01-26-1994 Building Code Board of Appeals

Home Browse Search

BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS - JANUARY 26, 1994 Kohnen asked if no improvements were done to the third floor if Oman would still require the second exit. Oman responded that he would. He did not feel that providing a safe refuge was an acceptable alternative. He would also require the second exit if the third floor were closed off, unless completely sealed off so that no one could ever enter the third floor. Kohnen asked Oman if distance were also a consideration in his decision, questioning if the code states where the second exit needs to be located. Anderson felt the code stated the exit must be 1/2 the overall diagonal distance. Chair Bellows expressed her frustration because her sense of the meeting was leading to the fact that if the Board ruled that this case was an exception, that a potential problem exists because Oman has stated he has essentially only one answer. This seems to defeat the purpose of the Board. Oman thought the Board was to make a decision on whether a second exit was required. The Jundts could propose an alterative suggestion, which he would reject, and that would be brought before the Board. Oman felt a decision could be made at this meeting. They could make a suggestion and Oman could agree or disagree and the Board could decide. • Mr. Jundt suggested making a security and fire alarm system with any upgrades to their currently proposed system that would be necessary. is Oman rejected this proposal stating a second stairway is necessary. The Board now has the option of ruling on his decision. Hanson asked if the Board could legally "direct" Oman to consider other alternatives. The Board agreed they could not. Chair Bellows felt there was no reason for the Board if they were being put in the position of not being able to rule on the issue. She felt the only acceptable answer for Oman would be a second stair and if that were the answer, there would be no reason for the Board to exist. Kohnen disagreed. He thought they could not use the design approach because the State would not accept their recommendation. He felt they had to agree or disagree with Oman. Paulfranz thought the problem was that the Board agrees with Oman and recognizes the fact of the code requirement. The Board's job is to decide appeals of orders relative to the application and interpretation of the code. In other areas of the code, there is reference to reasonable problems. He feels a second open stairway is not the best design. 0