HomeMy WebLinkAboutBdAppeals_2019_09_25
Minutes of the Brookings Board of Appeals
Brookings, SD 57006
September 25, 2019
The City of Brookings Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairperson Houtman
on Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:00AM in Conference Room #142 on the first
floor of the City & County Government Center at 520 3rd Street. Members present
were Paul Sahr, Spencer Hawley, Jon Meendering, Dave Ekern, and Houtman. Also
present were Building Services Administrator Jared Thomas, Building Inspector TJ
Chandler and City Engineer Jackie Lanning.
Item #2 – (Hawley/Sahr) Motion to approve the agenda. All present voted aye.
MOTION CARRIED.
Item #3 – (Hawley/Clites) Motion to approve the September 11, 2019 Minutes.
MOTION CARRIED.
Item #4 - Continue Discussion on Adoption of 2018 I-Codes and Amendments.
Thomas began the meeting with reviewing the code amendments. He reviewed the
two year time limit for building permits before the permit expires. The City still agrees
that the total time limit should be 2 years. Houtman asked how often it happens that
people don’t complete the project in 2 years and Thomas said that did not happen very
often.
Thomas discussed R302.13, Fire protection of floors. He stated that the code
language would allow an exception for floor assemblies installed over an unfinished
basement. Thomas discussed the situation of a partially finished basement, such as a
finished basement and restroom, but non-finished for the rest of the basement.
Thomas thought once the basement is occupied, the City would want to have the floor
assembly completed. Houtman stated that some owners occupy the space for a
bedroom but don’t finish the walls. Sahr said the intention should be to protect the
floor members in the case of a fire. Thomas said it would be easier to enforce the
ceiling lid if bedrooms are finished in the basement. Meendering said some
homeowners typically use their basement for laundry and storage and Thomas added
that most property owners put ceilings in unfinished basements. Hawley asked if that
was new construction for remodeling and Chandler said it was not difficult to add the
ceiling among the HVAC for remodeling. Clites asked if affordable housing could be
an issue brought up by the City Council, which they could comment on. Sahr said it
would be more simple to dry wall the utility room up front instead of later.
Thomas reviewed Section 1030, Emergency Escape, related to the window size.
Bolzer said the old codes were 4.6 square feet, which was based on research. It was
a private test by a fire department on what size of window a fire fighter could be able to
get in the window with gear. The 5.7 square feet was based on research and people
are larger but most fire fighters can fit in the 5.7 square foot window. Houtman said
most new homes are installing the 5.7 square foot window with a common window size
of 30” x 42” and on new construction the new window size could be met. The group
said the labor costs would be the same and the window cost should be minimal.
Thomas reviewed R310.2.4, escape windows under decks. The current code
amendment would require a minimum height of 6’8” above grade to allow a second
story deck. Thomas said most contractors meet this requirement.
Thomas discussed Section 311.7.8.5, Grip Size (on handrails). The Board previously
discussed allowing a horizontal 2x4 to meet this requirement.
The group discussed Section R403, Foundations. Thomas said he would be in favor
of allowing Item 2 “Constructed in accordance with Section R403.3”. Thomas said the
City required heating in the garage and lists on the permit that the foundation was a
different design, that was decided at that time. The City required an engineered
design, which most people used the prescriptive design which is already in the code.
Sahr said it could be an issue for the next property owner who may not know that the
home does not have a full foundation wall. Thomas said the code does allow the
prescriptive design which has research behind it. Houtman said the City does not see
that type of construction very often in our region. The group talked about the soil
testing, especially in the wetter areas where construction is taking place. Meendering
said the argument is that it is a cheaper way to build, but the group did not think it was
a cost savings. Sahr said there is risk with the construction. Houtman said he could
see both sides of the issue and Chandler agreed. The City has issued 4 permits over
the last 3 years with that type of footing. Sahr and Houtman want to make sure the
contractor constructs the footing correctly according to the design. The group did not
think there was a cost savings with the shallow foundation construction. Chandler
thought some construction companies may choose to construct that method since they
do not have foundation forms. Houtman said he agrees to leave the amendment as is
and Chandler added maybe the City should charge more for the inspection fees. Sahr
said if the foundation is engineered and built with quality, maybe it should be allowed.
The group thought there should be more inspections to make sure the construction is
built properly and agreed to leave the amendment as is.
The group discussed that Chapter 11 will be discussed with the Task Force.
Section 105.2 under the IBC, “work exempt from a permit”. Thomas changed the
chapter exemptions. The swings and playground equipment could still be exempted.
Meendering asked what the City would look at for playground equipment since the
issue was not a life-safety issue.
The group discussed Section 903.2.8, Automatic Sprinkler Systems. The previous
exceptions are proposed. The Section 1030, Emergency Escape and Rescue will be
amended to match the 5.7 square feet similar to the IRC.
Thomas discussed some of the IBC code amendments discussed by the City of Sioux
Falls, such as fire walls between adjoining buildings. Sahr said he understood how
important it was for drainage plans, but wondered how it could be cheaper or more
streamlined. Thomas said the amendment for snow load was removed since the
current chart shows 40 psf, which should be followed.
Item #5 - Discussion on Code Change Procedure and Schedule
The task force will review Chapter 11 which will be brought back to the Board of
Appeals.
Item #6 - Adjournment (Clites/Hawley) Motion to adjourn.
Submitted by:
Jackie Lanning, City Engineer