HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Board of Appeals 1997 Minutes l
January 14, 1998 RECEIVED
98 MAR -9 AM 8: 28
Mayor David C. Hollister LANSING CITY CLERK
and City Council Members
City of Lansing
City Hall
Lansing, Michigan 48933
Re: 1997 Evaluation of the Building Board of Appeals
Dear Mayor Hollister and City Council Members:
During 1997 the Board attained the services of a fifth member after operating most of 1996 with four
members. The board now has a full complement of five members. The new members of the Board
bring with them many years of experience in their various occupational endeavors which will provide
a means to make decisions on cases which can be very difficult at times. The Board will strive as
always to provide a means to find acceptable alternatives in adapting the Uniform Building and Fire
Codes to specific building conditions, without adversely affecting public safety.
The Board heard a total of eight appeals in 1997. The Board was able to find acceptable solutions
for most the appeals heard which allowed most of the building or renovation projects to proceed
within reasonable time constraints. The Board adopted.one new policy statement dealing with non-
combustible roofs and parapet walls. Another new policy statement is being developed by the
Building-Safety Office and should be adopted at the first meeting in 1998. By its actions,the Board
has provided a service to the citizens of Lansing which has allowed continued renovations and new
construction to proceed in a very rapid and responsible way.
The Board received excellent technical assistance from the Building Safety Division and the Fire
Marshal's office. Jack Nelson, the manager of the Building Safety Office provided all needed
information the Board required to make its decisions. Mr. Nelson, representatives from the Fire
Marshal's office and Krista Williams who serves as designated secretary to the Board did outstanding
work in providing the Board with information needed. I would like to thank them for their support
of Board activities and invite you to salute them for their excellent work and service to the citizens
of Lansing.
Respectfully submitted,
6�� X/��
Randall Kamm, Chairman
Building Board of Appeals
cc: City of Lansing Building Safety Division
PN 5 !N
ti C
20
Office of City Clerk
Marilynn Slade City of Lansing �:, 5� ;`;C CITY CLERK
City Clerk
TO: K7-±s-t-a--W 11- ams-; Building-Safety s-Diviion
FROM: -e-C i-i o-ie---Frey---C-1 e-rk-'-s--Cf-f i-c e
DATE : November 25 , 1997
SUBJECT: 1997 Building Board of Appeals Minutes
A review of our records indicates the following board minutes are
not on file in the Clerks' s Office :
No minutes on file
The last board minutes placed on file with our office were for the
meeting of (see above) .
Would you please either provide the missing minutes or advise us of
their status?
Thank you for your cooperation in bringing this file up to date .
/dlg
Ninth Floor, City Hall, 124 W. Michigan Ave., Lansing, MI 48933-1695 517-483-4131 517-377-0068 FAX
RECYCLED
PAPER
� PNSINc
�r h�
ICHIG
Office of City Clerk
Marilynn Slade City of Lansing
City Clerk
TO: Krista Williams, Building Safety Division
FROM: Dixie Gilmore, City Clerk' s Office
DATE : November 25, 1997
SUBJECT: 1997 Building Board of Appeals Minutes
A review of our records indicates the following board minutes are
not on file in the Clerks' s Office :
No minutes on file
The last board minutes placed on file with our office were for the
meeting of (see above) .
Would you please either provide the missing minutes or advise us of
their status?
Thank you for your cooperation in bringing this file up to date .
/dlg
Ninth Floor, City Hall, 124 W. Michigan Ave., Lansing, MI 48933-1695 • 517-483-4131 • 517-377-0068 FAX
1
RECYCIED
PAPER
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
of the
CITY OF LANSING
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
December 9, 1997
The December meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman
Randall Kamm at 2:00 p.m. The following members were in attendance:
Randall Kamm,Chairman
Donald Heck,Vice Chairman
Brian Taylor
Dean Taylor
Members Absent:
Richard Stuckman
Staff members present:
Jack Nelson, Secretary
Dennis George,Fire Inspector
Steve Bollenbaugh,Fire Marshall
Donald Heck made a motion to approve the November 4, 1997,minutes.Motion seconded by Brian Taylor.
Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
AB-008-97—2611 N Grand River Ave
Mr. Edward Liebler,owner was present.
The petitioner seeks a reversal of the Building Officials determination which classified an accessory
building as a S-1 Use Group. The petitioner contends that the appropriate use group classification for a
storage structure less than 1,000 sq.ft. should be classified as U-1.
Section 312 of the Building Code states that Group U-1 occupancies shall include private garages,
carports, sheds and agricultural buildings less than 1,000 sq.ft. in area.
This Section of the Code addresses occupancies which are not normally occupied by people such as sheds
and other accessory buildings. The fire load in these structures varies considerably but is usually not
excessive. Because they are normally not occupied the fire load is not great and in general the code groups
these uses as a low hazard potential. In order to secure the low fire hazard intended by the code, it limits
Group U structures to 1,000 sq. ft.
The building in question is located on a commercial parcel of property at 2611 N. Grand River Ave. Since
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS DECEMBER 9, 1997
PAGE
the structure is not residential in nature but located in a commercial district the office felt the appropriate
use would be Group S Division 1. The S-1 use is used for the storage of combustible commodities. A
complete list of all products allowed in this use would be very lengthy.
The classification is apparently being questioned since buildings classified as Group U may be located 3
feet from the property lines without rating the exterior wall. The S-1 Group requires a rated wall if it is
located closer than 20 feet to the property line. The building was constructed without first acquiring a
building permit. The building is 5 feet from two property lines. The Office has notified the petitioner that
the walls must have a fire-resistive rating. Should the Board reverse the Departments decision the building
may be non-rated construction.
Mr. Liebler addressed the Board and stated that he erected a 250 square foot storage building in conjunction
with a sign on property located at 2611 N Grand River Ave. Mr. Liebler stated that he was unaware that a
building permit was required for a building of that size. The building will be used to house computer
equipment for the access control gate to the property and small hand tools used in conjunction with the
business.
Mr. Kamm asked if the interior of the building was finished. Mr. Liebler stated that it was not, and the
exterior was sheathed with O.S.B.It is the intent to install vinyl siding over the O.S.B.
Mr. Paul Barbour, the architect not he project, addressed the Board and stated that in his opinion the code
classifies all buildings of less than 1,000 sq.ft.in the U-1 Category.
Mr. Kamm asked how many feet the building is setback from other buildings on the site. Mr. Liebler stated
that the closet building on the site was 75' away.
Mr. Nelson asked Mr. Liebler how many feet the building was from "Hitches `N More" an adjoining use.
Mr. Liebler stated approximately 10'.
Mr. Kamm asked for comments from the Fire Prevention Bureau. Mr. Bollenbaugh stated that he had no
objection for either classification.
Mr.Heck asked if a building permit had been issued.Mr.Nelson stated it had been issued.
Mr. Brian Taylor moved to classify the building as a Group S Division 2 Low Hazard Storage Occupancy.
Since the storage uses delineated by the petitioner seem to meet the definition of a S-2. Motion sectioned by
Mr.Heck.Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
CASE AB-007-97 1223 Turner- Magnate Properties
Mr. Heck moved to remove this case from the table. Motion seconded by Mr. Brian Taylor. Motion
carried.
Mr.Nelson stated that the petitioner has requested that the case be withdrawn.
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS DECEMBER 9, 1997
PAGE 3
Mr. Heck moved to allow the case to be withdrawn,no action will be taken. Motion seconded by Mr. Brian
Taylor.Motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Heck requested Mr. Nelson to draft a policy which would address the "U" Use Group which could be
shown to clients.Mr.Nelson stated that a draft would be available at the next meeting.
Being no other business Mr. Dean Taylor moved for adjournment.Motion seconded by Mr. Brian Taylor.
Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jack A.Nelson DRAFT: December 16 1997
Secretary APPROVED:
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
of the
CITY OF LANSING
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 4, 1997
The November meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman
Randall Kamm at 2:00 p.m.The following members were in attendance:
Randall Kamm,Chairman
Donald Heck,Vice Chairman
Richard Stuckman
Brian Taylor
Dean Taylor
Members Absent:
None
Staff members present:
Jack Nelson, Secretary
Dennis George,Fire Inspector
Richard Stuckman made a motion to approve the July 9 and October 14, 1997,minutes.Motion seconded by
Donald Heck.Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
AB-006-97-415 South Washington,CATA
The petitioner,Jim Aubuchon,Architect,was present for this appeal.
The petitioner proposed to construct a five-story office building at 415 South Washington Avenue. The
petitioner is requesting authorization to install aluminum non-rated openings in the south wall, in place of
1/4 rated opening protectives which are required by Table 5-A of the Building Code. The windows would
be protected by exterior and interior sprinklers. It is intended that the sprinkler system will cool the glass
and frame and will afford a commensurate degree of protection as if strict code compliance were
achieved.
Mr. Aubuchon stated that they are proposing to use thermal glass and sprinkler heads on the outside of the
windows. There is no overhang or ease above the windows.
Mr. Heck asked if the elements will make it necessary for a higher temperature to activate the sprinkler
heads.
Mr. Aubuchon said he does not anticipate that being necessary. Mr. Aubuchon further stated that this type
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 4, 199 i
PAGE 2
of request has been granted in the past but that it was on existing buildings rather than new construction.
Mr. George asked the breaking temperature for the glass. Is it 150' or better? Mr. George further stated
that he was concerned that the window could break before the sprinkler went off.
Mr. Aubuchon stated that he believed they had heat strengthened glass, but if not, he would make sure
that it is heat strengthened.
Mr. George stated that he would like documentation of the temperature of the windows and glazing.
After a brief discussion Mr. Stuckman moved to grant the appeal with the condition that glazing withstand
temperature equal to or greater than the temperature that the inside sprinkler head would go off. Motion
seconded by Dean Taylor.
Mr. Heck amended the motion to add that documentation be provided on glazing. Amendment seconded
by Dean Taylor. Motion carried.
CASE AB-007-97 1223 Turner- Magnate Properties
The petitioner Mr. James Drake and owner, Mr. David Ferguson, were present for this appeal.
The petitioner proposes to redevelop the former Estes Warehouse which is located at 1223 N Turner. The
existing warehouse is located 1.1' from the south property boundary. The proposed addition will be
located 3.0' from the south property line. There are eight windows in the south wall of the existing
warehouse. The petitioner is proposing an additional 16 windows in the addition.
The addition will be constructed of masonry units and brick. The existing building is constructed of
numerous wythes of brick. It is proposed that the windows be protected by sprinkler heads.
Mr. Drake stated that the windows on the southside face a vacant lot and a parking lot. Mr. Drake further
stated that they propose using punched windows with aluminum frame and fire protection on both sides.
They are willing to block the windows if someone should build on that side at a later time.
Mr. Heck asked if the alley is dedicated for that purpose.Mr. Drake stated that it only shows as an alley,not
whether its is dedicated.
Mr. Drake stated that they propose to put sprinkler heads on both side of the windows but not use wired
glass.
Mr. Nelson stated that in this case there is no openings allowed in the building and there has to be a rated
wall.
Mr. Stuckman stated that at this time the fact that there is an open space presently used for a parking lot is in
their favor, but that they are asking for the code to be changed in this instance rather than asking for a
substitution that would offer the same protection as called for in the code. There needs to be a 4-hour rating.
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 4, 1997
PAGE 3
Mr. Nelson asked Mr. Aubuchon if the owner had looked into getting an easement preventing the
development of the parking lot. Mr.Aubuchon stated that they had not.
Mr. Heck asked if there is anything preventing someone from building on the property next to this building
where the parking lot is, up to the property line. Mr.Nelson stated that there is nothing in the building code
to prevent someone from building there. Mr. Nelson further stated that the Zoning Office could issue a
variance for setbacks.
Mr. Heck stated that he would be more comfortable granting this appeal if the property was owned rather
than an easement because the code expressly says"to property line".
After more discussion, the petitioner requested that the appeal be tabled to allow them to time to inquire
about easements or purchasing the additional footage.
Mr. Heck moved to table Case AB-007-97 to the December 9, 1997, meeting. Motion seconded by Mr.
Stuckman.Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Heck asked if the Building Safety Office could draft a policy for the types of cases that were heard
today,thereby not requiring them to be heard by the Board.
Mr. Nelson stated that a policy is possible but it would require accessing a variety of scenarios and placing
them as part of the policy. Mr. Nelson further stated that he feels more comfortable with the Board having
some input and making the final decision.
Mr. Nelson invited the Board members to lunch at Seville's (in the Radisson) at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday,
December 9, 1997,followed by the Appeals Board Meeting at 2:00 p.m.
Being no other business Mr. Heck moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Brian Taylor.Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jack A.Nelson DRAFT: November 1 1997
Secretary APPROVED:
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
of the
CITY OF LANSING
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
October 14, 1997
The October meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman Randall
Kamm at 2:00 p.m.The following members were in attendance:
Randall Kamm,Chairman
Donald Heck,Vice Chairman
Richard Stuckman
Members Absent:
Brian Taylor
Dean Taylor
Staff members present:
Jack Nelson, Secretary
Dennis George,Fire Inspector
Steven Bollenbaugh,Acting Fire Marshall
NEW BUSINESS
Jack Nelson requested that the Board address case AB-004-97, prior to AB-003-97, since the applicant was not in
attendance.
AB-004-97- 1801 Bassett,Atmosphere Annealing
The petitioner,Kevin Day,Atmosphere Annealing,was present for this appeal.
Mr. Day addressed the Board and stated that Atmosphere Annealing is proposing to construct an addition to the
plan located on Bassett. The building by virtue of its area must be equipped with a fire suppression system. The
proposed fire suppression system for the existing building and the new office exceeds the amount of water pressure
which is currently being supplied by the Board of Water and Light. Atmosphere Annealing proposed to install a
fire pump, but this alone will not solve the problem of capacity.
Mr. Day submitted a letter dated October 7, 1997, from Sue F. McCormick from the Board of Water and Light.
The letter states that they are committed to upgrade the system but can not guarantee that improvements will be
completed in the fall of 1997.
Mr. Day indicated that he seeks authority to occupy the building prior to completion of the water system
improvements.
Mr. Heck stated that he conversed with Ms. McCormick at the Board of Water and Light and asked why a loop
system was not proposed. Ms. McCormick stated that a loop system would necessitate the acquisition of numerous
easements which would be costly and time consuming.
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS OCTOBER 14, 1997
PAGE 2
Mr. Kamm asked for the Fire Marshals' position. Mr. George stated that based upon conversations with Joe
Majinska of American Fire Protection and based upon the Board of Water and Lights response, the system will
provide 800 gpm of fire flow prior to installation of the reinforcements mentioned. Assuming only 4 or 5 heads
open in a fire the water capacity should afford sufficient flow to protect the building until the arrival of equipment.
Mr. Heck stated that he has no objection to the request subject to the placement of a time limitation for completion
of the reinforcements.
The Board asked staff how a time limitation could be enforced. Mr. Nelson stated that the Board could issue
citations to Atmosphere Annealing but it would be more prudent to set a compliance date and refer the case back to
the Board should the work not be accomplished.
Richard Stuckman moved to approve occupancy of the facility prior to the Board of Water and Light completing
the reinforcements noted in their October 7, 1997, letter, subject to completion by June 15, 1997. Should the
reinforcements not be completed by said date the case will be reviewed and possible reinforcement options will be
researched. Motion seconded by Donald Heck. Motion carried.
In support of this decision the Board makes the following findings of fact:
The existing water service, though inadequate to supply the code required fire flow will provide 800 gpm which
would afford sufficient capabilities to charge a limited number of heads.
The City has a commitment from the Board of Water and Light that modifications will be made to the system to
increase the flow to meet minimum code standards.
CASE AB-005-97 310 Seymour- Oliver Towers
The petitioner Mr. Bruce Beresh was present for this appeal.
Mr. Beresh addressed the Board stating that he proposes to install new windows on the Oliver Towers high-rise
facility located at 310 Seymour St. Upon submission of the proposed construction documents the Plan Review
Division noted that the window as specified did not comply with the minimum width dimensions of the Uniform
Building Code. The building code requires a clear width of 20". The window in question only provides 18 1/4" of
clear opening.
Mr..Beresh showed a representative window unit which is a Traco Model #6003. The net clear height opening is 52
1/4"the square feet of openable area is 6.868 sq.ft. Mr. Beresh also noted that floor to sill height was approximately
36" far below the 44" maximum requirement.
Mr. Kamm requested input from the Fire Prevention Office. Mr. George stated that the net clear opening area and
height would be adequate for Fire Department ingress.
Mr. Stuckman moved that the appeal be granted. Motion seconded by Mr. Heck. Motion carried.
In support of this division the Board makes the following findings of fact:
The proposal meets the purpose and intent of the building code. The net clear opening area and height is well
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS OCTOBER 14, 1997
PAGE 3
above the minimum code requirements for acceptable ingress and egress. The width dimension is close to
complying and would not inhibit rescue attempts.
Case AB-003-97 533 South Grand Ave.
The petitioner, Mr. Lothamer,was present for this appeal.
Mr. Lothamer addressed the Board and made the following presentation:
"I own a building which is located at 533 South Grand Avenue. The building is on the Historic Register and is
located in the Cherry Hill Historic District of the City of Lansing. I acquired a building permit in 1990 to convert
the first floor of the structure to an office, the second floor was to be converted to an apartment. I now propose to
convert the second floor to office use. A Barrier Free Design Rule Exception has been granted by the State of
Michigan to use the second floor for office purposes eventhough it is not accessible to the handicapped.
It has been determined that the existing stairway guardrail height does not comply with current code requirements.
Section 509.2 of the code requires that the top of guardrails shall not be less than 42" in height. The guardrail shall
have intermediate rails or an ornamental pattern such that a sphere 4" in diameter cannot pass through. The
stairway guardrail leading to the second floor does not comply with current building code requirements since the
guardrail height is 28" and the handrail height is 32"."
Mr. Stuckman asked what the occupant load would be on the second floor. Mr. Lothamer stated that it would be
approximately 5 persons.
Mr. Heck stated that lack of second floor access would limit the types of occupancy and thus limit occupant load.
Mr. Kamm asked if the building was on the Historic Register. Mr. Lothamer confirmed that it was.
Mr. Stuckman moved to grant approval of the variance request as proposed. Motion seconded by Mr. Heck.
Motion carried.
In support of this decision the Board makes the following findings of fact:
Section 3403.5 states that repairs, alterations and additions necessary for the preservation, restoration,
rehabilitation or continued use of a building or structure may be made without conformance to all the requirements
of this code when authorized by the building office, provided:
The building or structure has been designated by official action of the legally constituted authority of this
jurisdiction as having special historical or architectural significance.
Any unsafe conditions as described in this code are corrected.
The restored building or structure will be no more hazardous based on life safety, firesafety and sanitation
than the existing building.
In this case the building is on the State Register of Historic Buildings; and, there are not unsafe conditions in the
structure; and, the building will be no more hazardous than the existing building since its use has changed from
residential to commercial.
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS OCTOBER 14, 1997
PAGE 4
OLD BUSINESS
Jack Nelson requested that the Board defer the approval of the July 8, 1997,minutes until the next meeting.
Donald Heck moved to defer the approval of the minutes until the next scheduled meeting.Motion seconded by MR.
Stuckman.Motion carried.
Mr. Stuckman moved to remove Case AB-002-97 from the table. Motion seconded by Mr. Heck. Motion carried.
Case AB-002-97 was removed from the table.
Jack Nelson apprised the Board that the applicant Jonna Realty Ventures has requested that the case be withdrawn.
Mr. Stuckman moved to allow the case to be withdrawn.Motion seconded by Mr. Heck. Motion carried.
Being no other business Mr. Heck moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Mr. Stuckman.Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jack A.Nelson DRAFT: Oct. 17 1997
Secretary APPRO
l '1
OFFICIAL PROCEEDIN"S
of the
CITY OF LANSING
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
July 8, 1997
The July meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman Randall Kamm at 2:00
p.m. The following members were in attendance:
Randall Kamm,Chairman
Donald Heck,Vice Chairman
Richard Stuckman
Dean Taylor
Members Absent:
Brian Taylor
Staff members present:
Jack Nelson, Secretary
Donald Heck moved to excuse Brian Taylor.Motion seconded by Dean Taylor.Motion carried.
Richard Stuckman moved to approve the February 11, 1997,minutes.Motion seconded by Donald Heck.Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
AB-002-97-325 N Capitol
The petitioner,Lansing Building Authority and Jonna Realty Ventures,was not present for this appeal.
Jack Nelson stated that he had been in a meeting earlier with the petitioners and they have decided that the proposal is not
economically feasible. The petitioner requested Mr. Nelson to table this appeal until such time as they can come up with a
more economically feasible proposal. The request might then change but would more than likely still be required.
Richard Stuckman moved to table case AB-002-97, 325 N. Capitol, seconded by Dean Taylor. Richard Stuckman asked if
there is to be a time limit established by which the appeal must be heard. Motion amended to table appeal until there is a
new proposal by the petitioner, seconded by Dean Taylor. Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
Being no other business Richard Stuckman moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Donald Heck.Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jack A.Nelson DRAFT: Jul 14 129
Secretary APPROVED 1
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
of the
CITY OF LANSING
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS
February 11, 1997
The February meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman Richard
Stuckman at 2:00 p.m. The following members were in attendance:
Richard Stuckman, Chairman
Dean Taylor
Randall Kamm
Brian Taylor
Donald Heck
Members Absent:
None
Staff members present:
Jack Nelson, Secretary
Casey Griggs,Fire Marshal
Chairman Stuckman called for the election of officers.
There was a motion by Donald Heck to nominate Randall Kamm as Chairman. Motion seconded by Dean Taylor.
Motion carried.
There was a motion by Brian Taylor to nominate Donald Heck as Vice Chairman. Motion seconded by Randall
Kamm. Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
AB-001-97-514& 514'h W Oakland
The petitioner,Maureen Doyle was present for this appeal.
An.application for appeal has been filed by Maureen Doyle. The application seeks relief from Section 310.4 of
the 1994 edition of the Uniform Building Code and Section 1460.20(a) of the City of Lansing Uniform Housing
Code. This section of the code regulates access and exit facilities and emergency escapes, specifically from
sleeping areas. The code requires that rescue windows shall have a minimum net clear openable area of 5.7
sq.ft. The net clear openable height dimension shall be 24". The minimum net clear openable width shall be
20". The window shall not have a sill height of more than 44".
In this case the sill height in each bedroom is 54", the net clear openable area is 4.15 sq.ft., the ceiling height in
the three bedrooms is 7'2". The code requires a minimum ceiling height of 7'6".
Appeals Board policy allows inspectors to approve ceiling heights down to 6'8" only if hardwired smoke
BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS FEBRUARY 11, 1997
PAGE 2
detection is installed in accordance with Section 310.8 of the U.B.C., and bedroom windows comply with
current egress requirements.
Ms. Doyle stated that the size of the window is the problem rather than the ceiling height. Ms. Doyle stated that
she has been the owner for 15 years and has done no structural changes. The property was inspected when she
purchased it and no problems were found at that time. Ms. Doyle further stated that this is a two family
dwelling.
Ms. Doyle stated that the upstairs is totally separate and has a separate front door entrance. There is no hard-
wired smoke detection in the dwelling.
Casey Griggs stated that there would be no undue hazard to make an entrance for the fire department.
Randall Kamm stated that it would be hard for someone to exit because of the extra 10 inches to the sill.
Ms. Doyle stated that she is in the process of negotiating a sale.
After some discussion Richard Stuckman moved that in each bedroom at least one window shall be changed
to bring it to code and a fire detection system be installed to code with hard-wired smoke detectors.
Motion amended to allow until June 15, 1997 to have the changes completed. These changes are
required by the present owner or the new owner.
Motion seconded by Donald Heck. Motion carried.
Jack Nelson presented the Board with a Policy Statement for noncombustible roofs-parapet walls(see attached).
After some discussion Richard Stuckman made a motion to accept the policy statement. Motion seconded by
Donald Heck. Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
OTHER BUSINESS
Richard Stuckman made a motion to approve the minutes of October 8, 1996, and December 10, 1996. Motion
seconded by Dean Taylor. Motion carried.
Being no other business Brian Taylor moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Dean Taylor. Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jack A.Nelson DRAFT: Februa 1q,1997
Secretary APPROVED: q 7