07-09-97 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

in~NU~res CITY COUNCIL J[TLY 9, 1997 The Administrator pointed o~it th~t there hlve been some dangerous situations wl~icl~ have arisen in Yhe City From buildings which were built in the 1960's. One exam~~le is the Grand Pre' fire. The Administrator a~ain pointed out YhTC Che Builciing Official I~as no authority to do ~inything difi'~erent th~n atlminister the code. Joe Roshar, L,DS, poinled out YhaY other cities m11<e exce~tions to tax laws, ete. to attract busii~esses and ~eople to their ciCies. Roshar stated thaC, therefore, it bothers him t~h~t the conunent~ has been made thlt enforcement of Section 1306 is a blacl< or whiCe situaCion. Roshv~ stated that Ylie church is a gootl i~~ember oCCl~e community, pointing out the wori< members did recently on a neighborhood landsca~ing project. Roshar statetl th~t no matt'er whaT the outcomc is of this decision, the chureh will continue to be good citizens. Roshar l'~elt that iiiterpretin~ Section 1306 did not~ need to be as blacl< and white as htis been indicated. Rosl~ar felt t6at ~iven the low ceilin~s et the church, t~he sprinl<ler system coulci be a h~zard, antl there are other things which can be done to improve public safety. F1hey st~ted that if the Council disagrees with Section 1306, Yhen it should be repealed. F~hey a~reed ther~ was some merit to the issues raised by the church. I-Iowever, [he City Co~mcil doe;s no[ have t~he auti~~rity to change sC1te law. "rhe option that is av~ilable is to phase in Che retrofitting ofYhe existing buildin~_ Ano[I~er o~~tion would be for the church to r2ise these issues with the Le~islature and convince tl~em Co chan~e state law. Given there is no process to ~rant a v~riance to the State E3uildin~ Cotle, tlle Council has no choice but to enf'orce the Code. Archibald s~ig~est~d tl~at delayin~ the installation of Phe sprinl<ler system was ~ variance in itselF. Nlorei~n pointed out that the Biiildin~ Code does not establish a timeCable Por retrol~ittin~ an existing building. The Code j~ist says Yhat the retrolitting must be clone. Archibald su~~ested a 30 year delay for the retrotit. Fal~ey st~ated that h~ has not heard anythin~ to convinc~ him that Section U06 shoultl be r~pe~led. I~~hey ~Iso indic~ted th~t he was noC prepared to disa~ree with the [3uildin~ OfPicial's opinion on the State I3uilding Code. Alsop sug~es¢ed thsit~ the Co~incil cauld ~imend thc detinition of occupancy. Pe<tersen ~~oinCed out thaf people requesting variances have a nRrrow view of the issue, ~i~d the Counci( must~ Yal<e a much broader view. Once a 7