Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 Building Commission Minutes & Agendas Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting January 17, 2012 3:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 17, 2012 in the 1st Floor Mayor's Conference Room, City Hall, 150 Dexter Court, Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 1st Floor Mayor's Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Court, Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Roll call 3. Distribute 2012 code books 4. Adjournment r ., Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting February 7, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in the 2" Floor South Conference Room, City Hall, 150 Dexter Court, Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 2nd Floor South Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Court, Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Commence Review of the 2012 Int. Residential Code 5. Adjournment r BUILDING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, February 7,2012,2:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Silva, Dave Teas, Dave Ryan, Dick Sinnet and Chuck Kellenberger MEMBERS ABSENT: Pat Hudgens and Tom Lohbauer. STAFF PRESENT: Raoul Johnston; Marc Mylott; Gary Line, Dave Decker, Scott Heinrich EFD and Sandra Kolba. VISITORS: Dan Olsem, Crown Community Developers; David Faganel, Faganel Builders;Jason Boyer,Joe Bajko, Karen VanDeDrink, Deon Cross, Pulte Homes; Tom Curran, West Point Builders; Mark Stefani, Kings Court Builders; Brad Niemet, Dana Orwing, Dave Lawlor, Town &Country Homes; Rob Thornton, Greg Overstreet, Overstreet Builders;Jamie Pease, Mark Taft, Toll Brothers; Mary Krasner,Wyndam Deerpoint; and Jeff Meyer, Scott Nielsen, William Ryan Homes. CALL TO ORDER: Since the Chairperson, Pat Hudgens, was absent, a motion was made by Steve Silva and seconded by Chuck Kellenberger to appoint Dick Sinnett as the Chairperson for this meeting, the motion passed unanimously. The meeting was called to order by Dick Sinnett at 2:05 p.m., in the 2nd Floor South Tower Conference Room. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the May 9, 2011, meeting was presented. A motion was made by Chuck Kellenberger and seconded by Dave Ryan to approve the minutes and the minutes of that meeting were unanimously approved. r 1 NEW BUSINESS: Raoul indicated that he knew most of the people at the meeting but for those he did not, he introduced himself. He indicated that the meeting was called to get the 2012 codes reviewed for adoption. Raoul distributed to the members of the Commission as well as the visitors a schedule of free classes available for the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code. He indicated that anyone, including the builders, could and should attend and that it would be very beneficial for all. He indicated that he and the city inspectors will all be taking the class. He reminded all that the State Energy Code will be adopted on June 30, 2012, and that all new residential construction must abide by the code. Builder Mark Stefani indicated that he tried to register for the classes only to find out that the classes are booked through April. COMMENCE REVIEW OF THE 2012 INT. RESIDENTIAL CODE: Section R302.1 Exterior Walls: Raoul said that the Commission had discussed this Section thoroughly during the 2009 Code discussion for all types of houses. At that time, the Commission came to the consensus to either provide sprinklers as required by code or provide additional safeguards within single family dwellings and townhouses. When TJIs are used, they should be 16" centers, not 19.2", in order to provide additional time before floor collapse. At that time, all seemed to be satisfied. Staff wants to maintain sprinklers but would be willing to make a trade off in lieu of the sprinklers. Steve Silva asked if there were any changes to the code from 2009 to 2012 and Raoul indicated that it was the same. Dave Decker said that some things had changed, i.e., Section 501.3 regarding floors. Raoul said that if the builders used TJIs or web trusses, there would be a requirement for the underside to be protected. Chuck Kellenberger asked if the Fire Department agreed with this and Raoul indicated that they did. Dave Decker said that this might force the builders to go with nominal if not drywall or sprinklers. Dan Olsem said that he hoped that the Commission would continue to agree not to require sprinklers as it would add 5% to the cost. Dick Shiflett said that the water service to the current developments isn't sufficient anyway. Raoul asked Scott Heinrich of the Fire Department if he had any opinion and he indicated that he had none at this time. One of the builders asked if TJIs were required as it would add a substantial cost to the house. Raoul indicated that it would ultimately be the decision of the City Council, that the Commission just gets information to the City Council for their determination. Staff makes recommendations to the Commission which weighs them out during open meetings and then makes its final 2 recommendations for final approval by the City Council. Those recommendations then goes to the legal department and then to the City Council for its review and its vote to adopt or make changes prior to adoption. One builder said that adding drywall to TJIs is very expensive and may require a redesign of the plan to go back to nominal lumber. Another wondered if the addition of drywall would be cheaper than the installation of sprinklers and it was the consensus that it was not. It was questioned how drywall could be put on the underside of TJIs since there are so many openings. One builder thought that they would have to go conventional rather than TJI. The cost of sprinklers would add $9,000 to $15,000 to the cost of a home. It was agreed that the timing was bad due to the market conditions. One builder said that, when offered a sprinkler system as an option to his customers, they don't want them; he offers but has had no takers. It was indicated that, from city surveys regarding fires and fatalities, that was dependent upon the age of the home. The products used in new homes provide better fire protection than the materials used in older homes. Dick Sinnett asked if TJIs were rated for fire resistance and Steve Silva indicated that they are not. Again, it was brought up that the water service was not sufficient for sprinklers. Steve Silva suggested that basements only be sprinklered and Raoul said that, even though all of the sprinkler heads do not go off at the same time, the service still would be a problem. The water service would have to be at least 1-1/4" and all are now 1" and, with the current water service, the sprinklers would work only marginally. Raoul indicated that, with any new development projects brought to the city, the requirement would bel- 1/2" service to provide for sprinklers. He reminded the builders that they must plan for sprinklers in the future. Chuck said that the costs of$10,000 to $15,000 were high. Fox Valley Fire had provided estimates last year and those costs are probably higher now. His suggestion was to opt out on the sprinkler requirement. Dick Sinnett agreed. He said that this is the first time that the Commission has said no to something in the code. Raoul agreed that the city always tries to promote safety but still be economical. Dave Decker said that is why the city is suggesting the trade off of putting drywall on the bottom of the floors. A builder indicated that it would be an added cost to homeowners down the road when they go to remodel their basements and they have to rip off the drywall to do their work. Another builder indicated that the requirement of smoke alarms gives people a 99.5% chance to survive a fire and that new homes have a less chance of a fire than a home that is 10+ years old. Another builder asked about using better rdraft stopping instead of drywall but it was agreed that foam does not work 3 well around PVC piping. The builder said that he meant fire stop rather than draft stop. Scott Heinrich (Fire Department) agreed that TJI burns quicker and, although residents should have enough time to get out of the house during a fire, the firefighters are going into a burning house. He indicated that the Fire Department would like to see sprinklers in all new homes but understood the cost problems involved. Chuck Kellenberger indicated that, due to the fact that two Commission members were not present, this topic should be tabled even though all of the builders were here at this meeting. Marc said that the City Council will not strike the requirement without coming up with some other viable options. He asked the builders if the question was whether drywall should be used on the underside of TJIs. Raoul indicated that the City Council will get public opinion before making its decisions. The job of the City Council is to promote safety and, unfortunately, a price tag comes with safety. The builders indicated that they had hoped that things would be better now economically than it was in 2009 but now things are actually worse. They asked the Commission to keep things as they are now and change it down the road when things are economically better. They were concerned that, by adding more money to the cost of the house, the housing market will be more challenging. One builder asked what other municipalities are doing with this code and Raoul said that he has canvassed other communities and at least half of them are adopting the code and the other half are modifying the code. Marc asked if the builders could offer any other creative solutions. One builder indicated that most fires are in the mechanical rooms in basement and wondered if a single sprinkler head could be put in that room next to the furnace. Some builders thought that would be cheaper than drywalling. Another suggested a dry chemical system. One builder suggested putting the TJIs even closer together than 16" centers. Marc agreed that, since two members of the Commission were missing, this discussion should be tabled until the next meeting but did add that, in his discussion with Fire Chief Fahy, the Chief expressed concern about the TJI requirement. Scott Heinrich said that he would present the suggestions to the Chief. Dick Sinnett asked if a member would like to propose a motion to table this discussion to the next meeting. Steve Silva made the motion which was seconded by Dave Ryan. rk 4 Raoul Johnston told the builders that the next scheduled meeting would be on Tuesday, February 21st, at 2:00 p.m., in either this conference room or the first floor conference room. A builder, on behalf of all of the builders present, indicated that he appreciated the opportunity to come to the meetings and allow their feedback. Dan Olsem presented to Raoul Johnston a new sprinkler proposal that he had gotten for the Commission to take into consideration. Section R302.2 Townhouses: Raoul indicated that this Section discussed firewalls between townhomes. During the 2009 code discussions last year, the Commission agreed to maintain a 2-hour separation. Therefore, Raoul indicated that Staff suggests that this 2-hour separation be amended into the code. Dave Decker said that, even if the sprinkler code was adopted, with all of the foreclosures where the water eventually gets shut off, that would affect the sprinklers. With the 2-hour separation protection, the neighboring home would still have some additional protection from a neighboring burning home. Dick Sinnett said that this recommendation was even better than the 1-hour which is currently written into the code. Steve Silva agreed that there was no reason to change the previous recommendations and all agreed to leave the 2- hour separation requirement as was discussed during 2009 discussions. Section R302.3 Two-Family Dwellings: Raoul said that this Section discussed separation for duplexes. In the 2009 discussions, it was agreed to eliminate Exception 2. After a brief discussion, it was agreed that there was no reason to change the previous recommendations and all agreed to leave it as was discussed during 2009 discussions. Section R302.4 Dwelling Unit Rated Penetrations: Raoul indicated that this Section discussed rated penetrations. He said that the Commission should make sure to stay in line with the ratings on the wall. After a brief discussion, it was agreed that there was no reason to change the previous recommendations and all agreed to leave it as was discussed during 2009 discussions. Tables R302.1(1) Exterior Walls and R302.1(2) Exterior Walls - Dwellings with Fire Sprinklers Raoul indicated that the tables will be modified accordingly with the discussions on townhouses and duplexes. All agreed. Section R305.1 Minimum Height and Section R305.1.1 Basements: Raoul indicated that these sections discussed ceiling heights in basements. He indicated that all basements must have no less than 7' ceilings. However, he did indicate that there was a problem with roughed in bathrooms in basements insofar as the ductwork sometimes prevents the required ceiling heights in the bathrooms. Raoul indicated that the city did amend the ceiling heights in toilet 5 rooms (toilet and sink) could have a ceiling height of 6'8" but that full bathrooms (toilet, sink, tub and/or shower) must have a ceiling height of 7'. Raoul asked the builders to be aware of where the builders' mechanical subcontractors are putting the ductwork so as that there is no ductwork above the roughed-in bathrooms. Chuck Kellenberger said that this should go back to the architect and that the builders should take the initiative to be sure. Raoul said that the city has no requirement for duct drawings so, during plan review, they do not know where the ductwork will be. All agreed. Section R309.5 Fire Sprinklers: Raoul indicated that this code is regarding sprinklers in an attached private garage. It was agreed that this matter should be discussed with the tabled items at the next meeting. Section R313- Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems: It was agreed that this Section should also be discussed with the tabled items at the next meeting. Section R314 - Smoke Alarms: Raoul indicated that there were minor changes in the interconnection and power source but, otherwise no changes regarding installation. All agreed that this Section was okay. Section R315 - Carbon Monoxide Alarms: As was the smoke alarm code, there were minor changes in the connection/power but no changes in the installation. Gary Line asked if this Section was more restrictive than the State law and both Raoul and Dave Decker indicated that it was not. Dave Decker said his only question was the location as the code states "in the vicinity of" which can be open to wide interpretation. The rule of thumb is that the CO alarm should be within 15 feet of a bedroom,however Dave thought it would be nice if the code read that it should be within 15 feet of a bedroom door. Dave Teas wondered if that could become a liability issue. Marc responded that code is mandatory, not a guideline. Dave Decker said he doesn't like it when a code is open for discussion and that"code is code." He recommended that this Section be amended to read 15 feet or less of a bedroom. A builder asked if Carbon Monoxide Alarms need to be interconnected and Gary responded that it does not appear to be in the code. It was unclear, after discussion on this matter, if a decision was made by the Commission. Therefore, this issue will be revisited at the next meeting. Section R319.1 Address Numbers (revise to 5" high numbers, coordinated with IPMC): Raoul indicated that the code requires 4" high numbers but that, per the Commission's discussions last year, it was agreed that the address number height should be at 5". All agreed. r 6 Section 501.3 Fire Protection of Floors: It was agreed that this Section should also be discussed with the tabled items at the next meeting. Section 602.7 Headers: Although this Section was not on the list of items for the Commission to look at, Raoul felt that it should be addressed. He went on to say that there is a provision in the code for a single member header. He directed the Commission members to a table on page 161 and a diagram on page 162. Raoul indicated that a minimum size of 2x8 is reasonable. He gave an example of a homeowner who had a walk-out basement where the back wall was framed with 2x6s rather than 2x4s. The homeowner complained that there was no header above the window and that he tried to put drapes up and found a gap between the backside of the drywall and the header and felt that he got cheated. Raoul said he had no problem with using double headers and the builders can use 2x6s instead of 2x8s or 2x10s. Raoul suggested that the 2x8s should be amended out. Dave Decker responded that the requirements in the code do not make sense. Steve Silva said that he understood Raoul's point as, structurally, it makes sense. Dave Decker asked the builders if they used single headers on bearing walls and one builder responded that due to the state of lumber and energy, the builders are using single headers more often on exterior walls. It was suggested that this issue be tabled so that Steve Silva could look at the issue from an engineer's point of view and to take into consideration the energy code. Steve said that the openings that the Commission is talking about are small. Some builders indicated that they generally use the double header on single family homes and that adds more insulation to cover the energy code. Dave said that, if in the code, builders will use single headers. Motion was made by Dave Teas to table this item so that Steve Silva could take a look at it; the motion was seconded by Steve Silva; all agreed. This item was tabled until the next meeting. Sections R602.10 Wall Bracing and R602.12.2.1 Minimum Length of Wall Without Openings: Raoul indicated that, for the most part, these Sections were rewritten to make them more understandable. Raoul passed out a couple of handouts to the Commission members for their review and suggested that these issues be discussed at the next meeting. The handouts will make it easier for the members to compare the 2009 code to the 2012 code. Chuck Kellenberger made a motion to table this item until the next meeting;Steve Silva seconded the motion; all agreed. Chapter 11 - Energy Code: Raoul indicated that it was staff's perspective and ultimate recommendation to the Commission that, since the city will be adopting the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code, this chapter should be deleted in its entirety and just use the new Energy Code. All agreed. 7 r ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Chuck Kellenberger to adjourn the meeting at 3:35 p.m., and seconded by Dave Ryan. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, /I I. ► aL :andra L. Kolba Acting Secretary Date: W g/' (� r r 8 Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting February 21, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday,February 21, 2012 in the 1st Floor South Conference Room, City Hall, 150 Dexter Court, Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 1st Floor South Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Court, Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Continue Review of the 2012 Int. Residential Code 5. Adjournment BUILDING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, February 21,2012,2:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Hudgens, Steve Silva, Dave Teas, Dave Ryan, Dick Sinnett, Chuck Kellenberger and Tom Lohbauer. MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Raoul Johnston; Marc Mylott; Gary Line, Dave Decker, Steve Bone,John Wangles EFD, Chief John Fahy EFD, Scott Heinrich EFD and Sandra Kolba. VISITORS: Dan Olsem, Crown Community Developers;Jason Boyer,Joe Bajko, Karen VanDeDrink, Deon Cross, Pulte Homes; Pat Curran, West Point Builders; Mark Stefani, Kings Court Builders;Jamie Pease, Toll Brothers; Mary Krasner, Wyndam Deerpoint; and Steve Tag, Weyerhaueuser. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Pat Hudgens at 2:03 p.m., in the 1st Floor South Tower Conference Room. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the February 7, 2012, meeting were presented. A motion was made by Chuck Kellenberger and seconded by Steve Silva and the minutes of that meeting were unanimously approved. NEW BUSINESS: Pat Hudgens reminded the Commission members that they needed to take the Open Meeting Test and get the results to Raoul Johnston at their earliest convenience. Raoul indicated that he would be responsible for getting the certifications to the City Clerk once he receives them. 1 CONTINUE REVIEW OF THE 2012 INT. RESIDENTIAL CODE: Section R302.1 Exterior Walls; Section 309.5 Fire Sprinklers; Section R313 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems; and Section 501.3 Fire Protection of Floors: In order to continue the discussion on the fire sprinkler issues, a motion was made by Dick Sinnett to remove the discussion from the table and Tom Lohbauer seconded the motion; all approved. Pat Hudgens asked Raoul to reiterate those portions of the last meeting since Pat wasn't there; Raoul briefed the Commission about the last meeting's discussions. He indicated that, after the last meeting, staff met with the fire department personnel and they came to an agreement as to what the city staff would propose and recommend to the Commission. There would be three options as follows: 1) If TJIs are used in the basement, three to five sprinkler heads would be required to be installed in the basement; the sprinkler heads would be tied into the domestic water system to prevent back flow requirement, promote water flow with no dead ends and prevent bacterial growth due to dead ends. r 2) If TJIs are used but the builders do not want to install the fire sprinkler system in the basement, the bottom of the TJIs would be required to be covered with 1/2" drywall. 3) If TJIs are not used and no fire sprinklers installed, then dimensional lumber would be required. Marc introduced Fire Chief John Fahy to the guests and thanked the Chief for coming to this meeting. Marc indicated that he had had conversations with the Chief regarding TJIs and he was told that, even if the spacing of the TJIs were closer together, it doesn't help in a fire situation. Marc asked the Chief if he would like to add any information. Chief Fahy indicated that he has worked in the Fire Department in Elgin for 25 years and, as a matter of fact, has built 25 homes himself, so he feels he has similar knowledge and background as do the builders present. He reiterated the TJI discussion with Marc and said that, by adding more bulk, it then becomes a deflection issue as TJIs burn very fast since they are not a solid mass. He indicated that they had come up with a solution with offering the three options of which builders can choose to use to use. The city presently has 7,000 to 8,000 platted properties ready for construction. Those homes will need to 2 follow one of the three options. Any newly platted properties and developments would have to follow the full 2012 code with fully sprinklered homes and those developments would be provided with adequate 1-1/4" or 1- 1/2" water service lines to handle the fire sprinkler systems. From a urban planning prospective, Marc indicated that this will help prevent the "leap frog" development. This will help to keep people interested in building in currently platted areas rather than starting a new development. Pat asked if there would be any issues with insurance companies. One builder had a letter from Pekin Insurance Company indicating that they would not insure a builder who would be installing residential sprinkler systems due to the concerns of installation and exposure (if a sprinkler would go off incorrectly). Pat indicated that the Commission would take the letter under advisement but believed that the letter was vague and felt that a little investigation with other insurance carriers would be worthwhile. Pat volunteered to do the research. Dick Sinnett felt that the insurance companies are probably concerned about leakage so they are cautious about the idea. However, water lines can leak too. Raoul reminded everyone that the sprinklers would be tied into the domestic lines which are copper lines, not plastic. Dick Sinnett indicated that the insurance companies eventually better get used to the idea that homes are going to have sprinklers as it is written in the International Residential Code. Tom Lohbauer wondered why the sprinklers would be placed only in basements and not on the first or second floors and Marc answered that those upper levels will have drywall on the bottom of the floor joists/TJIs. A concern was raised whether domestic water lines will be substantial to cover the sprinklers in the basement and Chief Fahy indicated that a 1" supply line should cover the basement. One sprinkler head will cover 400 square feet. Dave Decker said that the domestic service is a looped system. Marc suggested that one of the Commission members might want to talk to Kyla Jacobsen in the Water Department regarding whether the 1" domestic water service would work with four sprinkler heads and without backflow problems. Pat Hudgens asked what the additional fees would be for the larger meters and it was discussed that the fees are somewhere around $50 to $90 more per month on a water bill. Raoul indicated that he would check the costs of the fees. Dick Sinnett said that the city has, occasionally in the past, reduced charges on larger taps on big buildings and maybe the city would be willing to do the same for the larger residential taps. 3 Steve Silva was concerned about a possible health issue with combining the sprinkler system with the water service. He believes that this should be looked at by an engineer to be sure that the city's water system is adequately protected. Marc asked who the plumbing expert was in the room and Dave Teas indicated that he was the plumbing representative on the Building Commission. Marc asked Dave if he also would be willing to work along with Raoul with the water department to iron out these concerns. Dave Teas wondered where, within a home, do most fires occur and Chief Fahy responded that most fires are in garages and kitchens and that very few fires are actually in mechanical rooms. Chief Fahy added that, within the Plumbing Code, sprinkler heads are considered another fixture. One of the builders wondered, if most fires are not in basements, how sprinklers in the basement will accomplish anything and wondered if it warranted the cost and Chief Fahy answered that firefighter and human life safety is worth the cost. Chief Fahy said that this was the compromise that they came up with and, if one tragedy is prevented, it is worth the cost. The builder indicated that, under these circumstances, they might have to find other communities in which to build. Dick Sinnett said he understood what the builders were saying but believed that most communities are soon going to adopt the 2012 code. Tom Lohbauer indicated that Hoffman Estates and Dundee both require sprinklers now. Raoul indicated that, at a Northwest BOCA meeting he recently attended, he was told that there are at least 60+ communities that require full sprinklers and that number will just be going up in the future. Marc indicated to the builders that he appreciated their opinions. Pat indicated that the Commission will take all the concerns into consideration- installation costs, water meter costs, health issues, insurance companies, etc. - and, after further research, will come back to the Commission before making a final decision. Pat thanked the builders for coming and expressing their opinions and indicated to them that the fire sprinkler discussion is complete and the Commission will now be continuing other discussion and the builders were welcome to continue to stay and listen or leave. Section R315 - Carbon Monoxide Alarms: The question was whether the phrase "vicinity of bedrooms" should be changed to "within 15 feet of a bedroom," since the word "vicinity" is open for interpretation. Dave believed that both the Carbon Monoxide Alarms and Smoke Alarms should match in the 4 code at 15 feet of a bedroom. Pat Hudgens asked if there was a quality requirement for both Carbon Monoxide Alarms and Smoke Alarms and Dave responded that they must be listed. He also indicated that Smoke Alarms should be replaced every ten years while Carbon Monoxide Alarms should be replaced every five years. Pat indicated that some Carbon Monoxide Alarms are actually cumulative and, over time, small amounts of carbon monoxide may build up until, eventually, the alarm goes off as if there is a sudden carbon monoxide alert. Tom Lohbauer asked if there is a definitive location for Carbon Monoxide Alarms,high or low? Chief Fahy said that it depended upon manufacturers' recommendations. After discussion, it was agreed by all of the Commission members that the wording should read "within 15 feet of a bedroom." R602.7- Headers: A motion was made by Tom Lohbauer to remove the discussion on this Section from the table. The motion was seconded by Chuck Kellenberger and all agreed. Raoul briefed Pat Hudgens on the discussion from the last meeting. Pat asked Steve Silva if he had formed an opinion since the last meeting and Steve indicated that he did not have a chance to take a close look at this Section. He did agree that single headers were good for insulation purposes. Dave Ryan said that, based on an engineer's standpoint, he did not see any problem with the single headers. Gary Line suggested that maybe additional backing at the corners might be an alternative to requiring double headers. Steve Silva asked about an inside face requirement but Dave Decker said that it was better on the outside for insulation and moisture purposes. Dave added that the code should remain as single headers and see who does it and who doesn't. It was agreed by all of the Commission members to leave the code as is with the requirement for single headers. Sections 602.10 -Wall Bracing and 602.12.2.1 - Minimum Length of Wall Without Openings: Steve Silva made a motion to remove this item from table, Tom Lohbauer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Raoul indicated that the Sections were rewritten to be more easily readable and understandable and, in a way, condensed. After brief discussion, it was agreed by the Commission members to leave these Sections as rewritten. Chapter 11 - Energy Code: Raoul reiterated that it was staff's recommendation to completely remove this Chapter from the 2012 International Residential Code insofar as it is covered in its entirety by the State's adoption of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code. After brief discussion, it was agreed by all Commission members to delete this Chapter in its entirety. r 5 r ADJOURNMENT: Prior to adjournment, Pat Hudgens indicated that, hopefully, by the next meeting, the Commission should be able to finalize the residential fire sprinkler issues. Raoul indicated to all that the next meeting date would be Tuesday, March 13, 2012, and that he would send an official Notice of Meeting in the near future. A motion was made by Tom Lohbauer to adjourn the meeting at 3:20 p.m., and seconded by Dick Sinnett. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. Respectf lly submitted, i / � it l.. s�k.I) IA S.n.ra L. Kolba Acting Secretary Date: C 6 Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting March 13, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 13, 2012 in the Pioneer Room at The Centre, 158 Symphony Way, Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting Pioneer Room, The Centre 158 Symphony Way, Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Continue/Conclude Review of the 2012 Int. Residential Code 5. Adjournment r BUILDING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, March 13,2012,2:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Hudgens, Steve Silva, Dave Teas, Dick Sinnett and Tom Lohbauer. MEMBERS ABSENT: Chuck Kellenberger and Dave Ryan. STAFF PRESENT: Raoul Johnston; Marc Mylott; Gary Line, Dave Decker, Steve Bone, Ron Sessions EFD and Sandra Kolba. VISITORS: Dan Olsem, Crown Community Developers; Pat Curran, West Point Builders; and Bob Skidmore, Sho- Deen, Inc. CALL TO ORDER: elk The meeting was called to order by Pat Hudgens at 2:05 p.m., at the Pioneer Room at the Centre of Elgin, 158 Symphony Way, Elgin, IL. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the February 21, 2012, meeting was presented. A motion was made by Tom Lohbauer and seconded by Dave Teas and the minutes of that meeting were unanimously approved. NEW BUSINESS: Pat Hudgens reminded the Commission members that they needed to take the Open Meeting Test and get the results to Raoul Johnston at their earliest convenience. Raoul indicated that he would be responsible for getting the certifications to the City Clerk once he receives them. r 1 r CONTINUE/CONCLUDE REVIEW OF THE 2012 INT. RESIDENTIAL CODE: Pat Hudgens indicated that he had talked to Brent Lundstrom of Lundstrom Insurance Agency, a very reputable and long-standing insurance agency in the City of Elgin, regarding the letter from Pekin Insurance Company which was provided by one of the builders at the last meeting. At first, Pat indicated that Brent was concerned that the liability which would be caused by leaks, etc. may be a reason for insurance companies to want to stay away. However, after Brent checked with some of the big insurance carriers that he represents, he found that all of the companies actually offered credits for homeowners that had sprinkler systems. He indicated he didn't know if that was true for sprinklers in basements only. Brent concluded that he did not see any problems with contractors getting insurance if they installed sprinkler systems. Brent also indicated that the letter from Pekin Insurance Company was very ambiguous and indicated that he didn't take too much stake in that letter. He said that Pekin is just one company within a huge industry. Raoul Johnston also had done some research since the last meeting. Regarding service sizes and water availability fees, he indicated that he had learned that all residential rates for availability fees would be for a 5/8" service even if there rwas a 1-1/2" or 2" service. The fees are the same no matter what size and those fees are already in place per ordinance. As far as meter fees were concerned, those were one time fees although they did have price variances: 5/8" was $250;3/4" was $285; 1" was $340; 1-1/2" was $515. Marc added that the meter size is based on the size of the pipe coming in to the house. Subdivisions with 1" service would require a 1" meter. New subdivisions would require the larger service. Raoul indicated that he did research regarding putting sprinklers on a domestic system. He said that the domestic system could handle 20 sprinkler heads with no backflow if looped. He said that if the sprinkler system was an independent system, then it would need a backflow. Raoul added that sprinkler heads are not considered water supply fixtures so there is no affect on the supply. He reiterated the requirements: 1) looped with no dead ends; 2) no non-potable water connections; 3) 20 sprinkler heads or less; and 4) potable water supplies require quality pipes such as copper. Raoul said that the city proposes that on current projects, copper piping needs to be used. A question arose as to why not use plastic and Pat indicated that there can be leak in the plastic at the welding connections and Dave Teas added that the problem was related to workmanship not the piping. Pat did indicate that, if the sprinkler system was separate, plastic piping can be used and Raoul 2 ("'` agreed but indicated that that system would require a backflow and its own check valve. He added that, in his conversations with Kyla Jacobson from the Water Department, if there was a separate sprinkler system and if a double check valve was used, there would be no need for a RPZ. Pat asked Ron Sessions if he felt that all of the questions had been addressed to his satisfaction and Ron indicated affirmatively. Pat reiterated that all of these changes are for firefighter safety and that if builders wanted to use TJIs or non- dimensional lumber, they would need to sprinkler the basement or put drywall up on the ceilings but, if they use dimensional lumber, they would not have to sprinkle the basement. Ron said that we have to see what is in the next round of code. He thought that it may push heavier and heavier. Raoul said that that is the reason that the code is looked at every three years since they are re-evaluated depending upon how things perform. Marc said that the proposal before staff is whether to approve the recommendations in existing developments but that the new developments will have to follow the new code. The floor was opened for comments by the three developers that had come to the meeting. The first comments were from Bob Skidmore from Sho-Deen Inc. He indicated that his subdivision is the Pingree Creek Subdivision which is a new subdivision, recently annexed but not platted. He wanted to offer a few points: 1) If it is firefighter safety that is the concern, he found research done in the State of Minnesota indicating that there has never been a firefighter death in fighting a fire in a single family home; 2) With these tough economic times, it is already difficult to sell a home. He indicated that the cost to sprinkler a 2,500 to 3,000 sq. ft. home would cost approximately $15,000 and,with that additional cost of which an appraisal does not take into consideration, the house doesn't appraise out and the builder looses buyers; and 3) Some builders, including a couple in attendance, helped pay for the Otter Creek Intercepter. The city paid $10 million, and each builder paid $5 million. There are less than 10 homes built out in that direction. It was this builder's opinion that, with the requirement of sprinklers in any new home built out in the far west developments, the sewer lines will never be used and $20 million will be lost. Dan Olsem was next to express his opinions. He indicated that he has probably built his last development within Elgin. He indicated he is disenchanted with the conclusions he has heard. He asked that the city delay the date of enacting the sprinkler requirement and, instead, continue to do more research. He indicated that he took to heart the Chief's position regarding loss of firefighter 3 life. He quoted some numbers from the U.S Fire Administration regarding loss of life: 87 firefighters died in the United States in 2010, 9 of which were from Illinois; 50 were from heart attack and/or stroke, 16 from crashes, 11 from wildfires, 12 during training procedures, 15 on duty activities, and 22 at a scene of a fire. He asked again that the city continue to do more research before making a final decision. He also mentioned that the Village of Huntley initially enacted the requirement for sprinklers but it has now been repealed. He suggested that we call them to find out why it was repealed. He finished by saying that he agreed a sprinklered house was better but asked if it was really necessary and that, if the City of Elgin decides to require sprinklers, new growth in Elgin will definitely drop. Finally, Pat Curran spoke. He started by saying that he echoes both of the previous builders comments. His development is the farm at Route 47 and Plato Road. He is taking pause about whether to develop it or not. He agreed that the new housing market in Elgin will definitely slow down. He said that the new rule would cause economic hardship to builders. He said that he had 250 to 270 remaining preliminary plats and wondered if those lots will fall into the category of new development even if engineered and preliminary platted. Pat Hudgens thanked the builders for their comments and told them that the Commission members came to this meeting with open minds and had not pre- determined its plans. Marc reiterated to Mr. Curran that all things are taken into consideration- engineering, preliminary plats and zoning. Pat asked Raoul to restate where the City was going with this. Raoul indicated that, at the last meeting, it was indicated that, in platted subdivisions, basements would have to be sprinklered if builders used TJIs or open web trusses unless the basement ceiling was drywalled. Otherwise, neither of those requirements would be necessary if the builders used dimensional lumber. He also indicated that, in new developments not yet platted, those homes would require full sprinklers. The determination of what would be considered new and existing development has yet to be made. Pat said that he would like to have more input from legal prior to making a decision. Steve Silva agreed that this needed more discussion. Dick Sinnett indicated his concern about the cost and wished he had more information from the city regarding developments. Pat asked if it was the consensus of the Commission to move forward on making a decision today. Marc said that there is no hurry or rush and that he would try to draft up some guidelines as to what is considered new developments. Marc said that he considered Sho Deen and Crown as already 4 • platted developments while Pat Curran s development would be considered new. A motion to table the discussion to the next meeting of Tuesday, April 3, 2012, was made by Dick Sinnett, seconded by Dave Teas. All were in favor of tabling the discussion regarding sprinklers to the next meeting. Pat asked that staff put together a fact sheet regarding 1) existing platted homes and 2) new development homes. He also asked that the city contact the Village of Huntley to find out why they repealed their sprinkler code. Ron Sessions also indicated that he would also put together a fact sheet. ADJOURNMENT: Prior to adjournment, Raoul reminded all members to take the Open Meeting Training and to be sure that the certificate of completion is sent to him for transmittal to the City Clerk's office. A motion was made by Dick Sinnett to adjourn the meeting at 3:15 p.m., and seconded by Dave Teas. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, andra L. Kolba Acting Secretary Date: t/. /(5 a r 5 Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting April 3, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 3, 2012 in the 2nd Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 2nd Floor South Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Continue/Conclude Review of the 2012 Int. Residential Code 5. Commence Review of 2012 Int. Building Code 6. Adjournment r eilk Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting April 10, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 10, 2012 in the 2nd Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 2nd Floor South Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Continue/Conclude Review of the 2012 Int. Residential Code 5. Commence Review of 2012 Int. Building Code 6. Public Comments 7. Adjournment r BUILDING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, April 10,2012, 2:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Hudgens, Dave Teas, Dick Sinnett, Tom Lohbauer, Chuck Kellenberger and Dave Ryan MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Silva. STAFF PRESENT: Raoul Johnston, Marc Mylott, Dave Decker, Steve Bone, Chief John Fahy, Ron Sessions EFD and Sandra Kolba. VISITORS: Dan Olsem, Crown Community Developers; Pat Curran, West Point Builders; Bob Skidmore, Sho-Deen, Inc.;Jeff Meyer, William Ryan Homes;John Hall, Jr., John Hall Custom Homes Inc.; Mary Krasner and Rich Guerard, Wyndham Deerpoint Homes; and Pete Stefani and Mark Stefani, King's Court Builders. r CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Pat Hudgens at 2:00 p.m., in the 2nd Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Court, Elgin, IL. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the March 13, 2012, meeting were presented. A motion was made by Dick Sinnett and seconded by Dave Teas and the minutes of that meeting were unanimously approved. NEW BUSINESS: There was no new business discussed at this meeting. r 1 CONTINUE/CONCLUDE REVIEW OF THE 2012 INT. RESIDENTIAL CODE: Pat Hudgens indicated that he had gone on a field trip with Chief Fahy to a couple of the recent fires Elgin experienced and found it to be a good learning experience. Raoul passed out to the Commission members a proposal for consideration. For Townhouses in current developments, builders would have the following two options: 1) If TGIs or Open Web Trusses are used, either drywall bottom of joist/truss or sprinkler areas of exposure (basement); or 2) Use dimensional lumber. For Townhouses in new developments, builders would have to put full sprinkler systems in new homes to conform to NFPA 13D. Similarly, for one-and two-family dwelling units, builders would have the following two options: 1) If TGIs or Open Web Trusses are used, either drywall bottom of joist/truss or sprinkler areas of exposure (basement); or 2) Use dimensional lumber. For one- and two-family dwelling units in new developments, builders would have to put full sprinkler systems in new homes to conform to NFPA 13D. Pat said that Raoul shared with him research that he had done regarding the sprinkler issue in other neighboring cities. The research proved that most municipalities are adopting some, if not all, of the new sprinkler code requirements and that, eventually, all municipalities will follow the code. Marc Mylott indicated that he had talked to Bill Cogley regarding getting a better sense of current and existing developments and the requirements for full sprinkler systems. He used as an example Toll Brothers (Bowes Creek Subdivision) which is entirely annexed and zoned but only half platted and Stonebrook subdivision where some lots are platted and other are not yet platted. The tentative decision made was that any lot that that was annexed and zoned in the city would be considered current and existing while future developments outside of the city limits would be considered new. Marc said that he ran some numbers west of Randall Road and found that there were approximately 10,800 annexed single family lots. 4,700 were platted and had infrastructure and, of those, 2,800 had single family homes built. The other 1,900 were platted with infrastructure. The balance of 6,100 lots can currently be permitted. Pat asked the Chief about fire response times and the Chief said that you can't use response times as a measure as they offer a false sense of security. The Chief indicated that the Long Common fire station serves the area all of they way out to Route 47. The Chief reiterated that he felt that city staff had come 2 up with a fair proposal and, with 10,800 lots currently exempt from the full sprinkler requirement, it might not affect the community for a decade. Pat and the Chief discussed a couple of the fires that occurred over the last week and indicated that one house had dimensional lumber with 5/8" drywall and it was well protected while another house fire in Parkwood had trusses and burned faster. Raoul reiterated to the Commission members, as well as to the builders present that, even with the unfortunate economic climate, the sprinkler code will eventually become a reality. More and more communities are adopting it in some fashion. He noted the need to proceed on the issue but done in a way conducive for everyone's best interests. Pat said that he talked to Brett Lundstrom again regarding the standards on homeowner's insurance policies for homes that are sprinklered. Brett indicated that there are no standards but that the typical annual homeowner premium is $1,000 and, with sprinklers, homeowners will receive a 10% to 13% discount. The floor was opened up to the public for comment on the sprinkler issue. Dan Olsem, Crown Community Developers, started by saying that he agreed with the TGIs needing to be drywalled but does not agree with the requirement for future new developments to sprinkler all new homes. He did say that he believed that this issue could be up for negotiation if the city was considering annexation of a property and, perhaps, that would be a better time to discuss the issue. John Hall,Jr., John Hall Custom Homes Inc., who builds in Highland Woods and Tall Oaks subdivisions, indicated that his office is in St. Charles. He indicated that he also builds new homes in St. Charles. He indicated that, initially, St. Charles passed the sprinkler ordinance but voted to put it off until 2013 to stay competitive. He said that he offers sprinklers to new clients but, out of five homes he built in St. Charles, all five homeowners opted out of the sprinklers due to the additional cost of$13,000 to $16,000 (on homes 3,100 to 3,700 sq. ft.). He was concerned that Elgin would no longer be competitive with other communities if it went ahead. Pete Stefani, King's Court Builders, said that new homes are already built much better and safer than older homes. His concern is that the cost of new homes will push people to buy less safe older homes instead. He believed that most fires start in garages, from lightning strikes in attics, and in kitchens, and those locations are not covered in this code. He believes that what the city is 3 proposing isn't going to help and the City of Elgin will be knocked out of the new home marketplace. Pat Curran, West Point Builders, handed out a paper regarding firefighter deaths over the last five years showing the division of how they died. Based on the handout, a very small percentage of deaths were due to residential fires. Bob Skidmore, Sho-Deen, Inc., thanked the Commission for coming up with a definition of existing vs. new developments and that the clarification of this definition is beneficial to his company. Rich Guerard, Wyndham Deerpoint Homes, said that all of the developers/builders pretty much said all that there is to say and he had no additional comments to add. Pat thanked all of the developers and/or builders for their comments. He also thanked the City staff for coming up with a good plan. Chuck Kellenberger reminded everyone that, regardless with what the Commission recommends, it is going to be entirely up to City Council to make the final decision. Dick Sirmett said that it is hard to look down the road to the future and what the cost of housing is going to be in five years. He also commented on the surcharges resulting from the cost of fuel which builders have had to add in over the years to the cost of the homes. He wondered whether the sprinkler issue is that big of an item or if it is all of the other costs builders is having to deal with. Jeff Meyer, William Ryan Homes, commented that his company did a restructure several years ago due to fuel costs and that they are already at rock bottom and that sprinklers would definitely be a new cost. Pat Curran, West Point Builders, commented about hearing about affordable housing but wondered how that would be accomplished with all of the costs being added to new homes. Dave Teas asked Chief Fahy what he want.The Chief said that this is the second time the sprinkler issue has come up in code discussions and that this issue is not going to go away. He said that the next person who wants to annex to the City will know what to expect and it will be a roadmap for the future. Pat asked if any of the Commission members would like to entertain a motion. Tom Lohbaur asked if the motion should be placed as a two-part deal, current developments and new developments and the Commission members agreed that it should. Dick Sirmett moved to approve staff's proposal for currently annexed and zoned developments, for both townhouses and one- to two-family homes, to: 1) 4 if TGI's or Open Web Trusses are used, either drywall bottom of joist/truss or sprinkler areas of exposure in basement; or 2) use dimensional lumber; Tom Lohbauer seconded the motion; a vote was taken and the motion was unanimously approved. Dick Sinnett moved to pass the proposal for new future annexed developments for both townhouses and one-to two-family homes to install full fire sprinkler systems to conform to NFPA 13D; Tom Lohbauer seconded the motion; a vote was taken and the motion was unanimously approved. Raoul indicated that, upon this vote, the Residential Code review is concluded. Raoul thanked the Commission for taking the time to make this consideration and guidelines for existing and new developments. Marc added that, at the current rate of 150 new homes per year, it may take 12 to 13 years to build on all of the current lots and the consensus of everyone was that they hoped that it would not take that long. Dave Decker said that the new code will come out in 2014 and that would be a good time to take a look at this issue again. Marc said that good questions brought good conversation and decisions and compromise. The Chief said that the decision was looked at holistically and figured this was a good compromise and is proud of the decision that was made and thanked the Commission for their good work. A builder/developer asked what the schedule would be for the code to be enacted. Raoul said that all of the codes (building, residential, electrical, plumbing, heating and fire) go first to the legal department for review and then to the City Council. If approved by the City Council, the codes would come into effect immediately. The goal was to get this before the City Council by July of this year. COMMENCE REVIEW OF 2012 INT. BUILDING CODE: Raoul asked the Commission members if they wanted to start working on reviewing the 2012 Int. Building Code at this time or come fresh next Tuesday to start review. It was agreed by all members to start the review with a fresh perspective on Tuesday, April 17. Raoul handed out the list of code sections that he was bringing to the Commission for review and indicated that those sections marked "s.r." were going to be reviewed by staff. Raoul indicated that all members should look over all of the code changes provided and to be prepared to move forward at the next meeting. r 5 ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Chuck Kellenberger to adjourn the meeting at 3:00 p.m., and seconded by Dave Teas. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, ? co\ofras. d16.166\ S ra L. Kolba Acting Secretary ( Date: I r-)^ c� r C 6 FIRE SPRINKLER PROPOSAL FOR BUILDING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION r TOWNHOUSES CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS: 1. If TGI's or Open Web Trusses are used either drywall bottom of joist/truss or sprinkler areas of exposure (basement). 2. Use dimensional lumber NEW DEVELOPMENTS: Full fire sprinkler system to conform to NFPA 13D ONE- and TWO-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS: 1. If TGI's or Open Web Trusses are used either Drywall bottom of joist/truss or sprinkler areas of exposure (basement). 2. Use dimensional lumber NEW DEVELOPMENTS: Full fire sprinkler system to conform to NFPA 13D C SURVEY COMMUNITIES FOR FIRE SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS /Aurora 2009 IRC, yes, currently require fire sprinklers in townhouses and single family where,l st floor footprint exceeds 5,000 sq. ft. There is a proposal for amendment for all single family and townhouses to be fully sprinklered starting Jan. 01, 2019 Crystal Lake 2006 IRC, no sprinkler requirements 0 1 Hoffman Estates 2009 IRC, yes all structures to be fully sprinklered. 4. Huntley 2006 IRC, fire sprinklers not required for detached single family homes but are required for all attached single- and multi-family dwelling units. 5. Oswego 2009 IRC, fire sprinklers required in one- and two-family bWellings with a total square footage exceeding 4,000 sq. ft including asements. Townhouses are required to have fire sprinklers where structure contains 5 or more townhouse units. 6. Plainfield 2006 IRC, no sprinkler requirements. 7. St. Charles 2009 IRC, sprinklers required as of Jan. 01, 2012. 8. South Elgin 2009 IRC, required but with exceptions to alleviate requirements. Z.A. West Dundee 2006 IRC, yes 13D system required for all residential zfc 10.Woodstock 2006 IRC, no sprinkler requirement. r t Commercial Total Atherosclerotic Pre-Existing Fall Building National Illinois Heart Blocked ardiovascuh CVA Medical Vehicle ' ! From Residential Roof Deaths Deaths Attack Artery Disease Stroke Condition Accident 1 Ladder Fire Collapse 2010 87 9 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2009 90 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 2008 118 6 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2007 118 5 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2006 106 4 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 519 26 14 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 53.85% 3.85% 3.85% 3.85% 3.85% 11.54% 3.85% 7.69% 7.69% Medical Condition 18 69.23% Residential Building Fire 2 7.69% 2010 House was built in 1951, went in to search for a resident who was also killed in fire. 2008 House is Older, Basement Fire was burning for over 30 minutes before the firefighters entered the house, no one was inside. Report on this item is attached. it L L 11 Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting April 17, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 17, 2012 in the 2nd Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 2nd Floor South Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Commence Review of 2012 Int. Building Code 5. Public Comments 6. Adjournment r BUILDING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday,April 17,2012,2:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Hudgens, Dick Sinnett, Steve Silva, Chuck Kellenberger and Dave Ryan MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Lohbauer, Dave Teas. STAFF PRESENT: Raoul Johnston, Marc Mylott, Steve Bone, Gary Line Ron Sessions EFD and Sandra Kolba. VISITORS: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Pat Hudgens at 2:04 p.m., in the 2nd Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Court, Elgin, IL. r APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the April 10, 2012, meeting was presented. A motion was made by Dick Sinnett and seconded by Dave Teas and the minutes of that meeting were unanimously approved (Steve Silva did not vote as he was not at the meeting of 4- 10-12). NEW BUSINESS: Raoul said that a staff meeting was held between the new construction inspectors and the Historic Preservationist regarding how to coordinate inspections between them in residential applications since historic guidelines are different from the residential code. One example was the height of guardrails around porches as, within the historic districts, handrails allow lower guardrails. Raoul proposed that the residential code be amended by taking Section 3409 from the I.B.C. to provide more definition for ease of inspections. He asked the Commission to consider amending the residential code by taking the complete section out and make a new provision in the residential code. The new provision would not compromise life safety. Chuck 1 �+ asked if that meant just railing heights or all and Raoul indicated the whole E section. Marc reminded the Commission that not all of the structures within the historic districts are necessarily historic. Pat asked if that included landmark buildings and the answer was yes. Marc asked how Section 3409.2 applies to the flood areas and Kane County Storm Water and Steve indicated that FEMA regulates the flood areas. Marc indicated that staff will look more into that section. Raoul indicated that he would check with Engineering. Pat suggested that this subject be deferred to the next meeting and all agreed. COMMENCE REVIEW OF 2012 INT. BUILDING CODE: Before beginning review, Raoul told the Commission members that, on the handout with the code sections to be reviewed, the notation of"s.r." means that this is a minor change that Raoul and the rest of staff will discuss so only those sections not marked with"s.r." will be up for review today. Section 402, Covered Mall and Open Mall Buildings: Raoul said that this code was revised with further clarification and definition regarding perimeters, lease plans, etc. He indicated that, currently, the city does not have any of these types of malls but may eventually. Chuck asked what the perimeter lines were and Raoul indicated that it was the line that encircles all buildings including courtyards and seating areas. He explained that this section is meant to establish what is or is not part of the mall. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 422, Ambulatory Care Facilities: Raoul indicated that this section added some separation requirements for safety of occupants. Chuck asked if this section was intended for new construction only and Raoul indicated yes. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 424, Children's Play Structure: Raoul indicated that this section is meant for places like the McDonald's play area and that this section adds guidelines for a safe environment for kids. Steve asked if this was meant for outdoor play areas and Raoul indicated that the section was meant for indoor. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 501.2, Address Identification: Raoul indicated that this section says that the numbers should be 4" but, in order to conform to the Property Maintenance Code which requires 5" numbers, this section should be amended. The larger numbers helps the fire department ease when responding to emergency calls. 2 After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended to require 5" address identification. Section 712, Vertical Openings: Raoul indicated that this section was rewritten to attempt to clarify what was in the previous code by adding two-story openings which is a little different. He indicated that there was nothing detrimental with the rewriting of the section and didn't see anything that needed to be amended but said that there might be some impact. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 901.8, Pump and Riser Room Size: Ron indicated the biggest change to this section is that it allows service of all equipment through doorway access. He suggested this section be amended to "Provide an exterior access door to the sprinkler riser valve room and/or the fire pump room that would be large enough for the largest piece of equipment." After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 903.2.4, Group F-1: Raoul indicated that this Section added paragraph 4. He said that, currently on F-1, the manufacture of upholstered furniture or mattress, the square footage is 7,500,but the new paragraph reduces that square footage to 2,500. Staff wants to add this paragraph to reduce the square footage to 2,500. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended to add paragraph 4. Section 903.2.6, Group I: Raoul indicated that some changes and exceptions were added to this section. Staff was concerned about exception 3 and suggested that this exception be deleted. . After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended to delete exception 3. Section 903.2.7, Group M: Raoul said that paragraph 4 was added to this section and, similar to Group F-1, this paragraph should be amended from 7,500 sq. ft. to 5,000 sq. ft. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended to add paragraph 4. Sections 903.2.8.1 and 903.2.8.2,Group R-3, R-4 and Day Care Facilities: Raoul indicated that code added another term of"Group Homes" which would require automatic sprinklers. He believed that this was a good section as most habitants of group homes are capable of getting out of the building but not always. Ron indicated that this is required by the State. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. r 3 Section 903.2.9, Group S-1: Raoul indicated that this section added paragraph 5 and staff recommends that this section be added. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended to add paragraph 5. Section 903.3.5, Water Supplies: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "Hydrant water flow data used for the design of any sprinkler system shall be no more than 1 year old. A minimum 10% safety factor shall be provided in the fire protection system hydraulic calculations. On each design drawing, provide a copy of the hydraulic nameplate for each hydraulically calculated area." Ron added that this used to be 5% and should be 10% to double the safety factor. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 903.4.2, Alarms: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "An approved audible device, located on the exterior of the building in an approved location, shall be connected to each automatic sprinkler system. In addition, alarm indicating appliance audio/visual devices shall be seen and heard within all areas of the building. Such sprinkler water-flow alarm devices shall be activated by water flow equivalent to the flow of a single sprinkler of the smallest orifice size installed in the sprinkler system. Where a fire alarm system is installed, actuation of the automatic sprinkler system shall activate the building fire alarm system. Where automatic fire sprinklers provide protection to an area with an approved flow switch interconnected to the fire alarm system,white strobes shall be installed at each multi-system sprinkler riser." Ron explained that this would make it easier to work with and involves no maintenance. He also mentioned it would be less deafening. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 903.4.2.1, Test Valves: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "Fire sprinkler system inspectors test valves shall be accessible at all times and located no more than 6 feet above finished floor. On multiple riser systems, test valves shall be marked as to which rise and area it tests." Ron said that this would make it easily accessible with no need for a ladder. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 903.4.3, Floor Control Valves: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "Approved supervised indicating control valves shall be provided at the point of connection to the riser on each floor of all multiple story 4 • buildings." Ron said that this would indicate what each valve goes to. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 905.3.8, Rooftop Gardens and Landscaped Roof: Raoul said that this section indicates that a valve would close out on the floor below or interior stairwell access. Steve asked what is there to worry about- dead vegetation? After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 905.3.1, Height: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "Class III standpipe systems shall be installed throughout buildings where more than 2 floors and/or 26 feet above the lowest level of fire department vehicle ground access or more than 2 floors and/or 26 feet below the highest level of fire department vehicle access." Ron said currently it is at 30 feet. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 905.3.9,Storage Warehouse: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "In all warehouse storage areas exceeding 50,000 sq. ft. or where storage exceeds 12 ft. high, provide interior 2-1/2" fire hoses valves with a 1- 1/2" reducer to a 1-1/2" hose connection. Locate valves at each exterior door to the warehouse and/or storage area. Show the location of all obstructions and/o rack storage on the plans. The fire hose system shall be where the system pressure exceeds 100 psi, provide a'Potter' reduced pressure field adjustable type valve." Ron said that there is a need to work with rack plans in reducing putting in a standpipe next to a rack. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 901.8.1: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "Provide a minimum 1-hour fire-rated separation for all sprinkler riser valve rooms." After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 907.1.4, Control/Annunciator Panels: Ron explained this new section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "All fire alarm control panels or full function annunciator panels shall be installed within 10 feet of the building main entrance, sprinkler room, or in a location approved by the fire code official." After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. "' Section 907.2.7, Group M: Ron explained this section to the Commission members and suggested that a sub-paragraph 3 be created to read as follows: 5 "3. Multi-tenant Use Group M buildings will be 'ring/alert by tenant', activated by the fire pull station/automatic fire detection and shall include a weatherproof clear outside strobe over the entrance to each tenant space as directed by the fire code official. All outside strobes to be a minimum 75 candela." Ron added that, as an example, 350 East Chicago Street has 32 different occupancies and that each occupancy would have their own pull station with white light identifying where the fire would be enabling the fire department to direct its unit accordingly. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 912.1.1, Connection Type: Ron explained this new section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to read as follows: "All fire department connections shall be NST 4" Storz connection with a 30 degree downturn (Stortz type only)." After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 9.13.1.1, Test Outlet Valves: Ron explained this new section to the Commission members and suggested that the section be amended to add as follows: "Provide an OS &Y control valve on all fire pump test headers." Ron added that butterflies would not be allowed. After discussion, it was agreed that this section should be amended accordingly. Section 1005, Means of Egress Sizing: Raoul indicated that this section has been rewritten. It used to have a table but the table was removed. The section still has the exception allowing for changing egress size of stairways with sprinklers,which used to be spelled out in the table. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 1011.2, Floor-Level Exit Signs in Group R-1: Raoul said that this group includes hotels and that this section requires lower mounted signs which would be more visible if there is smoke. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 1013.8,Window Sills: Raoul explained that this is a requirement for windows with an exterior grade of 72" below window sill and that it is an additionalstep to prevent a child from falling out of the window. Steve asked about the requirement for casement windows. Ron thought that this section should be compared to the Residential Code. After discussion, it was agreed that the section should be amended to delete one- and two-families. Section 1021, Number of Exits and Exit Configuration: Raoul indicated that this section was modified so that the exits would be arranged to serve a portion of the story which would help in multi-tenant buildings. One tenant would 6 • . . rhave exit on half of the building and the other tenant would have exit on the other half of the building. Basically there would be more exits per floor but separated out. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 1022, Interior Exit Stairways and Ramps: Raoul said that this section was reorganized. Steve asked if there were any structural changes and Raoul indicated there were not. After discussion, it was agreed that this section is good. Section 1409, High-Pressure Decorative Exterior-Grade Compact Laminates: Steve asked if this section was added for some new material and Raoul indicated yes, that it was like a laminated countertop material. Raoul said that, at present, it may not pass architectural standards but that the code was probably added to keep up with new materials on the market. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 1509, Rooftop Structures: Raoul indicated that the Commission members went over this at the last code cycle and, at that time, it was suggested that an amendment be added regarding rooftop screening. However, this new code deals with structures, not equipment on the roof and that it gives guidelines on the types of construction, area limitations, etc., and believes that it is a good addition. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 1607, Minimum Uniform Distributed Live Loads: Raoul indicated that the table was slightly modified, i.e., it used to read "assembly areas" but now reads "assembly areas/theaters." After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 3002, Elevator: Raoul indicated that the code now requires it to be 4 or more stories above grade. Staff feels that it should be changed to 2 or more stories above grade to accommodate ambulance stretchers. Raoul indicated that he had talked to the Thompson Elevator and they agree with the 2 or more stories above grade and that the fire department agreed that that was sufficient. Steve indicated that the only problem he can see is that the cost is more for a 2,500 lb. compared to a 1,500 lb. load elevator, amounting to $5,000 to$10,000 more. After discussion, it was agreed that this section was good. Section 3007, Fire Service to Elevators, and Section 3008, Occupant Evacuation Elevators: Raoul indicated that he had consulted with Thompson Elevator and they are okay with these sections and, if Thompson says it is okay, it should be ("' okay. After discussion, it was agreed that these sections were good. 7 • Appendix A: Ron indicated that this Appendix should be deleted from the Fire Code. After discussion, all agreed. Prior to adjournment, a discussion was had regarding the fact that all of the Codes are available on line and, therefore, some of the Commission members might find that better than actually having the books and that it might be more cost effective to purchase IPads for the Commission members rather than new books each and every code cycle. Marc indicated that he would get the links of the Code books to the Commission members for their information. Pat asked when the next meeting would be scheduled and Raoul indicated that it would be on Tuesday, May 1, 2012, at 2:00 p.m. with the location to be determined. At that meeting, the Commission members will review all of the printed amendments. Raoul indicated that he would finalize the draft amendments and would e-mail them to the Commission members prior to the meeting for their review. Raoul indicated that he was at a meeting a couple weeks ago regarding the adoption of the Energy Code. Initially the code was to go into effect on June 1, 2012 but the State may amend the Residential Code regarding whole house vents, etc. Raoul suggested that the city may want to pull back and wait for the State or adopt that section of the Residential Code per the State. The code would be more stringent, not less. Marc asked if our adoption could recognize the flexibility of the change. Steve asked why we had to adopt the State and Raoul indicated that it was easier to enforce when adopted. Raoul indicated that he could add wording such as "if State makes amendment to Code, the City will automatically adopt amendment." ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Steve Silva to adjourn the meeting at 3:55 p.m., and seconded by Dick Sinnett. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, g`---111&411 AL Sandra L. Kolba 8 Acting Secretary Date: 5-/- /i r r 9 Notice of Meeting Building Commission's Meeting May 1, 2012 2:00 P.M. The Building Commission's meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 1, 2012 in the 2" Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin. Agenda Building Commission's Meeting 2°' Floor South Conference Room, City Hall 150 Dexter Ct., Elgin 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of minutes from last meeting 3. New Business 4. Approval of amendments to the 2012 Int. Residential Code, Int. Building Code and Int. Fire Code. 5. Public Comments 6. Adjournment r r BUILDING COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday,May 1,2012,2:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Hudgens, Steve Silva, Chuck Kellenberger, David Teas and Dave Ryan MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Lohbauer, Dick Sinnett. STAFF PRESENT: Raoul Johnston, Marc Mylott,Steve Bone, Dave Decker, Gary Line, Ron Sessions EFD and Sandra Kolba. VISITORS: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Pat Hudgens at 2:00 p.m., in the 2nd Floor South Conference Room at City Hall, 150 Dexter Court, Elgin, IL. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the April 17, 2012, meeting was presented. A motion was made by Chuck Kellenberger and seconded by Steve Silva and the minutes of that meeting was unanimously approved. NEW BUSINESS: Raoul Johnston announced that Commission member Dick Sinnett's appointment expired as of the date of this meeting and Dick had indicated that he did not want to be reappointed since he wants to now enjoy his retirement. Raoul thanked him for his service. Therefore, the Building Commission will be looking for a commercial contractor to step forward and request to be appointed to the Commission. Raoul asked the current members, if they knew of someone who might fit the bill, to ask them to come in and fill out the required paperwork. r 1 Raoul indicated that he had gotten a friendly reminder from the city clerk to mention to the Commission members that, if they had not yet completed the Open Meeting Act test, they need to do so at their earliest convenience. APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE 2012 INT. RESIDENTIAL CODE, INT. BUILDING CODE AND INT. FIRE CODE: Pat indicated to the members that all of the proposed amendments had been handed out by Raoul. Dave Decker wanted to clarify one item-R502 of the Residential Code -where he believed the wording should be changed from"shall be installed 16" on center" to "shall be installed maximum 16" on center." Marc suggested that rather than "maximum" it should read "no more than," with the same wording on the next section, R502.1.8, open trusses. All agreed. Pat indicated that page 26 indicates a drawing and wondered if Raoul had yet done the drawing and Raoul answered in the affirmative. Pat suggested that a drawing also should be added for the furnace filter opening and inserted after the other drawing and Raoul indicated that he would do so. All agreed. Pat opened the floor up for motions to approve the codes. A motion was made by Steve Silva to approve the Int. Residential Code as drafted and Dave Ryan seconded the motion; a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. A motion was then made by Steve Silva to approve the Int. Building Code as drafted and Chuck Kellenberger seconded that motion; a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. A final motion was made by Chuck Kellenberger to approve the Int. Fire Code as drafted and Steve Silva seconded the motion; a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. Raoul thanked all of the Commission members for their time, effort and commitment during this process and reiterated that the City appreciated members' dedication to moving this process forward. Pat added that he believed that the Commission members did a good job of accomplishing this task before spring/summer. He added that he appreciated the city staff, the fire department and the Commission members working together and said that, as a citizen of Elgin, he feels confident that all involved were professional and C know their stuff. He said that he believes that City staff was approachable and used common sense solutions. Steve Silva seconded those comments and 2 added that he believed that the City staff knows that this is not a black and white world and that there are always gray areas to consider and that he appreciated Elgin's ability to work in that realm. Marc indicated that the final versions of these codes will be packaged up and sent off to the Legal Department for their approval and presentation to the City Council for adoption. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments presented at this meeting. ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Dave Teas to adjourn the meeting at 2:25 p.m., and seconded by Pat Hudgens. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, r / MALL flak `iFdra L. Kolba Acting Secretary J Date: )- 02I-7 r 3