Board of Code Appeals

BOARD OF CODE APPEALS REGULAR MEETING March 12, 2015 SUBJECT: The minutes of the Board of Code Appeals meeting of March 12, 2015. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Stanek at 6:07 pm MEMBERS PRESENT: Douglas Harvey, Laurel Johnson, Terry Measel, Thaddeus Stanek, Michael Viazanko, Building Official ABSENT: Fred Berg RECORDING SECRETARY: Rene Rosni APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion by Stanek, supported by Harvey, to approve the agenda as presented. Yes: All Absent: Berg Motion carried. CONSIDERATIONS PG15-0020 – Raad Cora Requesting Board Approval for a variance to Sections 903.2.1.2. and 1004.1.2. Code requires fire sprinklers in an A-2 use group with occupants over 100. Applicant indicates he will not have over 100 occupants but the code indicates that it will exceed it. Property address: 4075 Fourteen Mile Road Ted Burlinghof, President of Architects International, representing the petitioner was present. Mr. Burlinghof indicated he did a square footage calculation and got a number of 106 people. The owner said they are not going to have that many tables. Recently, there has been one small development which may have a large effect upon this meeting. Originally, they had proposed to put a cooler on the outside of the building, which was not in accordance with the City. Therefore, today they proposed another layout which would include the cooler on the inside. This would reduce the size of the dining area by 8’, 8” and thus knocking the number of occupants to 89 persons in the dining area and 5 in the kitchen, bringing the total to 98. Mr. Burlinghof requested that they be allowed to take the cooler from the outside to the inside and reduce the size of the dining area. If this is approved by the Board, the question of whether he has over 100 occupants might be a mute point. Mr. Viazanko indicated he has not seen this new plan and the Board would need to do an assessment before they could make a decision. It would be understandable if the Board feels inclined to table this to allow them time to review this. Mr. Viazanko also wanted to point out that the cooler has never been calculated as part of the total occupant load so that would not be a mute point out. He stated he still does not know the square footage of the dining area. It doesn’t matter how many chairs or tables there are. The code considers it standing room right when you enter your door. This means your 1 in 15 goes down to 1 in 5, so your occupant load is going to fluctuate. This could work more against you than it could for you because you still have a large area that would be factored in as standing room. Code factors in calculations of occupant load according to table to 10.04 of Table and Chairs, which is what you have, concentrated standing room area, which is also what you have, at 1 in 5. So you could take the 1 in 15 by the code or 1 in 5 by the code. You have to tell us what you have. Mr. Viazanko indicated that he is at a disadvantage because he doesn’t know the square footage of this restaurant area. He stated it’s up to the Board if they want to table this until next month or if they want to take some time and review the documents. Board of Code Appeals Page 2 March 12, 2015 Regular Meeting Mr. Harvey indicated that these revisions to the plans may reduce the occupant load and then there would be no need for a variance. Mr. Viazanko stated it could go either way. They are altering the overall floor plan but the square footage has only been calculated on this use by the Table and Chairs only. Mr. Measel stated that he calculated a little over 1500 square feet, which would be 15 square feet per occupant. Roughly that would be 109 occupants, however, if that number is reduced, it may be okay. Mr. Berlinghof stated that these changes were brought to him this afternoon and he apologized for presenting them to the Board at the last minute. He stated they tend to get deliveries that are not 9:00 to 5:00 so there’s a need for an outdoor loading door. Mr. Stanek indicated that on the original plan, there is an exit door where the cooler was going to be. Mr. Berlinghof indicated that is correct. We are proposing the second door which we were putting in for the cooler and there will be another exit door by the bathrooms. Mr. Harvey stated they are supposed to be at the opposite ends. Mr. Viazanko agreed and stated the heavy occupant load is to the west but your exit doors are to the east and southeast. Therefore, the code would necessitate that you have doors on each end. Mr. Stanek stated that since the Building Department would not be able to approve this, he didn’t think they should further discuss the variance until the other issues have been approved. Mr. Harvey was in agreement. Mr. Berlinghof agreed that waiting until he submits the revised plans would most likely be the best solution. Motion by Stanek, supported by Johnson, to postpone PG15-0020 regarding Raad Cora’s variance based on today’s proposal for an adjustment to the plan. Yes: All Absent: Berg Motion: Carried Mr. Viazanko asked if the petitioner wanted to table it to a specific date. Mr. Berlinghof stated he will submit revised plans to the Building Department. He asked if, in fact, the Building Department verifies that we are under the 100 people, would it be necessary to have another meeting here or will the variance then be null. Mr. Viazanko indicated that if this is tabled to a specific date and we find that a variance is not needed, the meeting will be canceled. His next step is to submit the revised plans to the Building Department. Therefore this motion is to table the meeting until April 9, 2015, if deemed necessary. OLD BUSINESS – None Board of Code Appeals Page 3 March 12, 2015 Regular Meeting NEW BUSINESS Mr. Viazanko indicated he is working with a homeowner and we may see something in a month. He has been in touch with a couple that live in a bungalow. They are senior citizens and would like to put in a stair lift that goes to the second floor. The problem is the stair sticks out too far and it only gives them 15” to get by. Mr. Viazanko suggested that they rework the archway in which they’re trying to put the stairs through to make it wider. He would rather not put them through the inconvenience of going in front of the Board. He really wants to see these people get their stairs but cannot overrule the residential building code. The State wants him sign an affidavit stating he has no problem with it. Mr. Viazanko stated that this puts him in a catch 22. If he signs it, he’s violating a State law and if he doesn’t sign it, it holds the residents up from getting their stairs. Mr. Harvey inquired as to if it’s a 3’ wide stairway. Mr. Viazanko stated that it is actually 40” wide but it narrows down to 10” on one side and 5” on the other side. At one time it was a door but presently it’s just an arch. Mr. Harvey inquired as to if it was a chair lift that would travel on what would be consider a hand rail. Mr. Viazanko stated that it is but it still has to be bumped out further because of the way the wall comes out at the bottom of the stairs. They may be okay if they widen the arch to the width of the stairs. Mr. Viazanko stated he has offered to meet with the homeowners and is trying to guide them down this avenue, which would be in their best interest. PARTICIPATION – None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Stanek, supported by Johnson, to approve the minutes of February 13, 2014. Yes: All Absent: Berg Motion carried Motion by Stanek, supported by Harvey, to approve the minutes of January 8, 2015. Yes: All Absent: Berg Motion carried ADJOURNMENT Motion by Stanek, supported by Johnson, to adjourn. Yes: All Absent: Berg Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:25 pm. Respectfully submitted, Thaddeus Stanek Chairman