01-26-1994 Building Code Board of Appeals

Home Browse Search

• BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS - JANUARY 26, 1994 It was moved by Anderson, seconded by Hanson, that the Board renders the opinion that, according to Section 104, none of the facts have indicated that the building is more hazardous or has been altered in such a manner that would require, under Section 104, a second stairway be added. Ayes 5, nays 0. Discussion continued. Anderson stated that based on what he had seen and heard, there are practical difficulties in providing a second stair. This is an existing building where two bedrooms were used. The remodeling of the third floor is not creating something that is more hazardous than what existed there previously. Therefore, with respect to Section 104, in his opinion a second exit would not be required. Hanson referenced Page 3, Section A, of the Attorney's letter noting the Board's finding that the building is "no more hazardous ... than before ... " Discussion of Section 203, City of Orono letter dated October 14, 1994, continued. Chair Bellows felt the Board was not discussing Oman's authority to determine a structure unsafe, but determining whether the structure itself was unsafe. Paulfranz asked to see the entire Section 203. • Chair Bellows noted this was a very subjective issue as to whether someone would deem a structure unsafe. Kohnen asked if Oman had issued orders to the effect that it was a dangerous building and a second stair was required. Oman responded he called it out on the plan review and that Chapter 33 applied. Kohnen questioned the reason Section 203 was to be considered since it discusses the building official's authority. Paulfranz agreed that Section 203 was not intended to apply in this case and no ruling was necessary on this section. By implication of ruling on Section 104, the Board has accepted the authority of the Building Official and found that the building was not hazardous. Mabusth explained that the findings of the Board will be sent to the State for further review. If the State overrules the Board, the property owners would come back to the Board of Appeals. The entire record of the hearing is forwarded to the State. The Jundts expressed their appreciation for all the work the Board has done and stated their intent is to comply with the code. Anderson stated his position that he felt Oman has the ability to issue orders under Section 203 and require a second exit. He encouraged the Jundts to continue to explore alternatives to the second exit.