01-26-1994 Building Code Board of Appeals

Home Browse Search

• BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS - JANUARY 26, 1994 some day it may be listed on the register but they did not want to spend additional time pursuing that option at this time. Mrs. Jundt added that the architects they have chosen specialize in restoration and have assured the Jundts that nothing has been done to destroy the historical value of the home. Mr. Jundt stated they had spent over a year researching architectural firms. Paulfranz continued that since they are dealing with an existing building with some historical character that he would be willing to look at alternative means of providing safe exiting. He referred to his experiences with fire fighting in larger homes noting that typically contents, fixtures, etc. would be the expected items to burn, not the structure itself. His concern would be a fire occurring in the kitchen, first or second floors that would block the only exit. He suggested looking at alternative means for "buying time" for exiting. Kohnen stated his first impression was that there would be no alternative but a second stairway. After touring the home, he felt there may be some options and agreed with Paulfranz. He noted that generally people don't burn to death but suffocate and the first reaction is to run to a stairway for escape. He agreed that a second means of exiting would be necessary and suggested an exit balcony made of wrought iron as a possible consideration. Hanson stated that another consideration must be future ownership of the property. Mr. Jundt responded that the City could require changes at any time according to the code. He added that the number of people living in the home and occupying the second and third floors will be • substantially fewer than the previous owners. Chair Bellows agreed there would be a demtensification of use and was not convinced a second stairway was necessary. She was concerned with second floor exits where most of the living would occur. She noted there were two exits from the Jundts' main living quarters. She felt the third floor would realistically not get a lot of use. She thought a telescopic or folding ladder might be a reasonable solution. She added that the continuation of the stairway to the third floor could be considered a hazard because smoke will rise on the stairways and may, in fact, worsen conditions on the third floor. She would like to pursue other means of providing a secondary exit noting there are roof lines to consider. Mr. Jundt stated that putting a stairwell in the room would make it unusable and they would consider abandoning use of the room. Anderson asked for further comments about the reduction in the intensity of use. Mr. Jundt responded that there would not necessarily be a reduction of use in that specific room but in the entire use of the home. The Pillsburys at one time employed up to 18 people as well as staff that lived there. There were seven or eight bedrooms that have been consolidated to four bedrooms. On a day -to -day basis, only the two Jundts and a live -in couple would occupy the home. He sees the third floor as a room for private use with only a few people using it at one time. If there is a large party, guests would not go to third floor. Anderson asked if the two bedrooms existed in the past and were actively used. Mrs. Jundt commented that over the years • 2