04.11.2019 BOBA-BOZA Summary Minutes_signed CITY OF BOULDER
BOARD OF BUILDING APPEALS
ACTION MINUTES
April 11, 2019, 5 p.m.
1777 Broadway, Council Chambers
Board Members Present: Michael Hirsch (Chair), Jill Lester, David Schafer,
Ellen McCready, Jack Rudd
Ex-Officio Board Members Present: Will Birchfield, Michael Calderazzo
Board Members Absent: N/A
City Attorney Representing Board: Erin Poe
Staff Members Present: David Lowrey, Cindy Spence, Robbie Wyler
1. CALL TO ORDER:
M. Hirsch called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m.
2. BOARD HEARINGS:
A. Docket No.: BOZ2019-05
Address: 516 Mapleton
Applicant: Claudius Jaeger
Fire Code Appeal to the Board of Building Appeals: Requesting an appeal from the
detached ADU Fire-Sprinkler requirement. Seeking relief to the "house behind a house
rule" since fire apparatus access to ADU is within 75'via the alley.
Staff Presentation:
D. Lowrey presented the item to the board.
Board Questions:
D. Lowrey answered questions from the board.
Applicant's Presentation:
Claudius Jaeger, the applicant, presented the item to the board.
Board Questions:
Claudius Jaeger, the applicant, answered questions from the board.
Public Hearing:
No one from the public addressed the board.
Board Discussion:
• M. Hirsch researched the City's Design and Construction Standards (specifically Code
2.0(d)) as well as performed a site visit. He said that this alley appears to be substandard
on every point in Code 2.0(d) specifically there are overhead power lines, it is not wide
enough, there is no signage, and no turnarounds. He added that within the same code
regarding alleys, there is no mention of access for emergency vehicles.
• D. Schafer said that an alley is not a street and not an appropriate access for emergency
vehicles. As a rule, we cannot consider alleys access points. Also, if the letter of the code
were to be addressed, the applicant's lot would not be compliant as it does not have
frontage on two streets, therefore structure needs to be sprinklered.
• J. Lester said an alley is not a street. In addition, there should be concern for the overall
safety of people in the structure which the fire chief accurately analyzed. She stated that
the purpose of the fire sprinklers is safety and to buy time. This board cannot redefine an
alley as a street.
• J. Rudd appreciated the applicant's arguments but stated that they were hypothetical. He
would support the fire marshal's interpretation.
• M. Hirsch said the overall issue here is life safety of people within the structure and of
the fire fighters. He agreed with the fire marshal's interpretation of the fire code.
• M. Calderazzo said, as a fire fighting representative, that the main concern often are the
obstructions that can be seen or unseen due to darkness or storms. Alleys make it difficult
to find the address of any location. He appreciated the applicant's comments and how the
code could be interpreted. He said that an alley is always free-for-all and never designed
for anything other than temporary access and the fire department always tries to avoid
them whenever possible. When they are forced to use them, the fire fighters are more
worried about overhead access and things that cannot be seen in the night. In addition,
while there is not building on the lot next to the applicant, his neighbor could build in the
future, then the applicant's ADU would no longer be visible from the street. He said that
access is most important.
Motion:
On a motion by J. Lester, seconded by J. Rudd, the Board of Building_Appeals voted 4-0 to
affirm the fire marshal's interpretation of the fire code relatingto o required fire apparatus
access on application (Docket BOZ2019-05) as submitted.
3. GENERAL DISCUSSION:
A. Matters from the Board
There were no matters from the board.
C. Matters from the City Attorney
There were no matters from the City Attorney.
D. Matters from Planning and Development Services
R.Wyler informed the board that the vacant board member seat remains open and that
applications are still being accepted.
4. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the board at this time, BY MOTION
REGULARLY ADOPTED, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 6:19 P.M
APPROVED BY
air
DATE
1
J
�k
Y