001I call to order the regular building board of appeals meeting for May 15, 2025. Can we have roll call, please? Board member Paul Darling here. Board member Kevin Cox here. Board member Bob Hart here. Board member David Arntof and Hugh Flack Jr. both are absent. Staff um Mike Lemieux here. Mike Redmond here. Juliet Harvey here. And we have Quorum. Okay. Thank you. First item on the agenda is uh public commentary general. Don't see any public comment here. So we'll move to the next item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda. Okay. A motion. Move to approve. Second. Those in favor. I. It passes. 3. Approval of the minutes from the March 28th, 2025 meeting. Those are in the packet. Did anybody have any comments on those? I believe those are in the packet.
002Um, they're not here. If not, uh, do we have a motion to approve those? We have those in the packet. Okay. They were emailed, but I don't think they're page five. [Applause] I start at 9:00. It's basically this motion from the previous one was pointing this to the May 15th meeting. Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Okay. Second. Those in favor? I I that passes. The first item on the agenda today is the appeal show cause uh actions and it's a continuation of the BBA 25007 for appeals 620 South State Street, Ann Arbor, Michigan. [Music] And the um process here is first we'll have a staff report kind of summarizing the staff report from last month. Then we'll have the applicant um sign in and give us a update on their variance request and then
003an opportunity for the staff to respond to that and then the board will uh ask any questions of the applicant that we have. Um then we'll have a motion on the uh variance and with um three staff members here it will take a majority of the one be here today to at least two out of three votes for it to pass. So um but first we'll start off with the staff report. So the staff report hasn't changed from the last meeting. Um essentially they're seeking relief from the um uh tread depth requirement and the riser height. Um at the last meeting it was requested uh some additional information be provided uh with reference to some pictures and possible alternative options. Um the applicant has provided those. Okay. Thank you. applicant, you have a summary of
004what uh what you're requesting again today and the updated information that you have. We appreciate your taking time out of your day to meet with us as well as uh the staff. Um Dwight Hendricks is the architect who has provided the updates and will uh share the difficulties um and problems related to our request. So uh Dwight Okay. Um I think that you all have the plan. Do you have the plans that updated plans through the package? Yeah. Okay. The I tried to make it as as um simple as possible on sheet A5.0. Um basically showing the existing plan the proposed variance and then the reason that the required code compliant plan does not work. um the alternative plan that was suggested at the last meeting. Um basically the existing stairs um are extremely steep.
005It's um the risers are 9 in and um uh right with a um treads I'm sorry as a the risers are 8 and 5/16 with a 9 in tread which creates a angle of incline of 43° which is almost 45°. um ex they're extremely steep and it's sort of a wonder no one's actually died. Um they're they're also um old. They're 100 years 110 years old. So they have metal nosings with concrete which are now extremely smooth. So it's they're really slippery on top of being really steep and they're narrow. Um the the proposed plan last time at this meeting was to use the regular um uh minimum requirement which would be the 11 in with a 7 in rise. And so I went through and created that in the only space that is possible
006um due to the fact that the building is um entirely built out of steel and concrete. There's no um wood or anything in the building. It was built to be completely fireproof on purpose and has these massive beams um going every which way. So on the third plane, you can see that um the idea of a landing, a second landing at the bottom of the stairs um is impossible uh for two reasons. Um one is a headroom issue. There's the the main carrying beam for the the all the floors above goes right where that would um overhead of that landing which only leaves you I think it's like 5 foot 8 or something 5'6 headroom. Um and that that beam is not it's you can't it's impossible to move that beam. Um the other reason
007is that there's um the main HVAC system that was just installed also runs through there, which would cost uh a lot of money to move, but it doesn't really matter because there's no headroom. Um, so we're basically asking for just one quarter of an inch um of height variance from the 7 to 7 and 1/4 riser in order to be able to make a um much wider and much less steep angle and definitely much safer uh staircase. Um the whole idea is just to make this a lot safer. This is the main um stairs between the main floor and the basement which gets used hundreds of times every single day. Um and we're just trying to make it so that this is like uh a lot safer for all the people that use the stair.
008Okay. Thank you. Any comments? I would just uh ask clarification. So the um tread depth as measured from the nosing to nosing of the step below it would be the 11 in that's not well which version do you mean? You mean on the are the propos what you're proposing. So I think we were it earlier Dwight I think you were measuring it and not including or the dimension we were using um was including the nosing and the code requirement did not include the nosing. So we may need a tread variance on the tread. Oh. Oh yeah. I thought you meant the other one the other version. Yeah. No no I just wanted to make sure that that that we were clear on what was being requested. Thank you. Right. Yeah. So, what is the proposed
009riser to riser dimension on the tread? What's that? Riser to riser dimension on the proposed plan is 10 and a quarter then. No, the riser is seven and a quart tread. The tread length. Um, no, it's 10 10 in with a 3/4 in nosing plus 3/4 in nosing. Okay. You're asking for an inch variance as mentioned going from 11in tread to a 10in tread. Uh, right. which is the residential code. This is multif family. No, I know I what all I mean is that it's not it's not it's it's comply with residential code but this is considered commercial because city ban concerns it considers this commercial use. staff have any comments or questions? Yeah. Um, from the proposal you had the first time till now, um, there were at the bottom of the stair there
010were two doors leading out and now there is just one door. The It looks like there's a wall missing on the right hand side of the proposed variance plan. Yeah, we just uh in the last meeting they said that it would not be required to be a fire exit since we already have the two. So, we removed that in order to make it more open to the lower space. So, it's an open stair with a guard rack, right? Well, the walls out of this that wasn't a bearing wall then. Okay. No, that was a that was a new wall anyways. There wasn't a bearing wall. Okay. Was it wasn't the full height? Okay. No, the the beam that the supporting beam is right above that. It does help to see the pictures. Um that was
011a big help to be able to have we can send in the packet and looking at the alternate solutions there. Um and also having the you know the proposed plan uh an existing plan. It looks like you're doing quite a bit of work to that bathroom on the first floor too to make the stairway wider. Oh yeah. Right. Basically, if you if you um if we tried to do the required plan, it would re it would not leave any room at all left for the bathroom. So, that would there would no longer be able to be a bathroom up there. And that's like the main bathroom for the whole first floor. I mean, it does look like even widening the stair does quite a bit of that. You're moving the door for that bathroom, right?
012But it it there's enough room headroom wise to keep the toilet um stalled. The treads, the stairway treads to the first floor foyer have to be relocated. There's HVAC equipment that has to be relocated. Um as well as reconfiguring plumbing in that first floor bathroom, which is all a very large expense that the owners are willing to take on to try to get to this safer stairway system. Is there a beam at the top of the existing stairway that prevents that that top thread from moving closer to where the door location is? Yes. Is it right at the top riser? Is it back in line with the wall? The section it looks like a section opposed and required. It looks like it's almost in line with that door that where you show the drop there.
013It doesn't call it a beam there. It shows a drop there. Um I don't know where you're talking about. So if you look at um the proposed variance plan section K, you'll see the top riser dimension and then the basement ceiling you'll see a drop drop piece. Is that the structural beam or is the structural beam closer to the face of the riser? Uh can I can I come over to see what you're Yeah, sure. So, let's see. Okay. Is this the structural beam or is there a structural beam here? Oh, um no. There's that. That is the main one that I was talking about that can't be moved. That's the main one that can't be moved. So, you can't move any of this that way any further. So, can this move closer to this?
014Well, if if it did, then there wouldn't be enough room when you open the door. would be a landing. You wouldn't you don't have a door there though cuz it's not enclosed anymore. Well, they want to keep the door that door's been there forever. They want to keep it there just for sound. So, there's like um a lot of sound downstairs. The whole idea the whole idea of the basement is to have that be the place where they can go crazy and then upstairs not get trashed. Not that those boys would ever crash. This the door at the bottom of the stairs wouldn't Oh, no. Of course, because it's an open stair now, right? Um, if you leave that door at the top in place, if it's propped open, which it invariably will be, is
015it going to interfere with egress from the vestibule or is that because you had it swinging the other way in the first game? Yeah, we we man I manage that facility. My company manages that facility on a day-to-day basis and I can tell you that that door has an automatic closer on it and it is kept closed that that is um not something that's allowed to be propped open. Could it be done occasionally? Yes. But it's it's rare and it's not allowed to be propped open. I believe that we have um well I know that there's a monitored fire system there. Uh there is not a hold open sensor on that door either that would allow it to be propped and held open under the um alarm system. I know in the in the last
016variance we had talked you know instead of having you're showing it coming up three three three rises at the bottom landing I think we were talking more like one or two and the three of them makes it so the headroom is so tight there you know but that's the only way it would that's that's because there's not enough room to to go any um further towards the exterior wall right there wouldn't be enough room for a code compliant landing I believe even with a winder in there. Well, winders aren't very safe. I mean, that's Well, I guess the wrong two. I might be calling it the wrong name, but if it's if the landing is cut in half and the landing is turned into two steps, right? theor the theoretically if that were to happen
017we'd go from 5'8 to um another 9 in or 7 in. So we would be at 64 you know 63 something like that which I believe is still under the required head height for a stairway. Yeah, believe me, I tried a million different versions of this. Yeah, except moving the top right back. Well, I I I to me that's you're not really supposed to do that anyways. But there's a door if there's a door there. But I mean, you're saying you're making the subway safer, but then you're also saying you're leaving the door there. Well, I think that's if you if you didn't have the door there. Let me think. The landing could be really where the door is the first riser could be where the door is at now and you gain if you
018don't have any door at all. I I mean I guess so in theory, but then then you there's I mean then you would have the whole downstairs open like there's no sound. There would be no way to I mean you can close you could close it at the bottom. So, I'm just using it to explo if I can add a comment that doesn't relate to the code, but relates to the use of the um the lower level. Uh the University of Michigan has requirements for fraternities that have social events. And one of those requirements is to limit access to the area where there is an event, only have one door in, one door out. um so that they can control the people coming in and out, check IDs and things of that nature. So that
019door at the top of the stairs helps comply with that requirement. So again, not a code requirement, but I'm just sharing another reason why um that would that just be to the basement room or is that for the entire house? Well, it's where the social event is being held. And so, as Dwight was explaining, the whole goal is to move all of the social events to that lower level. And um the way that they meet that code is actually the students. Um most of the students that are guests will come in through the outside door that they come around the outside and come in that door so they can manage that access that way. Um, so it's um, again, it's not a code reason, but it's just a a supports the use of it. Sorry.
020But like that being said, that's the importance of trying to get this as close to code compliant as possible because if it is the main thing and you have hundreds of 50 kids, 70 kids, whatever, going up and down these main stairs, you know, that's that's a very good point on why it needs to be as close to code as possible. And so so there's there's no more ex there's no more walls going down into the wreck room. That's just all open now and everything. Mhm. Um there's not even a lot of room. The main thing is in that Florida down there, there's only a half bath. So people are going to be going coming down the stairs to go to the bathroom for an event. You're correct about that. um the long-term plan and
021there were actually plans submitted two years ago to remodel the basement um that included new bathrooms in the basement. It would be hoped that those would be added at some point in the future. That's still the that's still the plan, but we're just trying to get this part. doing it in phases and because of costs and um there were several issues with uh accessibility compliance with that initial um set of bathroom plans. So that's the history on that issue. Mhm. So um one more just one more couple of questions. the the guardrail that's coming down on the right side of the stair as you're going. So that would have to continue, would it not? At least one one 10 pass. Yeah. So that'd be a variance on that, too. Well, that's what I'm trying to
022avoid. I don't want them to come back. Um, and I don't think you'd have enough clearance um between the wall and what would be the end of the guard rail. I I guess I guess where I'm going with this is um why don't you just why don't you just leave the stair open? Why put a door at the bottom? If the door at the top is the the the ceremonial or the decorative door and that's the one that's going to control sound, why don't you just make it the stairs as simple as possible? Because you are going to have a problem with the guardrail or with the railings. Well, that's going to be a problem no matter what unless you take the door off at the top and reconfigure the stair. I I I guess
023I don't want I don't want to have you guys come back because if you do the guardrail, if you do the rails and then the inspector goes out and it doesn't like the rails because they don't extend past the last tread, then what? And it has to be on both sides if it's going to be commercial. It has to be on both sides. Yeah. So, you know, I mean, um, because like we even if this is approved, we we wouldn't approve that. No, that's not up for anything. You see, what I'm saying is that I you're doing this in phases, but it's very hard to start issuing variances in phases. Um, I mean, I would ask I would also ask, you know, the question, you've got a big recreation room down there. What's the occupancy?
024Do those do the do does the door to the stair have to swing in a different direction because it's you're going to have 100 people down there? Are they limited to 35? Will it be limited to 35? Well, so my I mean again I don't want I don't want to start opening up more and more and more legitimate questions, you know, but it's my understanding that the fire department um generally doesn't rate fraternity structures for occupancy that under the code it's limited to 75. We've I I've not with Mr. Redmond, but with previous fire marshals, we've tried to get spaces rated and we've been told no. Um, so and and from assembly usage I'm told that the occupancy requirement is 75 and maybe that could be verified, but that's what I have knowledge of based
025on that. Yeah, I mean right now you'd be looking at 2021 IFC code. Um, and pretty much it's the same between building code and fire code for occupancy load. um you would be an R R2 uh group and that puts you also as commercial. But when you have one specific room within that building, if it's a you know open space and it becomes an assembly, if you have over 49, it's an assembly. Okay. So, it's not I don't I'm not sure where the number 75 is coming from. I haven't heard of that. I haven't read it. Haven't seen it. But anything over 49 is an assembly. Okay. Well, maybe offline. I'd love to have that conversation um from a compliance standpoint. Not for we manage 19 of these facilities on campus. So um trying to
026keep everybody correct under the codes is a challenge. I I will add one more thing to that though because usually this topic comes up to me. Most people will come to me for capacities and for occupant loads. Usually I refer them back to the building because the capacity or occupant load should be calculated with the drawings that are submitted by the architect for the CFO. Okay. So it it it would be very rare that myself would come out to do measurements to calculate and do that. I refer right back to the certificate of occupancy and what it was designed for, how it's listed for, what type of classification for occupancy type, and then what the architect deemed it to be, and then what would have been issued by the building department. Mo most of these
027structures were built a 100 years ago and existing non-conforming uses. But again, great conversation that I'll I guess I'll go back to Michael with at a later time. In balance with an occupant mode is bathroom count. you know, so you know, uh, walk more than just eress the way a number of doors usually more than 50. It needs two ways out of the basement or out of the space and designing it for more than that. You'd have to look consider that as well. Uh, one other quick question on your proposed basement floor plan. Um, there's a line that goes across where where it says utilities. There's a line that goes across. It looks like an opening below the elevation mark elevation symbol. Um, can I come over to see what you're talking about? Yeah. I
028just want to know. I just want to know what that is. Oh, that's just a wall. Oh, it is a wall. Yeah. There. That right there is a wall right now. But it won't be. What? It won't be or it will be? No, it's we we um we left a rough in for a door if someday they want to put a door there, but it's right now it's just a wall. Oh, so you really need you you really need the other side of the stair to be open to get it to get to this. I don't know what you mean. What now? This is a wall. Yes, this is a wall now. Yes. Okay. So, you really need this part of the stair open. It is open. Well, it is in your drawing, but I
029I was going to suggest something else as far as the railing situation. Oh, but obviously that's not going to work because you need the you need this open to get to this and you need this door because this is a mechanical room. Well, it's Yeah, mechanical laundry, whatever. Whatever. It's it's a utility room, so you have to limit access to it. Right. Exactly. Okay. The the since you were talking, I did come up with with one possible um if you if you can. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um where am I? Um if you made this bottom, there is enough headroom for one land for one step. Mhm. If you made this one step Mhm. then this then the railing could go the 10 in going that way. The railing that's coming down here. Turn the corner.
030Turn the corner. And then there and then there the other problem with the two l two two steps was that it came too close to blocking the this mean of eress. So if you just had if you made this bottom one one just seven seven in and then you had the railing go that way then it would work. Um, okay. And that also gives you the heading you need for the landing and get you underneath the bathroom sink. Seem like it helps you, right? But it doesn't change the overall geometry of the stair if you add the extra. No, you're still stuck with if you took one of the bottom. You would still need the variance, but then it would solve the um it would solve the uh handrail. Okay. If you got rid of
031the door at the top of the stairs, move it back. That'd be the only thing that would change. Hope you agree. Yeah, right. Um what depth? The the nosing to nosing. I don't actually know if since there's 17 times, I don't think that would work now. There's It should work cuz if you take two steps off the bottom, two bars off the bottom, you add two rises to the top and that would fit in the space that you have. You mean if which version are you talking about? the third version, the the the code compliant proposed version. Oh, right. Right. If you took off, you took off two steps here, you'd add two steps to the top. That would fit there. These two come off and they basically go there. Even if you got rid
032of the door. Yeah. Got rid of the door. Yeah. Mhm. You definitely don't want to get rid of the door. Could you build a wall in the basement where you have a door at the bottom of the stairs? Uh, no. Because then that would block the um means of egress on that on that um so you go down. Let's you go or I can show you better than explain it. Yeah. So if you go down, you couldn't do something like this. And then just fill this in with the wall. Then you lose all the opening. Then then you're going through two doors to to this is this is the main uh egress door. Okay. So I mean so then if this door just went this way since nothing's right there and this is the egress
033door out. You're running out this way. Every door is being pushed open. Going that way, you have a solid wall for no noise coming upstairs. You better insulation because this is all going to be blocked off here with sound insulation. And then the upstairs will just be left open. You can tuck that stair back, add two steps to your drawing. And I don't I don't think you can move now that you're saying this. Let me look something quick. And there's doors here, too. That could be the second. There's another beam. There's another beam in the ceiling. That's right at the base of this where the stairs start going down. Right above. Um, okay. So, there's there's the landing right there. Yeah. There's another beam that's going here. Let me draw. There's a beam that's going
034another beam that's carrying all of this part of the building on the floor above. So that that's why the stairs start there. So that you can't you can't get rid of that. Oh, so that's you can't move the stairs back. That's why I actually question first. So the beam is really You need to show those in the drawing there cuz it's not clear. Well, it's I thought it should. So there's a there's a right here. Oh, cuz it looks like that beam is further back on this column line that you're showing in variance to uh code every single one. it. Um, maybe looks like you have a good two feet, two treads. You're not wrong. That's what it looks like. Yeah. I mean, I'd have to go there and measure it to find out. There
035is a I know there's a another one of those big beams right there. So, I would suggest starting with a structural drawing that shows where all the beams are at because that way would give us information and then do what we can and can't move. And honestly, we're just trying to we're trying to make this pass, right? Like we're not we're not we're not trying to say appreciate what you're doing, but not we like we're digging deep here to try to to try to help to understand the barriers and where the limits are. like because like of course it's it's not it's not just the stairs, it's it's the handrails, it's the it's everything and having that amount of occupancy going down there and and things like that. Um I I don't think that they're
036going to want to have I'm trying to I I do I don't think they're going to want to have that opening at the top at the top. So I understand that like they don't want it. So there is two doors on the first floor that go into the between the main hall and that stairway. Could those be the sound doors? You have doors right here. That could be the sound isolation doors. Take that door off and these could be doors that are closed that separates the sound. That way you can come up use the toilet room. Well, it's it's this staircase is open to the to the entire building. Yeah. So when you go upstairs, those rooms all have doors on them, right? Um yeah, we're all sleeping rooms. You don't have a second floor
037plan, but yeah. So I I truly think your best bet is to create a door at the bottom of the stairs. And if you move that stair back to meet the beam to try to create because even even if we if we if we approve it as is your next problem is going to be handled. Yeah. But if we just do do this the step going off to the side. Correct. But if we approve this so there's nothing to approve then for today. Correct. Like we need we need that that plan that you would approve. So, if you do do the step off to the side and you do do those things, perfectly fine. But that's the plan we need in order to approve and because, you know, we can't I just want to add
038with the with the extent we're talking about changing these plans. It's going to require a new review. Um, we're talking about a whole Yeah. new plan review. I'm talking about reconfiguring just that that'll be an element that'll need to happen with the amount of changes that are being discussed. Clarification. um with the proposed variance plan if the step was on there. That's what you're saying. So to go from what the existing is and now if we say the proposed variance plan would be approved with the step and the handrails all being in the same red area, it would need that. So it would need to come in for review. We would evaluate it. if there were non-compliant elements found, the applicant would be informed and then if they would have the opportunity to come back
039to the board. So, so the city didn't didn't even get a chance to review that. This this was this was reviewed and what they're appealing now is the the they're appealing what we found on plan review. So they submitted the this their proposed plan was sort of their last what they gave us last time saying that they needed the variance from the uh width and riser height and that was the part that was evaluated. If there's a reconfiguration we just need to look at it to do a plan review and then when the um elements that aren't compliant are identified then it would come back here. Um it it it in order for us to be able to inspect it uh to to get a to get a um a clear approval if if the
040variance is approved, we just need something to go by. As it is right now with the changes we're talking about, I'd have no way to um instruct somebody in the field of how to inspect what was approved. So on your review, did you guys catch the handrail scenario? I I don't know. I all that I know is that the only variance that was requested was the was this. Sure. Do they red flag the handrail? Uh I don't believe so. But um may I ask a code interpretation question? And I'm not sure if this is building code or or housing code, but where that door is at the top of the stairs, that's a fire rated stairway that goes up and then closed. Now it's open on the bottom. Yeah. So that if it's fire rated,
041then this plan doesn't work. Okay. So, there's a stairway and there's fire rated doors at every level. And the door that's at the top of the stairs is a fire rated door. Glass in it now. I'm sorry. It's got glass in it now. Well, it was again that's probably a um a non-conforming use based on the time that it has been there. But what what I'm trying to get at is if we remove that door, are we creating are we violating some other code or creating another problem that we have to solve or is there a way to keep the door and we just take the but your variance plan destroyed the fire rating in that in that room by having the stairwell. We're talking about the maintenance power that comes in at the top
042at the top of the stair first floor up first. Not not the basement. Would that have to be a fire rated assembly? So, we're getting to a point where I don't know the building well enough to start making these just speaking to it. If if if the plan is changing significantly, we'll take a plan N. We'll re-review it and then that would sort of be the step forward with the amount that we're talking about changing at this point. As much as we would like to resolve this today with the reconfiguration we're talking, can we request another 60-day tableabling and provide more information and research this door issue and um come back again? I definitely think it's a good idea for you. I I you brought up good points, valid points. I uh and and again,
043we're just trying to get this to a yes for you. I've been on that side of We're not We're not trying to be hard on it, but we understand. On our end, we'll work with you to get a review done as quickly as possible. If you're giving us something that needs that um so that we can get back here, I will mention that next month's meeting is on a holiday, so it was going to be cancelled. Um, so it would be the following month. Uh, Junth Junth. Oh, Junth. Oh, I didn't know exact date. So, okay. So, you know, you mentioned the business about the rating. I mean, from the beginning, it it didn't to me it didn't make sense to have a rated stair from the basement to the lobby if the lobby or
044the vestibule itself is not rated. If you have a rated stair, it usually has to discharge into a rated corridor or something else right to the outside to the or directly to the outside. So that took away that rating requirement presumably made things a little bit easier as far as the rest of the stair open stair to the How many floors are in this building? Three. Three floors plus the basement. Wow. And I think what the doors may help you with would be passage of smoke. Yeah, I I don't you're probably right that that however this was passed eons ago. They did what they did to make it My understanding was when the housing code first came in in 1978, all of these old buildings had to go through a series of variances to come
045as close to compliance at that time. So, there's a bunch of things that don't meet code but have been allowed to be non-conforming uses. And when we go through the housing code inspections, these sorts of things come up. Um yeah, so um just yeah, I mean the housing code we would be at my door there is not fire technically fire with a label, but it had glass in there. So it may stop smoke from moving, but it was not going to stop fire, right? So it's chicken wire glass. So, at one time it may have been allowed uh and it now it's only a small proportion that's allowed for a fire rated door, but then you've got access. Yeah. But I mean, if you're doing all this war, you still don't have any bathrooms down
046there. Um, one other thing with these with the questions about fire ratings and required stairways. Um, when you prepare your plan, if you could just address that so we know what we're looking at when you with whatever you resubmit. just give us the layout of what's required so that um we know that too for review. Um and to to it'll clear up some additional questions that have been brought up. Um I have one request if you're going to table this and represent. Can you come up with an occupancy load for the lower floor? Okay. Proposed whatever proposed occupancy level. Maybe you should be less than 49 or 49 or less is because of the number of exits you have. But yes, that would be because that could affect Okay, it's reasonable to look into that.
047Okay. Um, also, I mean, I would just say double check fire routes and door swings and stuff like that. That was in the version whatever how many times ago that was originally submitted, I believe. What? And that showed the fire the stair rating or that basement being fire rated. Is that right? Yeah, it showed the pads the the paths of egress and the all that. And did that fire rating go through the the stairway on the back of the house? Is that go through the pairs of doors and all the way to the outside? Did that rating you're talking about for the stairway include that extension all the way to the outside? I don't know which one you mean. The kitchen stairs. Did that ring also wrap around you know all that? No. No. Right.
048Stop here. This this one and this is the difference. Those are the required got this floor. You know you were reading this. Did that reading all that stairway? Where did your part the um using that stair this stair for the basement? Okay. because there's the two that go directly one that goes directly right outside and then the other one. So you're communicating stair basically. Um we were just looking at the other stairs over there. Does this stair have the rising one code? Nope. No. Is that like in a future plan too? Nope. Yeah, there's no way that one can work. Okay, it's there's not enough room. Um, so again, we're like we're not trying to be difficult. We're just trying to help you guys get to that point. Um, if you guys want to table
049it for another 60 days, it would be Juneth and then July meeting unless you guys have a special request for a meeting on the This would mean that we can't build it this summer. Nice to know that this I understand. But given other timing and other unless magic with the owners to come up with a code compliant plan, I don't you can always request a special meeting. I think that's we did the last the first meeting was the April meeting was or the first meeting we had was a special meeting. Um I had heard initially that you wanted to take work for 60 days. So that would be well that July anyways. But if we need to put together a meeting for if we need to put together a meeting for June, we the initial
050plan was to cancel the June meeting, but if you think you can be ready, we can uh just reschedule it for a different day that month. It'll probably be in the third week. The the other thing here is that Sorry, way too close. If you come up with a plan and it actually works, you don't have to come back here. You don't need a variance. We understand. And so it's just a review by you and you're done. And it all works. Yeah. Yeah. Would it work with the um bathroom though? I don't think um No, it wouldn't. No. Right. So you you can request a special meeting again. Uh you could if it works, you don't have to come back. Um I I know of course everyone's moving out this summer and the summer is
051the best time to get all this stuff done. Um but see what you guys can come up with and go from there. Understood. Um we'll if we could request 60 days and if we there's an opportunity for a special meeting, I'll address that with Miss Harvey. Thank you. And then if you let me know directly when you've submitted that plan, I can make sure that it that we give it um uh a quick review. Thank you, Michael. I appreciate that. So, we would need a Motion to table for duration 60 days for 60 days. For 60 days, sorry. Motion to table for 60 days. Second. Those in favor? I tableling is passed. Thank you all for your time and uh trying to make this work for us. Appreciate it. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn.
052Second. Who's in favor? I adjourned it.