The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About~Master - Building Board of Appeals Minutes 05/07/2019 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS AMES, IOWA MAY 7, 2018 Call to Order The regular meeting of the Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman Larry Cormicle at 4:00 p.m., May 7, 2018, in Room 235 in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue. Present from the Building Board of Appeals were Larry Cormicle, Brad Heemstra, Brad Sydnes, David Carnes, Nathan Werstein, and Andrew Mott. Dan Nutini was absent. Staff members present were Adam Ostert, Natalie Herrington, and Jane Chang. Moved by Cormicle, seconded by Carnes, to approve the minutes of March 5, 2018 with a correction to the vote on the last item from 4-1 to 5-0 Vote on Motion: 6-0 Motion passed unanimously Old Business None New Business A. Appeal of the 2015 International Building Code, Section 1108.2.8 Performance Areas at 823 Wheeler Street #1 by Cheryl Sondrol with Tumbling Dice, INC/DBA NorthCyde Appellant, Cheryl Sondrol, presented the appeal. Cheryl and Daniel Sondrol moved their restaurant/bar, NorthCyde Kitchen & Kegs, to a new location quickly when they lost the lease at their previous location. After moving into the new location, they built an elevated platform for bands to use during performances and for diners to use when not being used by bands. The platform was inadvertently omitted from the permit application that was submitted to the Inspections office. The platform is in the dining room. The platform does not meet the accessibility requirements as required by the IBC. Section 1108.2.8 of the IBC requires all performance areas, regardless of the amount of public access, to have an accessible route to the stage area. An accessible route would include a compliant ramp, sloped surface or platform lift from the stage to the seating area. The appellant has bands perform on site 2-3 times per month, 42 nights per year, at most. While bands are performing, the public is not allowed on the platform, which the bands prefer because their equipment is off of the floor and away from the public. Building a ramp to make the platform accessible would take up a considerable amount of floor space, which would result in fewer tables for customers. A ramp would also make the platform too small for a band to use, so it would become useless space. The remainder of the space is handicapped accessible. Sondrol referenced Section 1108.2.8 Temporary Use. The Sondrols would lose money if they were not able to have bands perform, as having bands is what they are known for. 2 Sondrol visited other venues in Ames that have live performances on elevated surfaces and those venues are not handicapped accessible. Ostert said the City of Ames follows the A117 for accessibility and that existing elevated surfaces would only be brought up to code if they are part of a remodel. Nathan Werstein asked if the permit application had been submitted to the Inspections office without the ramp, would it have been approved. Adam Ostert replied that it would not have been approved. The ramp would have been addressed at that time. David Carnes asked if the issue is that it is an elevated area or that it is designated as a performance area. Ostert replied that there is an allowance for an elevated eating area, but it cannot exceed 25% of all facilities. If the area was only an eating area, it would not have to be accessible. There is not a percentage allowance if the area is dual purpose, as in this case. Brad Heemstra asked if the accessibility is intended for the performers. Ostert said his understanding is that the accessibility requirement is for the performers not patrons. Heemstra then asked how large the ramp would need to be. Ostert answered that with a 12 inch rise, the ramp would have to be 12 feet long. Sondrol added that a 12 foot ramp would eliminate 7 booths in the dining area. Nathan Werstein asked about the option of having a temporary ramp on site to be used as needed. Ostert said the code states that the ramp has to be in place. Discussion was held about alternatives to allow the performances to continue. Could the performers be given the choice of whether or not they wanted to be on the platform? Jane Chang answered that allowing some performers to be on the elevated platform while others could not be on the platform would not be considered equal. There are benefits to being on the platform that performers who were not on the platform would not receive. There is a provision in the ADA stating that providing separate areas is potentially a violation. Werstein and Heemstra suggested another design for the ramp. Moved by Werstein, seconded by Carnes, to deny the appeal as presented Vote on motion: 6-0 Motion unanimously approved B. Appeal of the 2015 International Residential Code, Section R311.7.2 Headroom and Section R305.1 Minimum Height at 2340 Storm Street by Jon Engelman of Brickyard Associates Jon Engelman renovated the property at 2340 Storm Street. The property has an attic that is being used as a bedroom. As a result of the rental inspection to obtain the Letter of Compliance, it was found that the landing and ceiling height do not meet the requirements of a habitable space. Engelman hired John Lott to come up with a solution to the stairwell. 3 Engelman would like a variance to continue to use the attic as a bedroom by correcting the stair landing, but leaving the ceiling height as is. Cormicle asked if it was possible to obtain any more headroom in the highest point in the ceiling. John Lott answered that it was not feasible. The only way to get the proper headroom is to literally raise the roof, which is why the appellant believes a variance should be g ranted. Cormicle and Lott discussed the modifications to the stairway. David Carnes asked if the code modification request for the stairs has been approved. Ostert replied that it has. The only issue at hand is the lack of head height. Andrew Mott asked what the Assessors page says about the space. Is it considered a three bedroom house by the Assessor? The previous owner paid taxes on the house as a three bedroom house. Ostert said the criteria used by the Assessor to determine a bedroom is based on square feet and a closet. Head height is not a consideration. Discussion was held about windows and egress. The space does meet egress requirements. Discussion was held about ceiling height. Ostert stated the code requirement for habitable rooms is 70 square feet of area, of which 50% has to be a minimum of 7 feet high. The space in question does not have 35 square feet of 7’ head height. Heemstra asked about the extent of the remodel. Engelman said he painted, put in new carpet, added the closet and removed a shelving unit. Cormicle asked at what point does redecorating trigger current code compliance. This situation was a redecoration not a renovation. A renovation would bring current code co mpliance into play. Natalie Herrington answered that because the house is a new rental property, the space would not be grandfathered in any way. The rental code states that a habitable room , other than a kitchen, shall not be less than 7 feet in any plan dimension and must have a clear ceiling height of not less than 7 feet. Ostert added that besides a renovation or remodel, a change of use triggers current code compliance. Engelman added that from a practical perspective, there can be three people occupying the house and he was trying to be proactive by avoiding future conflict with the City if renters choose to live in the attic space at some time. He tried to make it as safe as possible, although it is a few inches away from compliance. Heemstra replied that it is difficult to allow a variance for the ceiling height requirement because where would they draw the line then at the height requirement. Cormicle summarized that this existing ceiling does not even have 50 percent of it at the 7 foot height requirement – possibly even less than 10 percent. Both the building code and the rental code require 7’ ceiling height for habitable space. Moved by Heemstra, seconded by Werstein, to deny the appeal as presented 4 Vote on Motion: 6-0 Motion passed unanimously C. Election of Officers Moved by Heemstra, seconded by Carnes, to re-elect Larry Cormicle as Chairman Vote on Motion: 6-0 Motion passed unanimously Board or Staff Comments Discussion was held about the adoption of the 2018 ICC codes. The City will wait until the State of Iowa adopts the codes first. Adjournment Moved by Cormicle to adjourn the meeting at 5:03 p.m. ___________________________ Eileen Carter, Recording Secretary