Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Park Board of Appeals 2015-03-26RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals March 26, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Brad Klein, John Spooner, Joe Calvin, Don Darling, Tony Schiaffo Members Klein, Spooner, Calvin, Darling, and Schiaffo Chief Building Official Will Birchfield, Building Inspector Claude Traufield, Permit Technician Charlie Phillips, Recording Secretary Karen Thompson None The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. There were four people in the audience (including two staff). Chair Spooner opened the meeting, stating this meeting would be a continuation of the International Building Code significant changes, proposed local amendments, and local concerns. CONSENT AGENDA Minutes from March 12, 2015 Board of Appeals meeting. It was moved and seconded (Schiaffo/Calvin) to approve the minutes as presented and the motion passed unanimously. CBO Birchfield stated Chapter 1 of the IBC are the administrative provisions, which will also apply to the other codes. He would skip Chapter 1 today to move forward more quickly. If there was time at the end of the meeting, he would go back to Chapter 1 review. Classification of buildings. CBO Birchfield met with a local architect concerning small tenant spaces. According to the building code, a building serving food and drink with an occupancy load of less than 50 can be classified as a business; however, when there are more than 15 persons (including employees) they are required to provide separate sex restrooms. Both restrooms would have to be accessible. The proposed amendment would add an exception for small tenant spaces where the primary service is carry-out foods and/or drinks with seating for not more than 15 persons, may be classified as a Group M, Mercantile occupancy classification. This will make it easier for tenants as far as plumbing fixtures and restroom requirements are concerned. Address identification. In the Estes Valley, most streets are not on a grid system, and often have long driveways. This amendment would require an address be posted at the street if you are unable to see the address from the public right-of-way. This is a current amendment. Automatic Sprinkler System Trigger. All new construction and all substantially improved construction (50%) in the CD-Commercial Downtown zone district has to be fully sprinkled with an NFPA13 system. This is important for the downtown area, where there are many zero lot lines. The NPFA 13 system will allow the property owners much more flexibility for future uses. Stair treads and risers. This amendment requires stair geometry to be measured in their finished condition. Stairs are a hazardous use in building, and a finished measurement is more accurate than a measurement during the rough stage. Exit signs. Exit signs are required down low in areas serving hotel rooms so they are visible during a fire/smoke event. Current code with Larimer County. This is a current amendment. Window Openings. It is proposed to delete this section that requires guard rails on windows that are a certain distance from the floor. Local concern due to the number of homes with large window walls. Not a good fit for Estes Park. Emergency Escape and Rescue. This concerns the size of egress windows. 5.7 square feet is required on buildings where a ladder would be needed for emergency escape and rescue. If no ladder is needed, the size is lessened to five square feet. The proposed amendment is to require the 5.7 square feet, with no option for 5 square feet. The rules are different if a sprinkler system in installed. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals March 26, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Ceiling Heights in Basements. This provision needs to be deleted due to some of the existing ceiling heights in older buildings in town. Leaving this in the code would prevent the issuance of building permits in certain buildings in town. Regardless of the ceiling height, an emergency escape and rescue window is required. For new construction and/or change of use, every basement should have at least one egress window/door in basements. Basement fires are very hazardous for firefighters. Accessibility. The Division of Building Safety does not regulate the ADA or Fair Housing Act. Everything that is not in the building code is the responsibility of the property owner, the designer, and the contractor. The issuance of a building permit does not relieve the property owner, designer, and/or contractor of the requirement to abide by Federal or State laws. Developers will need to comply with Colorado Revised Statutes 9-5, which will become part of the building code as a local amendment. The Chief Building Official does not have the authority to interpret or the responsibility to enforce Federal and State accessibility laws. Minimum ceiling height. The proposed amendment provides for minimum ceiling heights in habitable spaces. Consistent with Larimer County. Roof assemblies. This local amendment would require Class A roof coverings or assemblies for buildings in the CD-Commercial Downtown zone district. This zone district has wooden buildings, zero lot lines, and limited access for firefighters. Rooftop structures. This local amendment is intended to maintain proper roof drainage when new and/or different appliances and/or equipment are installed on roofs. Twelve inch curbs will be required. Structural design. This is a current amendment. It is NOT consistent with Larimer County. Sets live loads for residential decks at 60 pounds per square foot (psf) and 100 psf if a hot tub is on the deck. Sleeping areas are 40 psf across the board. Member Spooner stated the loads on Table 1607.1 do not indicate live or dead load, and he thinks clarification should be made. CBO Birchfield stated there may be a footnote that talks about the loads. Loads were not intended to be compounded. He will check on it and report back. Snow Loads. The Structural Engineers Association of Colorado (SEAC) hopes to put out a new snow load study by the end of 2015. CBO Birchfield would like to postpone this amendment until the new study is complete. Wind Loads. There was extensive discussion about the new procedures for determining design wind speeds. The terminology is changing, now using "Ultimate Design Wind Speed". In the past, an 'importance factor' was determined by the use of the building. For example, a pole barn used for storage would have a lower importance factor than a critical care facility. The calculated wind loading was increased by an importance factor multiplier, thus providing higher loadings for higher risk buildings. In the new procedure, three different ultimate wind speed maps are provided for the different importance factors. The higher the importance, the higher the wind speed and no multipliers are used. Under the new system, the ultimate wind speed for a residential structure will be about 175 mph. However, once all the calculations are complete, the nominal loads for Estes Park residences will convert back down to approximately the equivalent to the 140 mph/ 3-second gust used previously. A question was asked about the manufacturer's rating of building components (such as windows) and the very high wind speeds that we have. Member Spooner stated all products are tested at sea level pressures, which are different than pressures at 7,000 feet above sea level. In addition to the table that we currently provide showing pressure corrections related to altitude, he would like to see a table showing sea level speed corrections for the Estes Park area. He would be willing to assist with the calculations for the table. He stated it would also be important to have Larimer County on board with the new wind speeds to ensure consistency. CBO Birchfield stated he would recommend adopting the study by SEAC by reference. Rain Loads. This amendment would assist with determining the size of roof drains. It was consistent with the Larimer County codes for 2009. The design factor uses 'inches per hour'. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals March 26, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Flood loads. The Estes Park Municipal Code had to be revised to align with state law. Floodplain regulations can be more restrictive, but not less. The floodplain regulations the Town has are in the Municipal Code. Estes Park does not have any occupiable structures in the floodway. The proposed amendment is to delete the flood load section of the IBC and refer to the Municipal Code. Earthquake Loads. This is a current local amendment and is consistent with Larimer County. It verifies minimum seismic design criteria for designers and for plan reviewers. Special Inspections. The IBC requires special third party inspections for wood frame structures in high wind areas. The local amendment would add "when required by the chief building official." This amendment will also apply to the International Residential Code and the International Existing Building Code. Soils and foundations - Dampproofing and Waterproofing. As determined by the CBO, foundation walls shall be waterproofed when such walls enclose habitable spaces on the uphill side of a buildings, and positive drainage away from the wall is not provided. Every habitable space below grade must be damp proofed. Foundation drains - This local amendment is intended to address water intrusion into below grade habitable spaces. Foundation drains would be required in buildings unless there are stamped plans that say they are not needed. Drainage discharge. Foundation perimeter drains shall not be dumped into the public sewer system. Must exit above ground. Foundations. The minimum design requirements shall be the Minimum Design Criteria for Non- Engineered Poured Concrete Foundations. There was general consensus among the Board to remove the design criteria for CMU foundations. Shallow Foundations. This amendment establishes the frost line at 30 inches below grade. Wildfire Hazard Mitigation. The current amendment adopts the Larimer County standards by reference. However, CBO Birchfield believes the Estes Valley is at higher wildfire risk than the rest of Larimer County. He will have discussions with Fire Marshall Robinson and review the Wildland Interface Code. Member Darling stated there may be a possible conflict concerning plant materials between the building code and the development code. CBO Birchfield stated he would research this and report back to the Board. He stated the Insurance Service Office (ISO) looks at hazard mitigation and gives the community a rated number. Buildings with lower ISO numbers could have better insurance rates than those with higher ISO numbers. Life safety always overrules aesthetics. CBO Birchfield stated the Appendices are not part of the codes unless specifically adopted. He recommended the following: Appendix V - Grading. This appendix is currently in the local amendments and maintains historic practices. Apart from this appendix, there are no provisions in the codes regulating earth work. If this is not adopted, the Town could not require grading permits. Grading permits are important to begin infrastructure construction prior to issuing building permits on large projects. The proposed amendments increase grading permit fees by 25-30%. At this point in the meeting, CBO Birchfield reverted back to the Administrative Provisions that had been bypassed earlier on. The Administrative Provisions carry through all of the codes by reference to the IBC. They are as follows: • Transfer of permits. Building permits can be transferred to another person when both agree. • Floor and Roof Design Loads. Design loads over 50 pounds must be posted. • Design standards. Prescriptive provisions do not apply due to wind speed. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 4 March 26, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall • Means of egress. Submittal documents showing means of egress cannot be cluttered and must be on separate sheets. The complexity of egress systems require separate plans. • Temporary Structures and Uses. The IBC is in conflict with the Municipal Code and Development Code, so this code will be amended to align with those two codes. • Temporary Power. Gives the CBO and the State Electrical Inspector the authority to provide temporary power to buildings. • Fees. The Division of Building Safety will conduct a fee study and will share the results with the Board. • Work commencing before permit issuance. Additional fees may apply if the contractor does not obtain necessary permits prior to commencing work. Fee is three times the permit fee, plus the permit fee. This amendment is meant for people who willfully work against the system. • Refunds. The CBO is authorized to establish a refund policy. This language is from the Uniform Building Code. • Expiration of plan review. The application for a building permit is null and void if the application is approved and the applicant does not pick it up and pay the fees. • Reinspection fees. Fees can be assessed if contractors call for inspections they are not ready, or if previous corrections are not made prior to the next inspection. These types of inspections require a significant amount of unnecessary staff time and paperwork. • Inspections. The Town requires drywall inspections. • Energy Efficiency. If you are conditioning the air, you must provide an energy efficiency certification at the end of the job. • Contractor's Affidavit. The goal of an affidavit is to expedite the jobs. If pre-approved, contractors can provide an affidavit in lieu of an inspection. This is a privilege, and not something the Division of Building Safety is required to do. • Certificate of Occupancy. This amendment explains when we need them. Includes a fee. The exception tells when a CO is not needed. • Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. The CBO is authorized to issue a TCO, but not required to do so. Fees are applicable. CBO Birchfield stated he is going to recommend to the elected officials that the fee for TCO be increased from $100 to $400-500, to deter abuse of the process. Fie added there would be an exemption for inclement weather. It is not the goal of the Division of Building Safety to allow the issuance of a TCO to be used as a punch list for the contractors. • Board of Appeals. CBO Birchfield explained each code has its own appeals section. This amendment would state the Board of Appeals section in the IBC will be the appeals process for all the adopted codes. Public Comment None. Staff and Member Discussion Next meeting is April 2nd. The International Residential Code Significant Changes (2012 & 2015) will be on the agenda. Many of the significant changes are not too significant, but CBO Birchfield wanted RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 5 March 26, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall the Board to decide if they are significant. The Board has been given the documentation, and was asked to bring any comments to the next meeting. There was brief discussion concerning public notices for Board of Appeals meetings. CBO Birchfield stated Public Information Officer Kate Rusch published a meeting schedule several weeks ago, and Ms. Thompson sends email meeting notices to approximately 275 addresses. A handout will be created that will be distributed by Inspector Traufield, and copies wiil also be available in the office. Chair Spooner stated if there are concerns about the present code and local amendments, comments need to be provided in person or in writing to the Board of Appeals. Member Calvin and CBO Birchfield will discuss the new ANSI accessible code and come back to the Board with comments. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:47 p.m. Johri"s6ooner, Chair Karen Thompson;1<ecording Secretary