Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Board of Appeals 2004 Minutes S1 DEPARTMENT OF G PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD I DEVELOPMENT C II I 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2-Lansing MI 48933-1238•(517)483-4355 FAX: (517)377-0169 Tony Benavides,Mayor BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF LANSING BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS Held at 316 N. Capitol at 2:00 p.m. Tuesday, May 11, 2004 Chairman Randall Kamm called the May 2004 meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals to order at 2:02 p.m. Members Present: Randall Kamm, Chairman Donald Heck, Vice Chairman Dean Taylor James Drake Members Absent: None Staff Present: Christine Segerlind, Secretary Old Business: Chairman Kamm asked for the approval of the minutes for March 11, 2003, meeting. Motion made by Don Heck to approve the minutes of March 11, 2003. Second by James Drake. Motion carried unanimously. New Business: Ms. Segerlind gave each member a technical bulletin from the Bureau of Construction Codes and Fire Safety regarding the requirements and terms of the Construction Board of Appeals. There was discussion between members regarding the requirement that the board shall consist of not less than 3 nor more than 7 members. Each member shall serve a two year term. Previously, the Board Members served four year terms. Ms. Segerlind asked the members whose terms were expiring on July 1, 2004, if they were willing to serve on the Board for an additional two year term. The responses were as follows: Randall Kamm, representing the general public: Yes Don Heck, representing licensed professional engineers: Yes Dean Taylor, representing residential contractors: Yes A letter of recommendation will be sent by the Building Safety Manager to the Mayor's Office for reappointment of the Board Members whose terms are expiring. The term of Mr. James Drake will not expire until July 1, 2005. Mr. Taylor brought to the attention of Mr. Brian Davis a situation he encountered at the Ingham County Consolidated Courts Facility. The benches were not bolted down as requested by the Appeals Board. Mr. Davis will have this checked out. Election of officers held. Mr. Dean Taylor made the motion to nominate the members currently serving as officers as follows: Mr. Randall Kamm, Chairman Mr. Don Heck, Vice Chairman Second by James Drake It has been moved and seconded that the current officers remain. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Segerlind asked if any of the Board members have a copy of the official rules and procedures for the Building Board of Appeals that had been developed in the past. After discussion, Mr. Kamm stated he would check his records. The Board will consider establishing a new set of rules and procedures if they cannot be located or if they need updating. Distribution of baseball game tickets. Other Business: None At 2:39 p.m. Don Heck moved to adjourn. Second by Dean Taylor Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Christine Segerlind Secretary Draft Date: May 24, 2004 Approved Date: Cc: Mayor's Office Board Secretary City Clerk's Office Appeal folders Appeal applicants Public file - original S 1 NG DEHARTMENT OF PLA► _KING AND v NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT t 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing,MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355•FAX: (517)377-0169 I C H i G 4' BUILDING SAFETY Tony Benavides, Mayor OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF LANSING BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS Held at 316 N. Capitol Ave. at 2:00 pm November 9, 2004 The November 9 meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order at 2:05 p.m. by Chairman Randall Kamm. The following members were in attendance: - Randall Kamm, Chairman Donald Heck, Vice Chairman Dean Taylor James Drake Staff Present: Christine Segerlind, Secretary Jim Bennett, Plan Review Analyst Brian Davis, Assistant Fire Marshal Brenda Jodway, Recording Secretary Petitioners Present: David C. Vanderklok, Architect, representing Kris Elliot Public Present: None Chairman Kamm asked for the approval of the May 11, 2004 minutes. James Drake made a motion to approve the minutes. Motion seconded by Dean Taylor. Motion carried. Old Business: None New Business: Case No.: Address: Petitioner: BBA-001-2004 101 S. Washington Square Kris Elliot David Vanderklok said he was there from the Architects office representing the owner Kris Elliot. Randall Kamm said he understood that some of the stuff was already taken off the table. Jim Bennett responded that originally the appeal was submitted in two parts, part A and part B. Part B was withdrawn by the applicant and part A was given an Administrative Modification. That is the way it sat for a few months and then the owner wanted to re-visit part B. Part A has already been dealt with and we are here to look at part B of the appeal. David Vanderklok stated that Jim had summarized what they had gone through. He said this particular restaurant location is the newly opened Troppo's Restaurant at the SE corner of Michigan and Washington. He said the reason why we are here today is that back in 1999 (guessing on the date) Paul Vlahakis from Vlahakis Company ended up fusing two buildings together. The issue they had when they were renovating those building's, is that the finished floors on the building when you go uk i slightly different. In this case, on the eject level that we are looking at today, one floor is approximately 4 '/ inches lower than the other level. At the time when they had fused these two buildings together what they did was one building had a triple wide masonry wall and the other building had a quadruple wide masonry wall, so the throat at which they cut the door in is at least a couple feet thick. What they did is because it was only 4 '/z inches difference between the levels they ended up using some concrete topping in the opening and within two feet they leveled it down the 4 Y2 inches. What that did is it gave the one building access to the egress controls back to the stairs; they gained access to the basement and to the service elevator. Mr. Vanderklok said, originally when he looked at the building, he had a conversation with Mr. Bennett while we were reviewing the drawings when we were out in the field, and Mr. Bennett looked at this condition and asked us to look and see what we could do. What we ended up doing, is the toilet rooms were actually finished out as part of the renovation in 1999, and what they had to do is that when they looked in the Code, it said landings shall have a length measured in the direction traveled not less than forty-four inches. We struggled a bit to get a level landing in there were you would actually step up 4 Y2 inches on a landing, and then would have to move the door down, and with the Barrier Free requirement we would have to arrange that door so we still maintain an 18 inch clearance on the pull side of that door, so we were down to the inch. The issue that we had with the primary exits on the building is that everybody that is coming on the pull side of the door is either an employee parked in the lot, the owner, or someone that is making a delivery. We could probably sign the door for those people that are regularly going to be coming in. But if there were an emergency and people had to get out this way, our feeling was that the ramp was probably a better condition to walk up to than a 4 '/2 inch step, not only for people in wheel chairs but also people that are mobile and walking out, and secondly it's also better for deliveries coming in the service elevator to roll down a ramp than a 4 Y2 inch step. Right now there is a temporary landing that is framed in that is 37 inches from the door right up to and covering the door frame. Jim Bennett gave an explanation that first of all, regarding the change in elevation back in 1999; none of the architectural drawings submitted ever noted the change in elevation across that doorway. So that condition was never approved by the Building Safety Office. The ramp was kind of just poured in there at the owner's discretion because he didn't have a tenant for the first floor at that time and it was one of those you can fix it later kind of things. The owner had an intense desire to open last week Tuesday and in order to get a temporary certificate of occupancy, we told him he would have to put in a temporary landing, which he did. So, as of now he has a temporary certificate and he understands that he will have to comply with whatever your decision is, whether it stays, goes or what gets done. Jim said he was actually up there this morning and he thinks it is 39 inches which is 5 inches short of what is required. So that's where it stands now, the original condition is not approved; they have come partway towards complying with the Code. David Vanderklok stated that if there were any other questions he would be happy to answer them. Chris Segerlind asked what the temporary landing was constructed of? Mr. Vanderklok responded that it was 2x's fire retardant deck and the floor finish in the space is laminate flooring and they did both the 4 Y2 inch riser and landing out of that same material. He stated that he understood the issue with the Code and he's not saying the Code isn't important, but that he thought that since this is a possible fire exit, that it should meet handicap access. He said the ramp should be extended out at least to meet the 1 and 12 on commercial. Jim Bennett stated that that would bring it 4 Y2 feet which would put it out in the middle of the existing door to the toilet room. Chris Segerlind stated that then you would not have barrier free access to the toilet room. Mr. Vanderklok asked, correct i. if I'm wrong here, but with the accessi' f Code we only need the one entrance? Jim Bennett answered that that is correct, he's only required to have the one accessible door and that would be out at the main doors. Don Heck asked Jim Bennett after seeing the landing this morning how close are the percentages to meeting the requirement? Jim Bennett stated that they have a 39 inch run and they are required to have 44 inch, so they are within 5 inches. He stated that in their packets he included a copy of form that Mr. Vanderklok submitted that had a landing that complied but they had to move the bathroom door. If they moved the bathroom door they could get the 44 inch landing in. If they leave the toilet door where it is they can only get in the 39 inch landing. So the issue is 5 inches. There was more discussion after which Don Heck asked Mr. Vanderklok what it is that the Board was being asked to consider? Mr. Vanderklok stated that what the owner has asked you to look at today is to leave the condition that is in the picture, finished of course. After much additional discussion and consideration, Don Heck made a motion to deny the variance based on the fact that there is sufficient room for them to get the landing,in place that meets the Code. Mr. Vanderklok asked that with that motion are you saying that the action would be to move the door and provide the 44 inches? Don Heck responded, yes, move the door and make it 44 inches. After a short discussion Dean Taylor seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Vanderklok gave his appreciation to the Board for their time and added they always appreciate the City of Lansing's time and that it is a very good Community to work in. Mr. Vanderklok asked what is the timeline? Brian Davis responded that it is probably 30 days from last Tuesday. Jim Bennett responded it is whatever timeline that Mr. Kloosterman, Building Inspector, put on the TCO (temporary certificate of occupancy). Other Business: Don Heck mentioned that at the Council meeting the night before, the Board Member names were brought up as renewed to serve the Board. Public Comment: None At 2:53 p.m., Don Heck moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by James Drake. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Christine Segerlind, Secretary Draft date: November 29, 2004 Approved date: 7p cc: Mayor's Office Board Secretary City Clerk's Office Appeal folders Appeal applicants Public file-original S I �G DEPARTMENT OF PLAT � NING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N. Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing,MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355•FAX: (517)377-0169 BUILDING SAFETY Tony Benavides, Mayor OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF LANSING BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS Held at 316 N. Capitol Ave. at 2:00 pm November 9, 2004 The November 9 meeting of the City of Lansing Building Board of Appeals was called to order at 2:05 p.m. by Chairman Randall Kamm. The following members were in attendance: Randall Kamm, Chairman Donald Heck, Vice Chairman Dean Taylor James Drake Staff Present: Christine Segerlind, Secretary Jim Bennett, Plan Review Analyst Brian Davis, Assistant Fire Marshal Brenda Jodway, Recording Secretary Petitioners Present: David C. Vanderklok, Architect, representing Kris Elliot Public Present: None Chairman Kamm asked for the approval of the May 11, 2004 minutes. James Drake made a motion to approve the minutes. Motion seconded by Dean Taylor. Motion carried. Old Business: None New Business: Case No.: Address: Petitioner: BBA-001-2004 101 S. Washington Square Kris Elliot David Vanderklok said he was there from the Architects office representing the owner Kris Elliot. Randal Kamm said he understood that some of the stuff was already taken off the table. Jim Bennett responded that originally the appeal was submitted in two parts, part A and part B. Part B was withdrawn by the applicant and part A was given an Administrative Modification. That is the way it sat for a few months and then the owner wanted to re-visit part B. Part A has already been dealt with and we are here to look at part B of the appeal. David Vanderklok stated that Jim had summarized what they had gone through. He said this particular restaurant location is the newly opened Troppo's Restaurant at the SE corner of Michigan and Washington. He said the reason why we are here today is that back in 1999 (guessing on the date) Paul Vlahakis from Vlahakis Company ended up fusing two buildings together. The issue they had when they were renovating those building's, is that the finished floors on the building when you go up slightly different. In this case, on the E ;ct level that we are looking at today, one floor is approximately 4 'h inches lower than the other level. At the time when they had fused these two buildings together what they did was one building had a triple wide masonry wall and the other building had a quadruple wide masonry wall, so the throat at which they cut the door in is at least a couple feet thick. What they did is because it was only 4 '/2 inches difference between the levels they ended up using some concrete topping in the opening and within two feet they leveled it down the 4 Y2 inches. What that did is it gave the one building access to the egress controls back to the stairs; they gained access to the basement and to the service elevator. Mr. Vanderklok said, originally when he looked at the building, he had a conversation with Mr. Bennett while we were reviewing the drawings when we were out in the field, and Mr. Bennett looked at this condition and asked us to look and see what we could do. What we ended up doing, is the toilet rooms were actually finished out as part of the renovation in 1999, and what they had to do is that when they looked in the Code, it said landings shall have a length measured in the direction traveled not less than forty-four inches. We struggled a bit to get a level landing in there were you would actually step up 4 '/2 inches on a landing, and then would have to move the door down, and with the Barrier Free requirement we would have to arrange that door so we still maintain an 18 inch clearance on the pull side of that door, so we were down to the inch. The issue that we had with the primary exits on the building is that everybody that is coming on the pull side of the door is either an employee parked in the lot, the owner, or someone that is making a delivery. We could probably sign the door for those people that are regularly going to be coming in. But if there were an emergency and people had to get out this way, our feeling was that the ramp was probably a better condition to walk up to than a 4 Y2 inch step, not only for people in wheel chairs but also people that are mobile and walking out, and secondly it's also better for deliveries coming in the service elevator to roll down a ramp than a 4 Y2 inch step. Right now there is a temporary landing that is framed in that is 37 inches from the door right up to and covering the door frame. Jim Bennett gave an explanation that first of all, regarding the change in elevation back in 1999; none of the architectural drawings submitted ever noted the change in elevation across that doorway. So that condition was never approved by the Building Safety Office. The ramp was kind of just poured in there at the owner's discretion because he didn't have a tenant for the first floor at that time and it was one of those you can fix it later kind of things. The owner had an intense desire to open last week Tuesday and in order to get a temporary certificate of occupancy, we told him he would have to put in a temporary landing, which he did. So, as of now he has a temporary certificate and he understands that he will have to comply with whatever your decision is, whether it stays, goes or what gets done. Jim said he was actually up there this morning and he thinks it is 39 inches which is 5 inches short of what is required. So that's where it stands now, the original condition is not approved; they have come partway towards complying with the Code. David Vanderklok stated that if there were any other questions he would be happy to answer them. Chris Segerlind asked what the temporary landing was constructed of? Mr. Vanderklok responded that it was 2x's fire retardant deck and the floor finish in the space is laminate flooring and they did both the 4 '/ inch riser and landing out of that same material. He stated that he understood the issue with the Code and he's not saying the Code isn't important, but that he thought that since this is a possible fire exit, that it should meet handicap access. He said the ramp should be extended out at least to meet the 1 and 12 on commercial. Jim Bennett stated that that would bring it 4 Y2 feet which would put it out in the middle of the existing door to the toilet room. Chris Segerlind stated that then you would not have barrier free access to the toilet room. Mr. Vanderklok asked, correct if I'm wrong here, but with the access: Code we only need the one entrance? Jim Bennett answered that that is correct, he's only required to have the one accessible door and that would be out at the main doors. Don Heck asked Jim Bennett after seeing the landing this morning how close are the percentages to meeting the requirement? Jim Bennett stated that they have a 39 inch run and they are required to have 44 inch, so they are within 5 inches. He stated that in' their packets he included a copy of form that Mr. Vanderklok submitted that had a landing that complied but they had to move the bathroom door. If they moved the bathroom door they could get the 44 inch landing in. If they leave the toilet door where it is they can only get in the 39 inch landing. So the issue is 5 inches. There was more discussion after which Don Heck asked Mr. Vanderklok what it is that the Board was being asked to consider? Mr. Vanderklok stated that what the owner has asked you to look at today is to leave the condition that is in the picture, finished of course. After much additional discussion and consideration, Don Heck made a motion to deny the variance based on the fact that there is sufficient room for them to get the landing in place that meets the Code. Mr. Vanderklok asked that with that motion are you saying that the action would be to move the door and provide the 44 inches? Don Heck responded, yes, move the door and make it 44 inches. After a short discussion Dean Taylor seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Vanderklok gave his appreciation to the Board for their time and added they always appreciate the City of Lansing's time and that it is a very good Community to work in. Mr. Vanderklok asked what is the timeline? Brian Davis responded that it is probably 30 days from last Tuesday. Jim Bennett responded it is whatever timeline that Mr. Kloosterman, Building Inspector, put on the TCO (temporary certificate of occupancy). Other Business: Don Heck mentioned that at the Council meeting the night before, the Board Member names were brought up as renewed to serve the Board. Public Comment: None At 2:53 p.m., Don Heck moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by James Drake. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Christine Segerlind, Secretary Draft date: November 29, 2004 Approved date: cc: Mayor's Office Board Secretary City Clerk's Office Appeal folders Appeal applicants Public file-original y�IA- s r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT w 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355•FAX: (517)377-0169 BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: August 27, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office City Council Offices City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office From: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, September 14, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, October 12, 2004, at 2:00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file- Original S 1NG DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355• FAX: (517)377-0169 I C H L G BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: July 22, 2004 = c� To: City Clerk's Office c: City Council Offices ` City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office �orn: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, August 10, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, September 14, 2004, at 2:00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file- Original SING DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.Capitol Avenue.Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355• FAX: (517)377-0169 1 C H 1 G BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: June 24, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office City Council Offices City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office 00From: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, July 13, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, August 10, 2004, at 2:00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file - Original SING DEPARTMENT OF PLf-%NNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 . Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355•FAX: (517)377-0169 BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: May 19, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office City Council Offices City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office C�, From: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, June 8, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, July 13, 2004, at 2:00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file-Original S j �G DEPARTMENT OF PLi-xNNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355 9 FAX: (517)377-0169 BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: March 25, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office City Council Offices City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office �rom: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING--CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, April 13, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, May 11, 2004, at 2:00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file-Original S I �G DEPARTMENT OF PLhNNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT M 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355•FAX: (517)377-0169 I c H I BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: February 19, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office City Council Offices City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office 010 From: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, March 9, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, April 13, 2004, at 2:00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file-Original y� Si DEPARTMENT OF PLk.. JNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.Capitol Avenue,Suites C-1 &C-2 • Lansing MI 48933-1238 (517)483-4355•FAX: (517)377-0169 I c H I �' BUILDING SAFETY OFFICE Tony Benavides,Mayor Date: January 27, 2004 To: City Clerk's Office City Council Offices City Hall Personnel Mayor's Office From: Christine Segerlind RE: BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE The regularly scheduled Building Board of Appeals Meeting for Tuesday, February 10, 2004, has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, March 9, 2004, at 2.00 pm in the Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite C-3, Lansing, Michigan. cc: Board Members (4) Building Safety Lobby Board Secretary Appeal folders Applicants Public file -Original