001to order the regular uh of the special meeting of the building board of appeals for today is Friday, March 28th, 2025. Do we have roll call, please? Yes. Uh board member Paul Darling here. Board member Robert Hart here. Board member Kevin Cox here. Board member David Arnto absent. Board member Hugh Flack absent. Uh building official Mike Leia present. Um fire marshall present. Attorney John Riser present. And staff leazison Juliet Harvey pleasant. Thank you. So we have a quorum of three members. Next item on the agenda is the public commentary general. Anybody here to have general commentary? Seeing none, I'll close that portion of the meeting. Next item is the approval of the agenda. Do you have a motion to approve the agenda? Move to approve. I second. Those in favor. I passed. Next item on
002the agenda is approval of the minutes from the March 20th, 2025 meeting. Is there any comments on those minutes? Any corrections? Not. Can we have a motion? Move to approve the minutes. I second. Those in favor. Pass. Next item on the agenda is appeals, actions, and show cause hearing. We have one item on the agenda today at uh 620 South State Street. So the procedural process that works with us is first we'll have a report from staff about these varants. Then we'll have the applicant come up and sign in and state your name and give us a brief summary of your request for variance. And we'll have the opportunity for staff to respond to that if necessary. and then the board will ask the applicant or staff questions. Uh then we'll have a motion. We'll
003have discussion about the motion and then a uh vote. So let's start with uh our staff from the report. All right. The property at 620 South State is a multif family R2 building. The building permit application was submitted on 72924 for work described as modification of the stairs from the first floor to the basement. plan shows a new stairway with tread depth of 10 in with a 3/4 inch housing and a seven and a/4 inch rise. Um, no stair measurements were on the plan indicating rise and run of the existing stair to be demolished. At plan review, it was stated 7 in max rise and 11 in minimum tread depth per section 101.5.2 the stairs not in the dwelling unit. The plan was required to be revised because the stairs on the plan do not
004meet the requirements of section 1011.5.2 of the 2015 Michigan Building Code. The applicant has indicated that they believe the stair geometry provided on the plan is equal to or better is an equal to or better form of construction. Staff recommends this application be denied as it does not meet the standards for approval. The code has not been misinterpreted. The provisions of the code do apply and the proposed condition is less safe than the minimum requirements of section 101.5.2 of the 2015 Michigan Building Code. The basis of this appeal suggests um that it's proposed equal or better than the code requirements is not proven as such by the information provided in this appeal. Based on the requirements of the 2015 Michigan Building Code, staff recommends the board deny this request and require new construction elements meet
005the minimum requirements of the 2015 Michigan Building Code. Um, as required uh for existing buildings 801.3 um code section 11 or 101.5.2 and two state stair riser heights shall be 7 in maximum and 4 in minimum. The riser height shall be measured vertically between the nosing and adjacent treads. Rectangular tread depth shall be 11 in minimum measured horizontally between the vertical planes of the foremost projections of adjac adjacent treads and at a right angle to the treads nosing. Winder treads shall have a minimum depth of 11 in between the vertical planes of the foremost projection projection of adjacent treads at the intersection with a walk line at a minimum tread depth of 10 in within the clear width of the stair. Uh the petitioner states the property owner's desire to install a new stair from
006the first floor to the lower level of the fraternity. The current stair system has 9 in treads and eight and a half um riser heights and a width of 36 in. A new stairway is proposed with 10 and 3/4 treads, 7 and 1/4 riser height, and a width of 49 in. Section 101.5.2 requires a minimum tread depth of 11 in and a maximum riser height of 7 in. The building has concrete and steel structural floor and wall components. Given the structural components of the space available within the existing building envelope, insufficient space exists to allow for a code required stair. They request a variance from 1011.5.2 to allow step treads of 10 and 3/4 in um 10 in with a 3/4 in nosing and a riser height of 7 and 1/4 in. Stair system receives
007high use from the fraternity members and guests. The current stair system is steep, narrow, and open to the lower level common areas, which does not provide a fire protected means of egress. The property owners proposed a new stair system that will be wider, 49 in instead of 36. Improved tread widths, 10 and 3/4 instead of 9, less steep, 7 and 1/4 riser height instead of the 8 1/2 in risers. And with the fire door at the top and bottom of the stairs, we believe that the improved safety of this design is a benefit that justifies the variance from the stated code. Uh portions of the floor described as steel and structural being removed to an open area to install are being removed in an to open an area to install a reconfigured stairway. There's no
008indication on the submitted plan that adjustments to the stair opening could not be made to accommodate compliance stairs. stairway is being completely reconfigured and as such must meet the minimum requirements of the 2015 Michigan residential code. The 2015 Michigan Rehabilitation Code for existing buildings level two alterations states in 801.3 that all new construction elements, components, systems and spaces shall comply with the requirements of the international building code. There's no exception given with regards to the stairways in this section. Therefore, newly installed stairways is required without exception to have a maximum 7in rise and a minimum 11in run with a nosing that is a maximum of 1 and a/4 in when measured from the tread depth shall be measured horizontally between the vertical planes of the fourmost projections of adjacent treads and at a right angle
009to the tread nosing. The configuration proposed by the applicant doesn't meet the minimum requirements of the 2015 Michigan Building Code as it's required um to by the 2015 Michigan Rehabilitation Code. The appeal claims that the proposed is equal to better form of construction which is not the case because the stair geometry proposed does not meet the minimum requirements of the code. Therefore, it is not equal to the code requirements. The case is made. No case is made to how the stere geometry that does not meet the minimum code standards is better than the code requirements. This appeal should not be approved because it doesn't meet the standards for approval set forth in the 2015 Michigan building code. Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon. Come up and sign in. State your name and tell us a little
010bit about your request. Um, good afternoon. Uh, first we thank everyone for taking time out of your schedules for this special meeting. We know it was an imposition and we do appreciate you hearing us on uh this situation. Uh my name is Alan Lutz with health design build contractor and with me is Dwight Hendrickx uh the professional uh design professional on this project and architect. Um to give you a little bit of background and context for this request. Uh this property was built in the early 1900s. Um 110y old building. When it was constructed it was constructed of um solid concrete construction. And all of the interior and exterior walls are poured concrete. The floor structures in this are concrete with uh steel reinforcing beams encased in that concrete. This makes um relocation and any
011changes, structural changes um very difficult compared to other more traditional forms of construction uh like with frame construction. um the owner's desire to provide a uh stair system to the basement that is more functional and safer than what is there now. Uh what is there now is a very narrow stairway with steep steps and uh narrow treads. Um there is no fire protection at the bottom of the stairs. Um and so um again making egress difficult in the case of any sort of emergency. Um we have examined how to create a a stair system that is as code compliant as possible. Um and this is what is is before you now. Uh in examining other options, um the structural changes that are necessary to walls that would be 12 to 14 in thick concrete um
012are so significant or that the to create a code compliant stair system um would render the uh rooms neighboring that stair uh unfunctional. to extend or or change the walls into those uh other capacities. Um and so what has been presented is a stair system that is it doesn't technically meet the elements of the code but is a safer stair system. It provides a fireprotected um opening landing at the bottom um and is um very close to compliant. Uh we um again want to reiterate that we've examined other and I'll let Dwight speak to this but other um ways to create a fully compliant stair system and it would be so uh invasive and unfunctional and such a negative impact in the other areas that it makes it um not a reasonable consideration. So we're
013left with a choice of either keeping this narrow steep stair system which is not fireprotected or creating a fireprotected stair system that is more functional and safer than um what is there now. So yeah, this building um is extremely difficult to make changes to it. It's um it was literally built to be fireproof um back then. And so the I spent I don't even know how like two weeks or 3 weeks trying to come up with any other version um in order to fit any any version of a stair in there that would meet the regular code. And it's impossible um just because of where the walls are. It would it would mean completely destroying and possibly they're all low bearing walls is the problem. And so there really is no way to move the
014the walls that would be required to move it like the extra 2 or 3 ft in order to fit any other version of of the compliance stairs in there. Um, so I don't know and if you need like 40 different versions to see how it doesn't work, but it is impossible. We've had engineers, everybody trying to figure out a way to um make it straight or bump this wall out or their wall out, but because the the way that it's um constructed, there's like this inner core of posts and solid poured concrete in the middle of the building. the existing stairs are up against that. So you can you there's this only this one small section of that that we can the engineer said we can remove in order to um because it's like not
015a major beam in order to fit this L-shaped stair in there. You can't go straight because above that there's a huge room that there's just no way you can like bump something like a a little whatever you want to call it hallway into the middle of this huge room. So there's you can't go up, you can't go straight and you can't go backwards because of that being where the column the main columns that that um support the whole building are. So this really is the only version that can fit and it's so close. It seems way smarter to make something safe than say that it's off by a quarter of an inch and we're gonna I mean this the existing stairs are really slippery and we're just lucky no one's fallen down there and gotten
016super hurt cuz I've fallen down there myself. So they're not good. Okay. Thank you. Anything to follow up on that? Uh Mike board have questions. Do you actually need a fire rated stair in that location? Well, there had I mean if you build it new you would. Yeah. There's there's um there's a another stair in the back, but if but when we did the co compliance um in order for there to be you know the distance from egress then yeah but but we can't have it there is no way of doing that the way it is now. Well, no, I understand that. But I mean, it it can't be treated as just a communicating stair from one floor to the other. Closing off the top and the bottom of the chair, but not both ends.
017Well, I the I mean, I'm going to get to something else here. I think you know the way the door discharges at the top and it looks like you have two doors at the bottom. Um I'm not sure that. And they're also supposed to be handrails on both sides. I don't know that you can get the It doesn't look like you can get the extension on the handrails down at the bottom either. Um that might I'm not sure. I have to look at that. But um even so, it would still be a million times safer than the existing version. I mean, that's basically the the whole point of this, I I guess, is we're trying to make something. I mean, we could just leave it. I No, I understand. I understand what you're trying to
018do. I'm just asking the question whether it has to be a fire rated enclosed stair because um as a means of as a means of egress because it discharges up at the upper level into a hallway. Yeah, which isn't rated either. May I suggest that um there will still need to be a landing at the bottom of the stairs. So even if the requirement for the um fire rated uh means of egress were removed and it were open at the bottom, we there would still not if we met the code compliance, there would still not be enough room based on the added run of the stairs to provide the landing at the lower level. Well, I guess that's what I'm kind of getting to because if it's just a communicating stair from one level to
019the other and you don't have doors, it looks like you could reconfigure the stair to get an extra couple of risers like at the bottom at right angles and do everything you want to do but still meet the requirements for the riser run, you code requirements. So, I guess I'm also asking the building department, do they have to have a fire rated enclosure? I don't think it was required. Well, I don't I guess I have not. You're the way that we did it. That's you're saying that you you think that you can extend you're thinking that we can extend the but we can't. I believe me, I've done it. The the reason is how far it has to come down before it hits a solid concrete wall. That's That's the head space. It's the head
020space that you I know that looks like there's room at the bottom for more steps, but No, no, I don't mean you have to have the same in the direction of Well, the way you've got it. First of all, let's let's back up a second. So, it the stair doesn't have to be enclosed or fire rated. It can be an open communicating stair. Is that right now? It looks like right. I haven't done an evaluation in that regard. They want me to feel well because I think they're going to have other problems doing it this way and having st having doors at the bottom and not being able to make the handrails work. And I really don't want to do this again. It's possible. This this was applied for back in July in June or
021July, but you haven't built it yet. Is that correct? Right. And um often when we'll see a bar cross, we'll get pictures of the existing conditions. We don't really have any of that. Makes a little difficult for us to understand the rise in the run and supporting the uh you know limited clearances for headroom and stuff. So that makes it a little bit more difficult for us to review as far as information goes. Um, one one comment about the the staff report. He says there there wasn't any exceptions to the rise and run regulations um in that chapter, but there are two exceptions for R2US and that's give me more clarification on that. So the yeah so the um uses for inside when I looked at the um commentary um it speaks to inside uses
022like that for people living um with this being a fraternity house I assume some people live there and other members are allowed to visit or can come and go as they please. Um and in the appeal also they uh talk about um that it's frequently used by fraternity members and guests. Um so I don't think the intent of the code for a stairway in this situation is that that um so this is the R2 used either like a townhouse or a duplex or in this case a fraternity which would be sleeping room. So the stere would be considered inside the dwelling unit. Correct. because they're not individual units or sleeping rooms and but it's a a common used stairway. if you share it, right? But it's a common area like I would see it more
023as like a lobby or commercial building or um any any area of a apartment building that was made for people to congregate and the use of the basement hasn't changed at all. That's still going to stay a recreation. Can you describe the use of that space a little bit more? What what happens down there? Okay. Tables, TV, what? Well, there is a room with a pool table in it. There's a larger room that's a gathering room with a TV. And then there's a third room which is a study room. Mhm. And those were recently permitted and um finished as those uses. And it looks like there's a door directly to the outside from the space. Correct. And that stair is somewhat code compliant. 7-Eleven. And what is that stairway? Oh, that was that was also
024built 100 years ago. So, yeah. So, it's probably the same 10in trail. I I would say it would not meet this 711 requirement. It's steeper and narrower than current codes. And that's just kind of emergency exit only that or that people come in and out of this? No, nobody ever uses it. Yeah. And the reconstruction of the stairs going to be out of wood or out of concrete. Uh they would be they're currently um designed to be wood frame. Mhm. There's also a section in there, I see in the drawings, you called this to be code compliance for compliance with the Michigan Rehabilitation Code, but you didn't indicate what level of renovation this is. I think that was a question in the plan or was it level one, level two, level three? Yeah, it wasn't
025indicated on the plan. just it just referenced the um the uh existing building code of the level um based on the reconfiguration of space I was functioning under the assumption that it's level two. There's also a section in there that I think that refers you back to I think chapter 4 of the rehab code about 403 that talks about um you know when you do have limited spaces in stairways like this and similar to the mechanics today and the previous code when you have tight tight conditions for that you know there's limited rebuilding you have a limited space but uh I don't know if we have enough documentation to confirm you know the limited space requirements you know, kind of the head room, the you know the way the configuration of the stairway is. Um
026um you mean you need a you you need something a drawing actually showing what the existing I think what the existing layout is what what you know what what what the limitation is. You say there's a steel beam you can take out you're already taking out one side wall because you're going from 3 ft width to 4 ft in width. So that wall is coming out. So yeah, that's there's it's on the other side of that thick wall. Yeah. So you're making descriptions of modifications of the structure, but then you're saying there's other things you can't change structurally, and it's help for us to to see that in a drawing and understand what the what the limitations there are. So um you know, can that that first tread going down, can that move back and
027give you longer run? No, it's right on that beam. They start the stairs at at the one beam and then there's another beam and so you have to make be able to get the clearance underneath that other beam. So we don't we don't see that on the set. We don't we don't that we don't have you know but the structural condition you can modify um it makes it difficult for us to review it. What you're saying is that there's limit there are things in the way that prevent you from modifying it but we don't have that you know information. Well, I thought I was just supposed to show how it would be built proposed and you know what? So, um if you got to go for that that uh Michigan rehabilitation code chapter 4 that
028you're that you're working within the limitations of the space, you can't modify any further for structural reasons. We'd want to know what those are. Um, if it would make a a difference to the board, I think our clients would uh be willing to have this matter tabled today and um submit pictures and documentation for you if that if that may sway the board's decision. Yeah, I think that would be maybe the best use of investigation time wise to to do that. um that way you can come back and represent that further. But um I mean there is an exception there that you know I'm curious about that cuz looking at the R2 exception in the code doesn't talk about how it falls into R2 use. You know that's to me is the commentary portion of
029that. Um, everyone living there, it's just 35 people living in the house you're saying and then all 35 are probably familiar with the stairway. Maybe, you know, guests wouldn't be familiar with it depending how often they come over. But that the rise and run of the stairway at 7 and4 and uh 10 and 3/4 long. It's pretty close to a normal residential stair, you know. So, it's not like it's a Well, that's a question not to interrupt, but I'm interrupting. So what is the actual dimension of the tread? Because the the the code definition is from nosing edge to nosing edge. So is that 10 and 3/4 of an inch or is it 10 in? 10. It's 10 in. Yeah. The is is um 10 and 3/4. So it's a full inch short. It is.
030But it also it also is sort of weird how they mention it that they they say that the flat part of the tread is supposed to be 11 in. And so they don't say that they don't it's like it goes around sorts of vague about what that means. So we're 10 and 3/4. That's how much flat. Yeah. So your your tread end knows you're 10 and 3/4. Not just not not just your tread. Yeah. Right. I mean there's hardly anybody ever has 11 and 3/4. Nobody does that. Well, you 11 I think they're looking for the 11 as being the horizontal piece. When you go to 11, you don't need to have a nosing past that. If you're less than that, you need to have a nosying past that. Right. Exactly. Exactly. So, you don't
031have the 11. So, um so basically it's it's the same thing. It's it's basically a quarter of an inch. And it I mean the stairs right now are crazy steep and they have steel nosings on them that have completely worn down so they're super um smooth. So people these guys are like falling down there. They have been forever. Is the building sprinkler? No, it is it is have alarms that are a smoke and heat detection and pulse stations monitored alarm system. It basically is fireproof. There's nothing in it except for like drapes or furnishings. That is interesting because of the application. You talk about it being a 3A type of construction and non-combustible would be a type two construction. So I find unless there's wood joist somewhere but or the wood, you know, except for
032like trim around. Yeah. That would be structural. Yeah. Yeah. So So it's solid concrete. It's crazy. Yeah. So you maybe maybe have a better construction type than 3A. You know 3A would mean fire rated walls and and combustible construction. So yeah, the only thing over anything is plaster which is also like non-combustible. So yeah. Yeah. So that has a potential value fire resistance. So when you just looking at the um I guess it's the basement plan. If you were to take off two risers and have a landing at the bottom and turn the stair one more time, would that be able would would you be able to make the geometry work that way? I think this is what he's saying. Put a landing here and then put two steps there. Uh, and then the question
033is, do you really need do you really need the stair to discharge both ways? Well, the the reason is there's no way to get in that room now. There's that wall. it went. I'd have to show you, but um basically they that that's going to be the way to get into um that what's it called in here? Um utility room or no, right? Yeah. If they cut this back to here, that be the work, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. Something here. You turn the wall like this and close that off. Yeah. And that's why I keep asking whether the stair has to be sorry whether the stair has to be enclosed or not. Yeah. Well, the the one one reason is they sort of want to be able to close that room [Applause] off doors there
034because of the noise. one for one reason, but um it they wanted they wanted to be able to go come this entire time. You go down the stairs and it's open to the whole basement. And the idea was to be able to um close off the door to the basement since that's where all the loud things happen. But you only need one door then like at the top. Well, there is there is a door at the top, but believe I mean it it's not the best for Well, I guess where I'm going with this is if the if the stair doesn't have to be a fire rated stair and you know configured the way you're showing it and let's just say it was a communicating stair and I guess this is also for the building
035department. Will that would that help you with your geometry if you come down to the bottom of the stair and instead of having the landing the way you have it, you cut back two steps, make a right angle turn to the bottom. I'm not I'm not totally sure because one of the issues with where it is, I'd have to do that in 3D. I do the whole thing's in 3D in the computer. Um the issue is where that landing is. the first landing. You go down to a landing and then you take a left. Um so that's the that right there that spot is the trickiest in this whole thing about the um the headroom. So if you continue down um there's a huge beam that's that runs like on this up and down the
036page next to the stairs to the right of the stairs and that's one of the main beams. So, I would have to see if the steps if you go down to a landing at the bottom, very bottom of this and then you add two more steps, I'd have to see if there's enough headroom to do that. So, I I appreciate the suggestion. If we can have a determination that this can be a communicating stair, again, if this were tabled, I think we could go back and examine that as an option. I would advocate for that because I think that's going to help you a lot. Not only in terms of functionality, but being able to meet the code the way you want to. And I think it's it's laudable that you're trying to make this
037work better, especially, you know, given how the space is being used and and the fact that even though the building is fireproof that it's not sprinklered, but you know, there's another way, a safer way up and down from those levels. And again, I I don't want to take this too far, but I do think that you're going to have a problem with those handrails at the very bottom. and the intermediate handrail because you're going around a winder that's going up 8 in inches for Yeah. So all of that is to say that I I personally I think there's maybe another solution there and it would be through not having to treat that as a fire rated enclosure. Okay. Okay. What is the ceiling height downstairs? It looks like the floor is only about a foot
038thick which means you have about an 8'8 in ceiling height down there. It's well it depends um to the to yeah for nine it's it's about 9 ft where there's no beams but the beams come down like um 16 or 18 in. So if you did that depending on where you are like this right angles they have they have it here. Yeah. Could putting in a winder help like breaking that landing into three steps that that would Yeah, that I didn't think that that was going to Yeah. So the winders have minimum dimensions too. 6 in around the corner. It's I think there are other other configurations. If there was a way to do it without winders, it would be safer, right? Impression on it. Yeah. Well, since it's not a fire, if it's not
039counted as a fire, going to a winder would help pull that stair back, giving your giving you your 12 in P or 10in pass for Andre. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure there other configurations uh should work there. Okay. So, any other discussion? You have a motion to table. um I guess clarity that they've wanted to table it right given what has been discussed um I think we can come back and provide additional information that will give us a better chance to either develop a compliance stare or provide adequate basis for the board to make a decision on whether what we've proposed is adequate. Okay. Motion motion to table. So if you table, you lay it on the table and then you need a motion take it off the table at some future meeting. If you want
040to postpone it to certain, you can say, I move we postpone to the April 17th meeting or May something meeting. So if you want to table it, which means just shelving it without a date, that's the way to do it. If you want to postpone it to a date certain, you can do that as well. Whatever the the body wants. Well, I mean, will you be ready by the next meeting to have your answer initiate the April 17th meeting in April 17th? That is your next meeting date. Okay. So, and I would just ask procedurally at what date would we have to turn in the information to you wanted two weeks ahead of time. So, this April 17th meeting is going very difficult. I was just saying give them 60 days and that that could
041happen when you got it gives you some time to develop stuff. Well, but we're going to run out of time for being able to build it is the problem. Yeah. He's going to need time to also put the packet together. So you need the material like a week in advance and get it distributed and things like that. So just something to think about the lead time into that whatever meeting you generally want. Okay. We'll work with Miss Harvey to determine the appropriate lead time and um make sure that we can submit by that date either by the April or the May meeting. What is your deadline for construction or is there a deadline for us? The deadline relates to construction in that the tenants move out on May 5th and they move back in on
042April or August 17th. Yeah. And we got to build that in another time. Yeah. Um and the we are moving structural and steel interior. We're building a new 22 foot um concrete block wall. Things like that that it's much easier to do it when the young men aren't in the building. I've proposed to give table for 60 days. That would give them maybe a week or two to get stuff on then week or two for them to process it cuz we set to a certain meeting date and they don't meet it then what happens? Yeah. No, I think we just put on the shelf and leave it on the shelf and then when they're ready to come back they're the date that I catch that was May 15th is the next meeting for the May
043date. So, so April 17th, that's six weeks. Is that what that is? April, May. So, we can table it for, you know, I'm sorry. Are you guys going to be ready in April? Is that what you're going to do? So, there's no reason to table this to May. Um, the I believe that we can have the materials to the building department one at least one week prior to that meeting. If there's next week, I'm sorry. That would be next week. Then you have to be first week in April. Well, if you're going to meet April 14th, this isn't that much work. So, you're suggest you postpone it until May 15th. If you're happy to be done by April, submit it. Always add it to that April meeting if need be, but thank you for that
044suggestion. Yeah. All right. So, a motion to table to the May 15th BBA meeting. Second. Oh, second. Those in favor I meeting. Huh? Second that. I thought he said second. That's why I didn't say that's okay. Okay. Thank you for your time today, John. So, Mr. In the event that I may not be here, what what I was saying was that if they end the stair here and they continue it around the corner like this. Yeah. Which section gives you two wide motion to resourc. Oh, sorry. Move to adjurnn. A second. Those in favor? I I journed at 2:10.