local amendment is consistent with the framework outlined in nationally recognized guidance, including the ICC publication 2018 Existing Building Code Essentials, which notes: “IEBC Chapter 3 contains provisions that apply to all compliance methods. This organization of topics in Chapter 3 is effective because it prevents repeating the same provisions in multiple chapters.”  “It should be noted that Accessibility requirements have now been relocated to Section 305, Accessibility for Existing Buildings, of Chapter 3, Provisions for All Compliance Methods. This relocation makes it clear that Accessibility requirements are universally applicable to all rehabilitation design methods, including the Performance Compliance Method.” In response to arguments presented by the applicant during the July 9 hearing, staff conducted further analysis of the intent and impact of the local amendment to IEBC Section 1301.2. Section 1301.2 outlines the applicability of the Performance Compliance Method in Chapter 13 and reads: “1301.2 Applicability. Existing buildings in which there is work involving additions, alterations, or changes of occupancy shall be made to conform to the requirements of this chapter or the provisions of Chapters 3 through 12. […]” On its face, this language suggests a choice between complying with Chapter 13 alone or with Chapters 3 through 12. However, the original model code published by the ICC used the phrase "Chapters 6 through 12," indicating that Chapters 1 through 5 (including Chapter 3) were never intended to be optional. As a result, Oklahoma City’s amendment to Section 1301.2 created an unintended conflict by implying that Chapter 3 may be excluded when using the Performance Method—contrary to the structure and intent of the IEBC. City staff now recognize this inconsistency and are working to correct the language in Section 1301.2. The current version introduces conflicts with both the city’s adopted code and state- adopted codes, as required by statute. Furthermore, the locally adopted Section 302.7 continues to require compliance with fire protection provisions—such as fire suppression systems—even when the Performance Method is selected, effectively overriding Chapter 13's original language regarding fire suppression. Based on this analysis, it is the determination of city staff that the amended language in Section 1301.2 conflicts with both local and state code requirements and that Section 302.7, as locally amended, remains valid in requiring fire suppression systems across all compliance methods. Staff Recommendation: The Fire Marshal’s Office and the Development Services Department recommend denial of the appeal.