No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-04-09 - MinutesA meeting of 1986, at the Arkansas. MICROFILMED MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF CONSTRUCTION APPEALS the Board of Construction Appeals was held on April 9, City Administration Building, Room 326, Fayetteville, Members Present: Neal Albright, Tommi Perkins and J. Palmer Boggs. Others Present: Albert Skiles, Erwin. Freeman Wood, Bert Rakes and Beverly The meeting was called to order by Chairman Albright at 4:08 p.m. The reason for this meeting is the applicant was not notified of the meeting held on April 4, 1986, and he felt he should have a meeting with them to present his case. The item on the agenda was from Albert Skiles for a variance on bedroom window sizes for a house which is already constructed at 2673 Colette. Skiles stated the last thing on his mind is to compromise safety as far as exits in a house. He wanted to show that he can meet the spirit of the code if not the total square foot of the window opening. The house exceeds the code in all other regards, for example 5/8" sheetrock, separate garage, full brick, four exterior doors and has two windows in the adjoining bathroom that do meet code. The owners requested that type of window because of their health. They didn't want them too close to the floor because they put their beds under them. They have practiced with them to see if they could get in and out of these windows and they could. His main point against the code is he could site examples of casement windows that meet the code that would be much more difficult to get in and out of than these would be. He thinks it is good to have a code that has a minimum square inch standard but that if you have a circumstance where you join a window together with a nonmetal mull then it is different. The mull in the middle is nonstructural and doesn't hold up anything. They disassemble with one blow. The whole assembly would come apart without breaking the glass. He talked to the Fire Department and they explained to him how they would get into the house if the window was locked. If it were a casement window that was locked they would have to shatter the whole window to get in where as in this case you could break the top window and unlock the window and break the mull and have a 3' high by 6' wide opening to get in. He feels these would be easier to get in and out of than some windows that meet the code. He feels getting out of them is not the issue. The windows are within 3' of the ground. The combination of all the above mentioned factors should have a bearing on the variance. According to Mr. Skiles he talked to a representative of Anderson windows and he stated they could be jerked apart in case of an emergency. • Perkins asked him what the height of the opening was. • Skiles stated he measured it and it was almost 19 inches. Perkins commented that the height also doesn't meet the code. Skiles agreed with her in that the height is supposed to be 24" high. The overall opening should be 5 square feet. He thinks it is fine as a standard but he feels that you can present a case with less square footage than is required and, that is not any less difficult to get out of. He thought that since they were this close and with the other factors mentioned above that it is not an issue of getting out of the building quickly. There is over 20 square feet of openable space if the mull was taken out. Perkins repeated that they wanted to put their bed under the window and that is why they don't meet the height requirement. Skiles said they also requested that type of window. He got them as wide as he could and he thought since the mull was not structural that it would have a bearing in the reading of the code. Perkins asked him if when he brought the plans in if he were told that the windows would not comply. Skiles stated his contractor brought the plans down. The first time he heard that they would not meet the code is when they were inspected recently. At that point the Contractor said the Inspector said they would not meet the code. He figured the windows were going to be real close but he did not measure the windows. He wished it would have been measured sooner. He feels that as far as safety is concerned he is within the spirit of the code as far as getting someone out in an emergency. If all the Board had to go on was that the windows don't meet code then he would be all for denying the variance. They can get out of their bathroom as easily as they can get out of the bedroom and the bathroom has windows that meet the code. Albright asked if they were wood sashes. Skiles stated they were Anderson windows. The mull in the middle is not structural. A fireman can hit it with his axe and break the mull without breaking the window. He talked to the fire department and they told him if they were metal windows they would be harder to get in than a wood window. The issue the code addresses is how the fireman will get in with an oxygen tank on. The code doesn't address how high the window is off the ground. It can be on the first floor and still be twelve feet off the ground. These windows are less than 4' off the ground. The fireman told him they would break the top window and undo the latch if it were locked. You can meet the code and still make it more difficult to get in than it is to get in or out of these windows. Albright asked for Wood's comments. Wood stated the only comments he would make is he told the person who brought the plans it that it didn't look as if the windows would work. • Skiles stated that factors should be can not meet code make it easier to feels the criteria window. Albright asked for Skiles stated each information didn't get to him. He felt that other considered other than just code requirements. You and have a lot of other factors going for you that get in and out of the house in an emergency. He should be how easy it is to get in and out of the verification of the dimensions on his request. window is 3 1/2' high by 3'2" wide. Albright asked him if he meant 36 inches wide without the mull. Skiles corrected him in saying that figure is with the mull. In the open position it is 18 3/4". The total square feet is 4.49. The height is slightly 6" less than the code allows and 6" wider than code. Albright asked if the mull is knocked out how many square feet you have. Skiles stated you have 20 square feet. If both are knocked out than you have 40 square feet. He thinks it is important to consider that they could possibly get out easier than if the window were to meet code. Albright asked for the minutes of the last meeting to see comments from Fire Chief Jackson. In the last meeting Jackson stated in his summary that we have a code with reasonable requirements and we should stand behind it and enforce it. It seems like they were warned before the house was built. Skiles stated if they had known that they weren't going to meet code then they would not have put them in there. He told them he would never have to come before them again. Albright asked who brought the plans in. Skiles stated the contractor brought the plans in. He thought it was his responsibilty to make sure the house passed code and not the responsibility of the Inspector. He would not have proceeded if he had been told. Perkins told him that they haven't granted variances in the past on bedroom windows. Skiles told her that he realized that and he wanted to point out these things for them. He wondered if it would have an affect if windows that do meet the code are in the adjoining bathroom. Boggs asked what the difference was that would make them meet the code. • • • • Skiles told him they are 4' high. Wood stated he didn't think a 4' high window would raise 24". Skiles stated it is 4'1" overall. It is 26 inches wide. Wood stated he didn't think it would give him 5 square feet. It takes a 3o5o window to get 5 square feet. Boggs asked if they are double hung in the back. Skiles stated yes. Skiles stated he thinks it is good that they don't grant variances for just anything. Boggs stated he felt Mr. Skiles argument is very convincing but it isn't enough. He made a motion. to deny the request. Perkins seconded. Skiles told them that what he planned to do if he was rejected was to replace one window with a shutter that locks from the inside and opens to the inside for egress. Wood told him as long as it had 5 square feet it would work and it did not have to have glass. He suggested that they make a sticker to put on it that says Emergency Egress which would be helpful in case of an emergency. After no further discussion the vote was unanimous 3-0 for denial of the request.