HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-11-15 - Minutes• • MICROFILMED • 212 + W DICKSON ST THREE SISTERS PROJECT • MINUTES CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS (CBAA) NOVEMBER 15, 1999 A meeting of the Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals was held on November 15, 1999, at 2:30 p.m., in room 111 of the City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Matt Bodishbaugh, Thomas Campbell, Dennis Becker, U E Luttrell, Jim Key, Stan Johnson, Mike Tramill, Tommi Perkins Robert Sharp, Ken Dunk, Greg House, Mickey Jackson, Steve Cattaneo, Bert Rakes, and Jan West The meeting was started at 2:30 p.m. with a trip to the site, at 212+ W Dickson St. The meeting was called to order at 3:15 p.m. in room 111, of the City Administration Building, by Chairman Matt Bodishbaugh. Bert Rakes called the roll, with Butch Green and Stan Johnson being absent. The first order of business was deciding that there was a quorum and the rules of the board are that it takes at least 3 votes to vary a technical provision of the code and at least 4 votes to vary the building officials decision. It was established by Matt Bodishbaugh that there was an altemate member, Thomas Campbell, voting in the place of an absent member, Butch Green. The next order of business was approving the minutes of the July 29, 1999 meeting. U E Lutrell made the motion to approve the minutes and Tommi Perkins seconded the motion. The motion was carried by the majonty. • Robert Sharp, architect for the Three Sisters Project, presented the case for the appellant. Robert am • • • stated the reason for the change in the plans was to take advantage of the height so future tenants could take advantage of a better view of the surrounding area. The appellant had already presented the changes to the Planning Commission and been approved for the change. They were now presenting these changes to the Construction Board of Adjustments & Appeals. Mr. Sharp presented seven points on why the Board should give a variance to the developer, Gregg House. Point one: All of the residential portions of the project exit onto the two story, poured in place, concrete deck. The deck is sprinkled with a dry pipe system, a pretty good structure, there are fire stairs that continue on down to the final grade. In Mr. Sharp's opinion, if there was a fire and people reached the deck their safety would be assured. From the point of that deck to the new addition is 58 feet. The code says that the height can only be 53 feet. If the board could make the roof of the deck the new ground zero, the new addition would meet the requirements. Point two: The code allows 5 floors that are to be sprinkled. So this project is with in the minimums of the code. Point three: The area that we are talking about is only 900 square feet. This is not going over the entire building, it is 3.75% of the allowable building per story, so it is a pretty small area. Because of the small area, the full height should not be an issue. Point four: The code shows an exception for steeples, parapets, and mechanical penthouses, that is not counted in the building height. This piece is mainly sculptural, one of the reasons for it's existence is to keep people out of the roof garden. A good portion of the penthouse addition does fall under this exception. Point five: Mickey Jackson and Bert Rakes met with the architect at the site previously and Mickey's method was to attack any fire from Dickson street, get the ladders to a point and then have a built in roof ladder that would get to the last exit. Point six: This is a type five construction, the builder has gone beyond the requirements for a type five construction. Point seven: The building is fully protected by a fire sprinkler system. Even though height modification is not allowed for sprinkling, Mr. Sharp thinks that since a sprinkler system is so much safer, a height modification should be allowed. In closing Mr. Sharp went through the five points that the variance law requires. The first being that special circumstances do exist. He pointed out the grading, the neighborhood, and the cost of the project. Mr. Sharp then asked if there were any questions from members of the board. Mr. Bodishbaugh then asked for Mr. Rakes to present the interpretation and summary of the request. Mr. Rakes said that there is no doubt about the size limitations of the code. Mr. Rakes commended Mr. House and Mr. Sharp in working so diligently with the Inspection Division during this process. This project is being built under the Southern Building code of 1991. Even • • though it is only 900 square feet and there would not be a lot of people in the area. But it is a habitable space and those people have to be protected. There have been some extra protection added such as the extra egress and ingress, and the total non-combustible construction that has been provided. Mr. Rakes further stated that for the basis of this meeting we are considering that Mr. House will be meeting the other code issues will be met. Such as the occupancy separation will be met. Mr. Rakes said he wanted to hear the boards discussion on these matters. Mr. Rakes said that he did not have many problems with the way things were going with the project and that it was a good thing that the board got to tour the project before discussing this problem. This way they have a concept of what is happening. Mr. Bodishbaugh then asked Mr. Mickey Jackson, Fayetteville Fire Chief, if he had any comments or questions. Mr. Jackson stated that the conclusion that he came to was that it was a very minor variation they were asking for in exchange for fulling sprinkling the entire building on all floors. They are making the residential areas a 13 code instead of a 13r, which means that they are sprinkling the entire area as if it were a commercial area. Residential areas are not required by code to be sprinkled. Mr. Bodishbaugh said that he had some questions. The first question was "The area is sprinkled but everything is unprotected, correct?" Mr. Rakes replied that this was correct except for occupancy separation, and we do not know what occupancy separation there is until they get tenants. The next clarification Mr. Bodishbaugh needed was if they were 13 or 13R. Mr. • Jackson stated that the last he knew they were rated at 13. Mr. Dunk said that at this time the lower two floors were commercial, and the next floors were residential, the commercial is rater 13 and the residential is 13R. Mr. Bodishbaugh next concern was assuming that the deck of the parking garage was considered ground zero, was the code concemed with the ingress of the fire department? Could the fire department get a fire truck on the roof of the parking garage? Mr. Bodishbaugh main concern is someone going to have to get to this area or will they be brought to this area by the fire department. Mr. Jackson said that the fire departments hope is that the occupants of the building would be able to exit the building before they arrived on the scene. If the occupants can not get themselves out it then becomes the responsibility of the firemen. The key is the sprinkling so that the tenants have the time to get themselves out. If you have a sprinkler system the chances of having a smaller, controllable are much better, the fire department has a lot of faith and confidence in buildings that are sprinkled. Mr. Dunk further clarified the 13 and 13R ratings. He said that with 13R was for building like soronty houses, some nursing facilities where patients were mobile, of course the flow was Less than with the 13 commercial rating but they were pretty similar. Mr. Bodishbaugh said that he gathered that the answer to his question was that with the sprinkler system that in a perfect world the tenants would be fully protected by the system and would be able to get out before the fire department arrived. Mr. Rakes asked that before we left the issue of sprinkling, he wanted to know what did the area modification play in going from a 13R to a 13. The code and inspectors see that with the modification that they need to go to 13, no question asked. Mr. Bodishbaugh wanted to clarify the usage of the space. He stated that when he heard observatory, he thought of a party room. But from what he was hearing from the builder, this • so • • • area is going to be an apartment, with kitchen, bathroom & possible bedroom Mr. Rakes said that the building official had always considered it an apartment. The clarification is that it will be one room of an apartment, just a floor above the rest of the apartment. Mr. Bodishbaugh stated that the only question that the board was being asked to consider was being asked to make a technical variance of the height restriction of the floor. If the board interpret that the top deck of the parking garage is in deed ground zero, you are talking about only a three foot difference. In Mr. Bodishbaugh opunon this is not an awful lot, but if they are not considering the deck as ground zero you are dealing with a fifteen foot difference, which is substantial. What is the intent of the code, to protect people getting out or the fire fighters getting into the building. The general feeling of the fire department and the code is to get the tenants out quickly and safely. Mr. Bodishbaugh said at this point he had no other questions and put it to the board and any members of the audience if they had any further questions. Since there were no other questions Mr. Bodishbaugh asked if the board was ready to vote on the question of granting the three foot variance from the virtual ground floor of the parking deck roof. Mike Tranull moved to "Grant the variance requested by the appellant" and Jim Key seconded and motion passed unanimously. Since there was no old business Mr. Bodishbaugh declared the meeting closed. The board adjourned at 4:10 p.m. • City of Fayetteville • Inspection Division • NOTICE OF APPEAL CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS NAME: Wischmever Architects/Don Mobley DATE 12/16/99 ADDRESS: 24 E. Meadow Suite 10A CITY: Fayetteville STATE. AR ZIP: 72701 HOMEPHONE: WORK PHONE 501-444-6074 ADDRESS OF PROPERTY WHERE APPEAL REQUESTED: 3380 N. Futrall Dr., Fayetteville, AR 72703 APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND/OR APPEAL THE TECHNICAL PROVISION OF CODE Y (Y/N) BUILDING OFFICIAL DECISION: Exit access corridors require one hour fire rating with 20 minute self closing doors in a Business occupancy with 3,000 sq. ft. or more. TECHNICAL PROVISION OF CODE- Section 704.2.4 - Exit Access Corridors. REASONS FOR REQUESTING APPEAL. Functionality of the pediatric clinic. /147.4a M Signature NOTE: A fee of $50.00 shall accompany each Notice of Appeal. Notice of Appeal shall be filed within thuy (30) days after the decision is rendered by the Building Official. • • • THE WISCHMEYER ARCHITECTS December 20, 1999 Wischmeyer • • Mr. Bert Rakes Building Inspector City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 RE- North Park II 3380 N. Futrall Dr. Fayetteville, AR 72703 Dear Mr. Rakes: Architecture Planning Interiors Consulting We would like to request a waiver of Section 704.2.4 of the 1997 Standard Building Code. This section requires the Pediatric Clinic to have one hour rated exit access corridors if the building is not sprinldered. Due to the functionality desired by the pediatric staff, it is practically impossible to subdivide the building as required by the code. The construction is proposed to be type V unprotected with all walls and partitions being constructed with metal studs. In an effort to offset the requirement for rated corridors, six exits have been provided, this is three times more than the minimum requirement of two. Also, the greatest travel distance to an outside exit door is approximately 82 feet; whereas the code permits a 200 foot maximum travel distance. The occupancy is group 13 and the total building will contain approximately 19,700 square feet. The Pediatric clinic will have 14,700 square feet leaving 5,000 square feet of lease space which is anticipated to be a pharmacy. Further, the building is separated on all sides by driveways and parking. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please feel free to contact us should additional documentation be required Respectfully THE WISCHMEYER ARCHITECTS )0771 - Don D. Mobley, AIA DDM: Ill c: Danny Smith Doug Brooks 24 E. Meadow • Suite C • Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 • 501/444-6074.501/444.9899 fax St. Louis. Missouri • Peoria. Illinois • Springfield, Missouri • Bloomington, lamas • Fayetleriee. Arkansas • Denver. Colorado a nwn.leA, 0/ ttw 9avr,oaiott4 107(4t 91,014r • • EXIT ACCESS CORRIDORS -1997 SBC 13704.2.3 PARTITIONS WITHIN TENANT SPACE 13704.2.3.1 Partitions dividing portions of stores, offices or similar places occupied by one tenant only, which do not establish an exit access corridor serving an occupant load of 30 persons or more, and partial partitions, may be temporary or permanent and constructed in accordance with 13609 without fire resistance, provided that: 1. Their location is restricted by their method of construction or by means of permanent tracks, guides or other approved methods. 2. Flammability shall be limited to materials having an interior finish classification as set forth in Table 8803.3 for rooms or areas. • • B704.2.4 Exit access corridors. Fire resistance rating of exit access corridors shall be in accordance with Table 13704.2.4. TABLE 8704.2,4 FIRE RESISTANCE RATING OF EXIT ACCESS CORRIDORS FIRE RESISTANCE ' : Yl G (HOURS) OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT LO Sprinklered A,B,F,M,S less than 30 30 or more 8609 PARTITIONS 13609.1 Bearing walls shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 136, but shall provide not Less than the degree of fire resistance specified in Table 8600. B609.2 Nonbearing partitions shall conform to 13609.2.1 through 8609.2.4 and have the fire resistance specified in Table B705.1.2 except as specified elsewhere in this code. 13609.2.4 Type V and Type VI construction. Partitions may be of any material permitted by this code. 13607 TYPE V CONSTRUCTION Type V is construction in which the exterior bearing and nonbearing walls are of noncombustible material and have fire resistance not less than that specified in Table 13600; bearing portions of interior walls are of material permitted in Table 8600, and have fire resistance not less than that specified in Table 6600; and beams, girders, trusses, arches, floors, roofs, and interior framing are wholly or partly of wood or other approved materials and have fire resistance not less than that specified in Table B600. Type V construction may be either protected or unprotected. Fire resistance requirements for structural elements of Type V construction �7 • • • • • shall be as specified in Table B600. TABLE B600 FIRE RESISTANCE RATINGS REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE IN HOURS TYPE IV /TYPE V TYPE VI TYPES STRUCT PROTE TED P • CTED PROTEC:1E1) ELEM. I H III 1 -HOUR ROT. 1 -'OUR UNPROT. 1 -HOUR UNPROT. ROOFS & ROOF/C See B605 11/2 1 H{d} 1 NC {e,p} {e,f,p} {e,p} {e} (% indicates percent of pro permitted. See B705.1.1 for Horizontal separation (distance from common prope over 30 ft: 4(NL) 3(NL) 1(NL) 1(NL) B1003.1 OCCUPANT LOAD LIES {g} 0 e ends of roof {g,i,l}) B1003.1.1 For determining the means of egress required, the minimum number of persons for any floor area shall in no case be taken less than specified in Table B1003.1. USE Business areas TABLE 131003.1 MINIMUM OCCUPANT LOAD TABLE B500 AREA PER OCCUPANT {2,3} (square feet) 100 gross ALLOWABLE HEIGHTS AND BUILDING AREAS Lower case letters in table refer to Notes following table. Height for types of construction is limited to the number of stories and height in feet shown. Allowable building area (determined by definition of "Area, Building") is shown in thousands of square feet per floor. Z/ce • • • • B BUSINESS(a,b) TYPE MAX. HT. MAX. NUMBER AREA CONSTRUCTION IN FEET SPRINK. OF STORIES MULTISTORY ONE STORY ONLY V 1 -Hour 65' uns {h} spr {j} CV Unprotected 55' uns {h} spr {l} 5 5 2 5 21.0 42.0 14.0 28.0 {h) When all portions of buildings are sprinklered in accordance with the standards listed in B903.2, the height of buildings listed under this column «this row» may be increased one story. A general area increase provided for in B503.3.2 may be applied before using footnote {h}. 0) When all portions of buildings are sprinklered in accordance with the standards listed in B903.2, the allowable heights and areas of buildings shall be as listed under this column. {b} For area modifications and limitations by occupancy see: 3. Business B503.4.1, B503.4.8 B503.4 OCCUPANCY AREA MODIFICATIONS B503.4.1 The area of a one story building of Group B, Group F, Group M, or Group S occupancy shall not be limited provided the building is equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system throughout, in accordance with B903, or other automatic extinguishing systems as approved by the building official, and is surrounded on all sides by a permanent open space of not less than 60 ft (18 m). High -piled combustible storage shall be protected in accordance with Chapter F36 of the Standard Fire Prevention Code. B503.4.8 The permanent open space of 60 ft (18.3 m) required in 13503.4.1, 13503.4.2, B503.4.3 and 13503.4.7 shall be permitted to be reduced to not less than 40 ft (12.2 m) provided all of the following requirements are met: 1. The reduced open space shall not be allowed for more than 75% of the perimeter of the building. 2. The exterior wall facing the reduced open space shall have minimum fire resistance rating of 3 hours. 3. All openings in the exterior wall, facing the reduced open space, shall have opening protectives with a fire resistance rating of 3 hours. B503.4.8 The permanent open space of 60 ft (18.3 m) required in B503.4.1, B503.4.2, B503.4.3 and B503.4.7 shall be permitted to be reduced to not less than 40 ft (12.2 m) provided all of the following requirements are met: 1. The reduced open space shall not be allowed for more than 75% of the perimeter of the building. 21.0 63.0 14.0 4•-• I a2.00 s-1 E €D. 14I6 iLteCgt)4-iktj- UPSP iv • • • 2. The exterior wall facing the reduced open space shall have minimum fire resistance rating of 3 hours. 3. All openings in the exterior wall, facing the reduced open space, shall have opening protectives with a fire resistance rating of 3 hours. B503.3 GENERAL AREA MODIFICATIONS 8503.3.1 The exceptions and requirements of B503.3 and B503.4 shall modify unsprinklered areas permitted by Table B500 and the specific use provisions of this chapter. B503.3.2 Where streets or public spaces, or horizontal separation from property lines of total width of not less than 30 ft (9144 mm), or 30 ft (9144 num) between buildings on commonly owned property, extend along the building perimeter, except for hazardous occupancies, the areas permitted by Table B500 may be increased as follows: I = 4/3 [100 (F/P - 0.25)] Where I = Percent increase of unsprinklered areas in Table B500 F = Building perimeter which fronts on streets, public spaces or horizontal separation not less than 30 ft (9144 mm) wide P = Total perimeter of building B503.3.3 For both an unsprinklered building and a sprinldered building, the percent increase is multiplied by the unsprinklered area permitted in Table B500 for the type of construction of the building, and the resulting area increase is added to either the sprinklered or unsprinklered areas in Table B500. When there are no unsprinklered areas permitted for the building in Table 8500, an unsprinklered area can be computed for use in this section. The corresponding unsprinklered areas are computed as one-third of the sprinklered area for one story only and as one-half of the sprinklered area for multistories.