Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCA 2003-12-08 Minutes MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS DECEMBER 8, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Building Official, David Pendley, at 6:32 p.m. 3. (taken out of order) SELECTION OF A CHAIRMAN Joe Crane made a motion to nominate Bill Manning as the Chairman of the Board of Construction Appeals. The motion was seconded by Lynn Mothera!. There were no other nominations and Mr. Pendley called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). 2. (taken out of order) ROLL CALL PRESENT Chairman and Place 3 Place 1 Place 2 Place 4 Place 6 Place 7 Bill Manning Joe Crane Daron Gunter Lynn Motheral Lloyd Robinson W. D. McCarthy VACANT Place 5 CITY STAFF Building Official Assistant Building Official Office Coordinator Fire Inspector David Pendley Penny Peterson Carolyn Huggins Lt. Mike Smith The Building Official announced that a quorum was present and explained that this is the inaugural meeting for the members of this Board and therefore there are no prior minutes to approve. Page 1 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes 4. BOA 03-01 CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S INTERPRETATION REGARDING A SPIRAL STAIRCASE AND BEDROOM EGRESS WINDOW BELONGING TO DARCY BOATMAN, 7005 SMITHFIELD ROAD. The Building Official, David Pendley, explained that the Code allows the Board of Appeals to vote on interpretations. They are not allowed to waive or vary requirements. He then explained that there are two items for consideration in this case. The first item is located in the second story of a bedroom in the Boatman house. Mr. Pendley was unable to obtain a photo from the applicant. He explained that the Boatman's have made a secondary room that is above the ceiling level. He does not wish to use the term "loft" or "mezzanine" because this is a normal room with a ceiling, with a hole cut out in the corner and in that corner is a spiral staircase. The room above it is about 1 Ox1 O. Mr. Pendley stated that when he inspected the room there was only a small couch in the room. He also explained that the staircase and secondary room were not on the building plans that were submitted to and approved by the Planning & Inspections Department. Mr. Pendley explained that the spiral staircase must meet a couple of requirements. The width of the stair tread from the center post to the outside edge must be 26". The staircase under consideration has approximately 22" - a narrow tread width. The code measures at the pie shape -- 12" from the narrowest point. With a triangular shaped stair, the measurement is from the narrowest point back 12". The width of that tread at 12" is supposed to be 7-1/2. The staircase under consideration has about 6-1/2; therefore there is a narrow stair tread as well as a narrow stair width. Mr. Pendley explained that another problem is that the stairs overlap each other, which does not present a problem going up as much as it presents a problem going down. The tread width is even smaller because they are overlapping. Mr. Pendley then showed the Board a slide of an acceptable alternative tread. He explained that the code allows an alternating tread stair - a single rung on each side, about the width of a shoe. "It is cut out so that when you are descending, your right foot is standing on a rung and there is no obstruction as your left foot descends. Although it looks funny, you walk down the rungs almost as if it is a normal set of stairs." Mr. Pendley then restated the code requirements for a spiral stair. The minimum tread width is 26"; the depth of the tread at 12" and 7-1/2. Minimum head room is 6'6" (although that is not a problem in this case). Page 2 12/8103 Board of Appeals Minutes The second item for consideration in this case is the area above the room - should it be considered a "sleeping room." Even if the Boatman's don't intend it as a sleeping room, the Building Official follows the rule that if it looks like someone could sleep up there, they probably can and will sleep up there. The question to be answered is whether or not it has to be treated like a sleeping room - in other words having an egress window, which goes along with sleeping rooms. Mr. Pendley stated that he believed there was a smoke detector up there already so that requirement is being met, but the egress window becomes a problem. There is a fixed window and it is too high off the floor. That can be changed to meet the requirements. But the issue is should that room be considered its own sleeping room or should it be considered part of the bedroom. Mr. Pendley stated that it is like a two story bedroom. No other room has access to the upper area other than the bedroom that is below it. Mr. Pendley asked if there were any questions. Chairman Manning asked if the code defines a bedroom vs. a study vs. a dining room. Mr. Pendley stated that it does not. He stated that "room used for sleeping" is about close as you are going to get. He stated, "when we get plans in our office and bonus rooms, we typically will include those as a bedroom, making sure there are smoke detectors in them and they have a window. Sometimes we'll get one that is intended to be a living room so we make sure when that occurs that it won't be used for sleeping. They typically are open- ended. They are at the end of a hallway or they won't have any closets. It's basically going to be used for a pool table or something like that. We try to eliminate those possibilities that it might be turned into a bedroom or used as a bedroom." W. D. McCarthy asked what would be considered an emergency exit. Mr. Pendley responded that assuming that the room upstairs is a bedroom; the emergency exit would be the window on what would be called the third level. Mr. McCarthy stated that it would probably be 45-ft. from the ground. Mr. Pendley replied that the code requires, even in commercial buildings that are used for sleeping purposes, that egress windows are available up to and including the fourth floor. Mr. McCarthy asked if there is a fire escape or ladder outside that window. Mr. Pendley responded "no," that they are not required. Daron Gunter asked for confirmation that the window is a fixed window. Mr. Pendley responded "correct." He stated that if the window was switched out, which could very easily be done and made to open, and they constructed some sort of stair or platform to make it so the bottom of that window sill height is 44 Page 3 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes or less, that window could, in effect, become the emergency egress for that room. Chairman Manning asked if there are any special rules on 3-story houses for egress. Mr. Pendley responded that the rules are the same as a 2-story house. The Chairman then confirmed that the only requirement, if it is a bedroom, is there must be an emergency egress. Mr. Pendley responded "right." Mr. Motheral asked if this was built without a permit. Mr. Pendley explained that the house had a permit, but this modification (using the attic area to create a third floor in that bedroom) was not on the plans. "We didn't know about it." Mr. Motheral asked if the joists are sufficient to carry loads? Mr. Pendley stated that when he saw this construction it was already in its final stages. He stated that the inspectors could have approved the ceiling joists and this was done after they had left. Mr. Motheral asked, "if the city was given plans with this application on it, would the city accept it? As is?" Mr. Pendley responded "no." Two things would have been required - an egress window and the stair requirement (as well as a smoke detector, but he believes one is there). Mr. Crane asked if this is correctable. Mr. Pendley explained that the stair is massive, weighing anywhere from 400 to 600 Ibs., made out of steel. It would have to be cut out. Mrs. Boatman asked if she could say something. The Building Official explained that after the question period she would be allowed to present her case. Mr. Gunter asked the age of the residence? Mr. Pendley explained that it is brand new. Mr. Gunter asked if anyone in the room knew whether or not it had ceiling joists or trusses, or 2x6 ceiling joists? Mr. Pendley said that no one in the room knows for sure. Chairman Manning commented that he thought it could be measured without demolishing everything. Mr. Pendley responded that it could be measured. Lloyd Robinson stated that fire is his concern. He stated that it only takes a little spark. He asked if a fireman with his gear could get up to the room. Lt. Mike Smith, Fire Inspector, replied "no." Mr. Pendley stated that he does not have a slide of a fireman getting up the stairs, but he presented the following slides: 1) a fireman going through an egress window; and 2) firefighter equipment. Lt. Smith commented that the firefighters pictured in the slides are of average size. Mr. Pendley explained that a firefighter wearing full equipment from elbow to elbow is 28" wide. From front to back, the firefighter is about 21." Mr. Pendley Page 4 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes stated that he isn't a very big guy and when he went up the stairs, his shoulder rubbed the center post all the way up. However, he stated that coming down is the bigger problem since there is a smaller tread width effect because of the overlap. Chairman Manning asked if the plans had included this room and it had said study or something besides bedroom, would staff have looked at it and said, "wait a second, it's a bedroom?" Mr. Pendley responded, "We would have, because it is located in a bedroom." He stated that if it was located off a hallway or something like that, staff may have done something different provided it didn't have closets or things like that. Mr. Gunter asked if the room is actually over or offset. Mr. Pendley responded that it is over. He stated that it might be offset a foot or two based on the configuration up there, but when a person is standing up there, they are over the bedroom. Mr. Motheral asked if there is liability to the City if someone gets hurt. Mr. Pendley responded that it is a possibility. If the Boatman's moved out and someone else moved in and a fire happened, someone could always ask why the City approved this. Mr. Pendley explained that it is because of this, that we go to the Boards. He explained that he does not believe the Board can act on the stair issue because the Board does not have the authority to waive the requirements. Mr. Pendley explained that to Mr. Boatman from the very beginning. The Board does have some leeway on the second issue which is an interpretation matter; unless the Board determined that the dimensions on the stairs had been misinterpreted. Mr. Motheral then asked, "So what we would be interpreting is the size of the opening at the top of the stairs?" Mr. Pendley responded, "No" and then further stated that he did not want to railroad this or guide the Board in any particular direction. He stated that he wishes to be as democratic as possible. He explained that unless the Board decides that 7-1/2" is really 6-3/4" there wouldn't be an interpretation issue with the stairs. He explained that there isn't much interpretation for the Board to make with the stairs without overstepping the boundaries of the Board which would then involve the City Attorney. Mr. McCarthy stated that the first consideration must be safety for the person in that room especially if they are under the age of 18. "If something happens, a fire, a candle lit, kids will be kids, an electrical short - seeing a person, but especially a child, even with a window where he could come out, standing on top of a house and then he jumps, I can't live with that. Safety is what we should be looking at." Mr. Robinson added that nine times out of ten the Fire Department would not be able to get in there if that area is filled with smoke. He stated that there is not much area to get in there. Page 5 12/8103 Board of Appeals Minutes Mr. Pendley asked Mrs. Boatman to present her case to the Board members. Mrs. Boatman stated that they were told there was only a 3" difference, not 6- 1/2." Mr. Pendley explained that the 6-1/2" is for the tread depth, not the stair width. Mrs. Boatman said that she understood that the main issue was the width. She stated that she is bigger than Mr. Pendley and the housekeeper of the house and she can get up and down the stairs. She also stated that there is not a couch up there. Mr. Pendley said that there was a futon-type chair. Mrs. Boatman responded, "No, there is a folding chair, television, and a Nintendo." She stated that this is their 11-year old son's room. She said that this is a pretty nice house. Her son's bedroom is downstairs with a television and all his stuff in his bathroom and this is basically a kid's loft for a Nintendo, his junk toys, all his army men, and all that stuff. It is not a sleeping area. He is not allowed to sleep up there. There is a smoke detector up there. It is built to standards on the width of the floor and all that stuff. It is not a sleeping area. She said that basically they hired a stair company to put it in and that it is a heavy thing. She stated that they killed the house bringing it in. "They killed the front bringing it in because it is so heavy. It took about 8 guys to bring the spiral thing in. They installed it." She said that their mistake was in assuming that the stair company had the code of the City. She went on to explain that it is already installed and it's just a play area. It's just like a game room. Or a library. She asked, "if it would have been a library instead of over a bedroom would you look at it differently?" She stated that her son is not allowed to sleep up there and that they are aware when he is up there. She continued, "It's just a play area. It's a fun staircase. Any kid in the world would have wanted one growing up. Originally, we wanted a fire pole but we didn't have the room to put one in there." Mrs. Boatman stated that the window is just a little bay window. She stated that if they had to make it an open window, that wouldn't be a big deal. She stated that they would be happy to sign something saying the City is not held responsible and even making it where if they ever sold the house, they would either change the stairs or the other people would sign the same document saying that the City is not held responsible for this staircase. She stated that it is a big, heavy-duty staircase and it would be really hard to take it down and put a ladder up there. It is a much bigger process than that. She stated that whatever they have to do to make the City ok with it, they would be ok with that. That they will keep their kid safe. That they will be just as safe in that room as in any other room in the house they are going to have a hard time getting out of - it's a big house. She stated that it is like a fort room. They call it a loft because that's what they assume it is, however, it doesn't have a loft overlook. She does not remember hearing about the actual step part of it, but she remembers hearing about the 3" difference on the width of the stairs being the problem. She summarized that it is just a little boy's room with a special loft area. She stated that they do not want the City to be held responsible for something that they would be fearful of and that they will be happy to sign documents. Page 6 12/8103 Board of Appeals Minutes Mr. Gunter asked when they decided to add this room. Mrs. Boatman stated that her husband is a builder and he decided that they had room up there to add this. She stated that there were inspectors out there and they saw it going up. That it wasn't like they saw an open room and then all of a sudden they saw this room with stairs in it. She stated that they had inspectors out there all the time because they were red-tagged every time they turned around. That at some point they had to have seen. That it just couldn't have appeared there. She stated that the room had a big square hole in the ceiling and so someone had to have asked "what's that?" Mr. Pendley explained that it's not like the inspectors would not have approved it, but it is the stairs that are causing the problem. Mrs. Boatman said that there were several different inspectors out there and perhaps one thought that the other had approved it. Mr. Robinson asked when the staircase was put in - before, at, or after the final inspection? Mrs. Boatman responded, "before." She stated that it was at the final inspection when the stairs became a problem. She stated that they had assumed that they had hired a reputable stairway company. Mr. Robinson stated that perhaps Mrs. Boatman's stairway company may have to knock out something since the contractor should have known better. He stated that if he does something wrong, he is responsible to bring it back to code. Mrs. Boatman responded that she and her husband are the builders and don't have a problem taking the blame on that. She stated that it is just not an easy process and she is sorry that she doesn't have pictures of the stairs. Lt. Mike Smith, Fire Inspector, commented to Mrs. Boatman that if her son were playing in that area and a medical emergency occurred, he was concerned about whether or not rescue personnel could get to him with the necessary equipment. Mrs. Boatman responded, "you could go up the stairs." Lt. Smith asked, "how are we going to get him down?" Mrs. Boatman responded, "well, how do you get them down spiral staircases? I don't know." Lt. Smith responded that he hasn't seen one 22 to 23 inches wide. He stated that most firefighters are kind-of big and that it is going to be hard enough getting "ourselves and our equipment up there, but then you go back to the fire side and how are we going to get to him? You have a fixed window." Mrs. Boatman said that the window can be easily changed to an open window. Lt. Smith asked if it is something that we could access. Mrs. Boatman Page 7 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes responded "with a ladder, yeah." Lt. Smith asked if they would need to go through the roof. Mrs. Boatman stated no, they could come through the window. Lt. Smith asked if you can see out of the window. Is it a dormer? Mr. Pendley stated that it is sort-of a dormer. Mrs. Boatman said that there is a platform and a window. Lt. Smith said that his consideration is not only for the safety of her son, but also for his own safety in trying to go up a spiral staircase in smoky and heated conditions. Mrs. Boatman wondered if it were 3" wider to meet code, would it be that much easier. Lt. Smith responded, "Every bit helps." Mrs. Boatman said that she understood that, but that it would be hard either way. "It is not going to be an easy thing to do on a spiral staircase whether it is 3" wider." Lt. Smith explained that when they set those codes, they do it for a certain reason. Mrs. Boatman responded that she understands that and they are willing to take responsibility for that. Lt. Smith responded that they are taking responsibility for their son, but what about somebody else who might be injured? Mrs. Boatman responded that if they signed a document, she assumes they would. Mr. Motheral stated that there is a concern in his mind that the Boatman's certainly can't sign for someone who purchases their home. If something goes wrong, it is going to come back that they were allowed to do something that could risk lives of subsequent owners. He stated that it doesn't seem like a good precedent to set. He stated that the Board is not here to modify the codes but rather to say whether or not this is a code issue. Mrs. Boatman asked if the room were considered a library would the codes be different. Mr. Pendley explained that if it is determined that it is a room other than a bedroom, a library or a den or even a game room are other considerations, but "we never see them or approve them when they are off of a bedroom. The circumstance doesn't come up very often when it is that way, but those rooms that we do dub as a game room or a den are typically off the hallway. They are a separate room and are not part of or accessed from the bedroom." Mrs. Boatman said that they would still be accessed by a staircase if someone were in the playroom and there was an emergency? Mr. Pendley responded "yes" and they would be subject to the same stair requirements. Mr. Motheral stated, "I don't think that your contention is that if there was a stairway that was the correct dimensions that you would have a problem with it, is that right?" Page 8 1218103 Board of Appeals Minutes Mr. Pendley answered "correct". He further explained that we would have the issue with the window, but the window issue is fixable. Mr. Motheral responded, "You don't have a problem if they want to take that staircase out and put in one that meets code, correct?" Mr. Pendley, "that's correct." Chairman Manning: "If I understand it correctly, we don't have the authority to say since you've gone and measured it, our only alternative would be to go out and measure it and say you measured it wrong and therefore it does meet the requirements. We're not allowed to modify the code that the City of North Richland Hills has adopted. So I'm not sure that we have a lot of latitude on the stair itself. I think we do have latitude as you mentioned earlier on what that room is called. It would be easier to know what it was called if it were on the original plans, but regardless I think we still have that issue to deal with whether or not it's a bedroom, a sleeping room, or a game room, or whatever it would be called. I've been in several houses where you go into a master bedroom and there's double pocket doors that go into a study that is adjacent to the master bedroom and it's obvious that room doesn't have a closet in it, it doesn't have bathroom access and it's on the first floor so nobody is really concerned about it from a safety standpoint; it doesn't become a big issue, but it definitely is not a sleeping room even though it is adjacent to the master bedroom and is separated by a pair of pocket doors. If that room said library or study or sitting room or something like that and it was adjacent to the master bedroom, I can see how that would be a very easy call to say that definitely is not a bedroom even though it is attached to the bedroom. The only way into it is through the bedroom so that's the only part I'm having a little bit of trouble with is trying to determine whether or not this is a sleeping room. It still doesn't relieve the issue that we are dealing with on the stair. I don't think we have any latitude on the stair itself. Unless it was mismeasured by the City staff members, I don't think the stair meets the current requirement, regardless of what the room is." Mr. Motheral, seconded by Mr. Crane, made a motion to have the City go out one more time and measure the staircase. If it meets the code requirement, it stays. If it doesn't, it's removed. Mr. McCarthy stated that the manufacturer should have the dimensions for the Boatman's. Mr. Pendley stated that Mrs. Boatman has already indicated that the stairs are at least 3" too narrow. Mrs. Boatman concurred. Mr. Motheral revised his motion to have the stairs removed. Mr. Crane seconded. The Chairman called for discussion. There was no further discussion and the Chairman called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Page 9 12/8103 Board of Appeals Minutes Mr. Motheral recommended to Mrs. Boatman that she go to the stair company and tell them to take the staircase out without messing up anything in her house. He advised her, "however they have to do it, they have to do it and it's out of their pocket. n Mrs. Boatman said she understands, but she asked if there is anything within the City. Another appeal? It was explained to Mrs. Boatman that this Board is the last appeal within the City. Further action would require going to court against the stair company. Chairman Manning then stated that the Board now needs to decide whether or not this room is considered a sleeping room. "If it is a sleeping room than the code, to me, is very clear that it does not meet the current code for emergency egress. If it is considered not to be a sleeping room, then there are no emergency egress requirements." Mr. Gunter stated that his interpretation of this room from dealing with other cities is that they would have a problem with this also just because the only access to this room is from the bedroom. "You have a child's room and mom and dad can say that no one is sleeping up there, but if you have four kids spending the night, you are not controlling where they go to sleep after mom and dad go to bed. I have a problem with that since the only access to it is from the bedroom. There is no other way out of that room except down the spiral staircase into the bedroom. In my view, that room is able to be a sleeping room." Mr. Motheral added "that may be the question there -- is it possible that it could be. And, are we being asked to look into the future and say if a future resident takes that over, can they possibly make it a sleeping room." Mr. Gunter replied "I think we are, because in my opinion that room can be used for a sleeping room because there is access to a closet basically in the same area because you just come down the stairs. You're not going out into a hallway to get to a closet. It would not be hard to throw a futon or something up there that would fold down into a bed. You might not be able to get a bed into that room, but you could get something there that can be used for a bed and not necessarily in the Boatman's use of it, but somebody's use five years down the road." Mr. Crane stated that if the Board determines that it is a bedroom, "which it obviously is a bedroom, all she has to do is change the window, because she's going to have to change the stairs anyway." Mr. Gunter: "So we have to decide if that can be a bedroom or not." Page 10 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes Mrs. Boatman asked for clarification of a closet in the room. She said the closet is in the bathroom. "Is that considered still in that room?" Mr. Gunter said that his experience with any other City, as well as this City is if the room has a closet, it is a sleepable room. Mr. Pendley stated, "That is one of the tests that is used." He further explained that with a bonus room or den or office which are typically accessed off of a hallway, "if we walk into one and we see that one has a closet in it, we make the determination that it is a bedroom even if the builder is saying otherwise. II Mr. McCarthy stated that the only thing is safety. "Children will be children." He said that he could give Mrs. Boatman a long list of names of people that thought their children were in their bedrooms but weren't. He stated, "I've seen two fires with children who could not be rescued in similar cases what you have with this room. That room is attached to a bedroom. You are asking for problems." Mr. Crane, seconded by Mr. Gunter, made a motion that the Board consider the upper room part of the bedroom. Chairman Manning commented that he knows this is an undefined area which is why this Board is being asked to make a determination. He stated that the definition, which might be a deficiency on the code or something that is more obvious to everyone else than it is to him, but he sees the person submitting the set of plans as the person who has to determine which rooms are or are not bedrooms. "I was in a friend's house a few months ago and he had a kid home from college and his kid was sleeping in the dining room because they were out of room in the house. That definitely wasn't a bedroom but they had a kid sleeping in there and it just appears to me that the requirements are generally put on the plan drawer to identify what rooms are what and in this case if there was a closet in there I wouldn't have any problem saying oh yeah this is another bedroom. Just because it comes off a bedroom, I still have a hard time agreeing that the definition is clear that it is a bedroom. I understand everybody else's position on this, but again I have a hard time seeing that's the case." The Chairman then called for a vote. The motion passed (5-1) with Chairman Manning voting against. Mrs. Boatman asked for an explanation of the timeframe regarding the decisions made by the Board this evening. Mr. Pendley explained that 14-15 days would be allowed unless the Boatman's decided to appeal as a court case. If a stay was granted, the City would need appropriate documentation from the Boatman's. Page 11 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes 5. ADJOURNMENT The Building Official adjourned the Public Hearing portion of this meeting at 7:20 p.m. and continued with a regular meeting of the Board of Construction Appeals to discuss local amendments to the residential building code. 8/11 I ~-H- Page 12 12/8/03 Board of Appeals Minutes