My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC WORKSESSION 10042005
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Work Session
>
2005
>
CC WORKSESSION 10042005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2016 9:37:13 AM
Creation date
7/19/2016 9:28:14 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Memorandum <br />Date: September 16 <br />To: Kim Moore -Sykes <br />From: Greg Schmit <br />Subject: Basement egress window area well setbacks <br />I have not been considering the area well as an encroachment into the side yard setback <br />areas for the following reasons. <br />• Egress windows, of a specific minimum size, are a life -safety requirement of the <br />building code, when finishing habitable space in a basement. When these <br />windows are below finished grade, they require a specific minimum size area well <br />in order to provide for occupant egress and firefighter ingress. It is generally <br />accepted in code administration that a specific life- safety code requirement should <br />take precedence over a general zoning code requirement. Zoning setback <br />requirements are generally not based on life -safety issues. <br />• Structures are prohibited in the setback areas, however retaining walls are <br />specifically exempted from the definition of structures. Reference St. Anthony <br />Zoning Ord. 1605.01, Subd.72. I feel that an area well more closely matches the <br />definition of a retaining wall than that of a structure. <br />• 1605.01 Subd. 17 states that setback distances are measured to "the building," not <br />to the overhangs, projections, etc. I don't consider the area well as being" the <br />building. " <br />• 1605.01 Subd. 84 states that measurement is to the "principal building." <br />• There is an extensive list of allowable encroachments into yards in section <br />1650.03, paragraphs (a) thru (h). I don't believe that when this ordinance was <br />authored, area wells of this size, (3'x 3' minimurn), were in common use, or even <br />contemplated. If they had been, presumably they would have been included as an <br />exception. <br />• It is feeling of the code community that providing for the safety of the building's <br />occupants is the primary consideration. People will continue to finish, and <br />inhabit, basements. I would rather have them do this work with a valid building <br />permit, and a compliant egress window, than have them avoid the permitting <br />process due to overly restrictive zoning requirements. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.