HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Council Action Form dated February 27, 1996 ITEM #
DATE: February 27, 1996
SUBJECT: Request approval for changes in Chapter 5, of the Ames Municipal Code
regarding adoption of the 1994 Uniform Building Code and local amendments.
BACKGROUND:
For the past 18 months the Building Code Board of Appeals has been reviewing the 1994
Uniform Building Code for its adoption. The majority of the proposed changes are
renumbering the sections to make the amendments to the 1994 UBC coincide with those in
the 1991 UBC. The local building code has worked very well since its implementation on April
1, 1993, except for the following three areas of concern.
1. Current projects are required to be started within 180 days after the permit is
issued, and show continuous progress every 180 days, thereafter, until the project
is complete.
The new wording will read 180 days to start the project," as is now, but change to
read "show progress every sixty (60) days, thereafter, or be approved by the
Building Official." This change is recommended because of numerous complaints
from neighbors of construction projects where work begins and becomes unsightly
for the neighborhood for months or years thereafter. Also, the Board felt the
Building Official shall become more aggressive in defining continuing progress, but
provide leniency in case of inclement weather or material delays.
2. Return to the wording in the UBC requiring an egress window in every basement.
Currently, we are less restrictive by requiring egress windows in finished
basements only. This change is proposed because of the numerous complaints
of homeowners spending thousands of dollars installing egress windows in
basements immediately after purchasing a new house. A great majority of
basements get finished within five years after the house is built.
The majority of builders already build to this standard. The most recent homes built
for the City's affordable housing program meet the egress standard as stated in the
UBC. The Des Moines Metro Building Official's Group already have this require-
ment in Des Moines and surrounding suburbs. The Board is also concerned about
liability for the City of Ames in case of a death or injury.
3. Require the same quality of footings for a wood pole structure as we require for a
steel structure. In both cases the buildings are pre-engineered, but the foundations
of the pole structures are based on past practice, generally, and are not based on
standard engineering practices. Steel structures, however, generally have
engineered foundations and are designed to withstand the forces placed upon
them. There have been several local concerns of uplifting forces on pole structures
where damage has occurred. The Board prefers to see these two types of
structures treated equally.
The Building Code Boards of Appeals have held two public meetings, January 4, 1996, and
February 8, 1996. The inspection's staff sent the attached letters to all registered contractors
asking for input and announcing the public meetings. One contractor expressed his concern
to the Building Official about wood pole structures, but did not let the Board know, nor did he
attend either public meeting. Another contractor sent a letter to the Chairman of the Building
Code Board of Appeals regarding egress windows, but did not attend either meeting, nor did
he send a representative to either meeting. No one who attended either meeting had any
concern about the three proposed changes. The Board voted unanimously in favor of all three
changes.
Therefore, the Building Code Board of Appeals request the City Council approve the adoption
of the 1994 Uniform Building Code including the three proposed changes to the local building
code and ask the City Council to direct the City Attorney to prepare the ordinance accordingly.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to adopt the 1994 Uniform Building Code
including the three local amendments.
2. Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to adopt the 1994 Uniform Building Code
and any combination of the three local amendments.
3. Deny the request.
MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #1.
COUNCIL ACTION: