April 2, 2007 minutes
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Jim Sparkes, Bryan Wyatt, Kevin Chaney, Mark Jarboe |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
Gary Mohr |
|
|
|
|
|
GUEST PRESENT: |
|
Bill Schweitzer, IAPMO |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT:
EX-OFFICIO: |
|
None
Patrick O’Brien, Mechanical Inspector |
|
|
|
|
Meeting called to order at 6:37 p.m.
(This agenda item was discussed after the following agenda item)
Staff stated that he had made a copy of a requested change of an item that was added to the minutes.
Sparkes stated that he did not have any concerns about the content of the minutes but did take exception to some of the comments that were made at the meeting. He mentioned a comment that was made by a plumbing contractor about being able to get twelve right answers for the same scenario on water sizing. His comment was that if a water system is approved under the IRC and then at a later date, there is a problem, who is responsible.
Chaney agreed but did not know what the answer is except make some kind of an amendment.
Pinnick responded that it is the same thing in the mechanical code when people have a room with poor airflow.
Sparkes agreed and that using the “J List” should help eliminate those kinds of problems.
Sparkes stated that another comment made by Mike Porter that when the building board asked for an ICC rep, they were there at the next meeting. He stated that the Mechanical board had not been that lucky.
Pinnick stated that whenever the board wants ICC here, he will make every effort to get them here.
Sparkes stated that when ever they were having a joint meeting, that all the boards should be represented. He stated that he could remember only one time that there was full attendance at the joint chair meetings. He mentioned that he had attended several meetings but only one meeting where everyone was there.
After review Wyatt made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Seconded by Chaney, pass 4-0.
Discuss proposed dates for meetings and resolve conflicting schedules
Chaney mentioned that he attended the City Commission meeting(on March 13, 2007) and the Mayor asked and told us to go through the International Code and amend it and make it so that we’re satisfied. He mentioned that staff has compiled proposed dates for meetings for the next six months with meetings every two weeks. Chaney asked if anybody had any questions about what happened at the (City) Commission meeting.
Sparkes apologized for not being at the (CC) meeting, he had a previous commitment that he was not able to get out of. He mentioned that he watched part of the meeting on TV and heard Ron Durflinger had stated that the Mechanical Board was the one that was holding up the works and he took offense to that. Sparkes stated that the board has worked on this and he would mention again that the board had a 5-0 vote for the Uniform code. He stated that it is the builders and the inspection department that want the International. He also mentioned that he thought they were going to have a blended code but sounds like they don’t have a choice in the matter.
Chaney agreed and he knew that Sparkes was not going to be there. He then asked Wyatt why he was not there.
Wyatt responded that he didn’t know he needed to be there.
Chaney interjected that Wyatt knew about it and stated that he was very disappointed that Wyatt was not there and was “teed off” about it. He stated that the board had a 5-0 vote and he was the only one standing up there, no contractors or any body else was there to back him up. He said he felt like the lone duck.
Wyatt responded to Chaney that he was sorry that he felt that way. He said that he doesn’t think that anything would have changed if we had all been there. He stated that the real issue was about the Matrix report. The Matrix report recommended that the City should adopt all the International codes and not go with the blended codes. He said that the board is aware that he had fought against that for a long time, but after attending the meetings that he did and hearing what was going on, he agreed with the decision. He admitted that he was one of the 5-0 votes for the Uniform being more prescriptive. He stated that he felt that at this time with what the Commission and hearing from the other boards that a time for a change needed to come and it did. He apologized for having offended Chaney and as vice-chairman it was probably not the thing to do. He also stated that he does not recall that everybody agreed to attend the (Commission) meeting. He stated that if he did not fulfill his duties as a board member, then will apologize to this board.
Chaney stated that he felt that Wyatt should have been there since himself, Wyatt and Sparkes were the remaining three of the 5-0 vote. He also asked about the proposed dates for the meetings for the next six months and wanted to know if anybody had any conflicts with the meeting dates. None of the board members had any conflicts at this time. Chaney stated that he thought it would be nice to get the dates ironed out to work on the codes. He was also invited to meet with Victor Torres, Tim Pinnick and Patrick O’Brien and have requested for all the board members to get a phone number for ICC and the identification code to be able to call ICC directly with questions. He asked if that was available yet.
Pinnick responded that he did not have that together, he wanted to get a feel from the board what type of technical questions the board has to be sure that the board could quickly get to the right person.
Sparkes responded that it would most likely be a mechanical person.
Pinnick stated that there were several people that are in the mechanical side in the organization.
Chaney stated that he would like to have a contact number in case questions came up during the reviewing of the code that they could call and get an answer.
Pinnick said that he had the contact numbers and was planning to call each one to get there area of expertise to reduce the number of phone calls that the board had to make.
Sparkes stated that he recalled the ICC rep at the last meeting said there was a representative from California that had mechanical expertise. He also said that what works in California doesn’t work in Lawrence, Kansas. He realizes that this is a general code all over the U.S., but he would rather try to get someone locally.
Pinnick stated that there is a person that is over the IRC mechanical in Illinois. For general issues, Bob Guenther out of Whittier. He has a list of other people that he can give to the board. He stated that he would get the membership number to the board also.
Chaney stated that he also requested that a person from ICC be at the meetings to answer questions. He also said that he would get a list of questions for the person so he could be somewhat prepared and have some answers for the board.
Wyatt asked the board if they had any questions to give to ICC to get answered. He also asked if the board had given the questions to staff.
Chaney stated that he did not have the list of questions with him and had not sent them to staff.
Sparkes stated that he had not given them to staff.
Wyatt stated that he had not come up with any questions yet. He just was curious so that maybe they could just give staff the questions together.
Chaney asked at the same meeting if they could get a worksheet that showed the differences between the 2000 UMC and the 2006 IMC and 2006 IRC to try and streamline the review process.
Wyatt asked if the board had anything in writing from the commission directing them on what they need to do.
Chaney stated that he did not have anything but what the Commission told him at the (Commission) meeting.
Staff read the motion from the minutes of the 3/13/07 City Commission Meeting that directed staff and the trade boards to draft required ordinances for the adoption of the International Family of Codes with the appropriate local amendments, a timeframe of six months for bringing these ordinances to the City Commission for adoption will be in effect.
Wyatt stated that his observation is that the Commission are the lawmakers and the board can not deviate from that.
Schweitzer asked a question if this is the first time they had read this.
Wyatt requested from the chairman for meeting etiquette where public comment is limited to a certain time period so the board can discuss issues without interruption.
Chaney said that would be fine but the board also could not be rambling on. He then asked Schweitzer if he had a comment.
Schweitzer asked if this was the first time that this issue has come up with the City Commission. He was asking if the contractors had gotten prior notification so they could be at the meeting and provide input.
Chaney responded that the contractors will still be able to give input at the public meeting of the Mechanical Board once the codes have been reviewed. The only thing the Commission has asked is to review this(International Codes) and amend it and get it ready for adoption.
Staff stated that they had looked online for a published comparison chart and they have some older versions available.
Chaney asked Schweitzer if IAPMO has a comparison.
Schweitzer said that they had a comparison for the 2000 and 2003 but did not have a 2006 yet.
Pinnick showed the board a comparison book between the 1997 UMC and the 2000 IMC and then work up from there.
Staff stated that there is a 1997 UMC to 2003 IMC available and then when the significant changes to the 2006 IMC is available to get that.
Chaney would like to know if the 2006 UMC that was recommended unanimously for adoption was going to still move forward in the interim or not.
Staff replied that they did not know the answer to that question. He stated that he assumed that that process would not continue since the direction that the Commission had given. He said that he would find out for sure.
Wyatt stated that he would still like to have a written directive with specifically what the board is supposed to do to eliminate any confusion on what needed to be done.
Chaney stated that what he understood from the Commission was to start the process of the International codes.
Schweitzer asked which comparisons the board was needing.
Chaney responded that since the bard just finished the 2006 UMC, that probably a comparison between the 2006 UMC and the 2006 IRC and IMC.
Pinnick asked that since the board planned to begin review of the IRC because it would take less time that they may not need an ICC representative for at least a couple of meetings, if that still holds true.
Chaney responded that probably within the next couple of meetings, they would need someone(from ICC) here.
Pinnick would like to try to get some background information for ICC, so maybe get some questions assembled from the IRC and get them to ICC and then get the representative in to answer the questions.
Discuss strategy for reviewing codes and assign chapters for IRC
Chaney said he thought it would be best to start off with the international code since they already had the books.
Chaney asked about the board makeup in the IRC.
Staff stated that the IRC ordinance will be made to reflect that the appropriate board will oversee the appropriate sections of the IRC. He stated that staff will provide the board with a draft copy of the IRC ordinance to show what has been amended particularly with reference to the boards.
Chaney said he just wants to make sure the Mechanical board is the one with the jurisdiction over the mechanical portions of the IRC.
Sparkes mentioned again that the Mechanical board went with the UMC and now they have to look at the ICC codes and that the builders are the ones pushing these codes. He stated that he feels now that if the board were to vote tonight there would be a split vote. He also mentioned that years ago with Mayor Hodges that if there was not a 5-0 vote, it was not a good vote.
Staff mentioned one item that was in the building part of the IRC was that penetrations through the garage wall into the house will now have to be fire caulked.
Wyatt asked if having an opening into the garage would be allowed.
Staff replied that it would not be allowed.
Sparkes asked whether existing systems will have to be brought up to code or if they would be grandfathered.
Staff confirmed that existing systems would be grandfathered.
Chaney stated that on M1202.1 when it talks about additions shall not cause an existing system to become overloaded. He says that if someone puts an addition onto their house then they would need to increase the size of the mechanical system if they wanted to comply with the “J Sheet”.
Staff responded that the system would have to be redesigned to accommodate the additional load. With the “J Sheet”, that would need to be submitted when they pulled a permit.
Chaney asked if they needed to add language to make sure they would have to recalculate it.
Schweitzer stated that the UMC has the same section for additions, alterations, or repairs at 104.1.
Staff stated that the section had the same intent, the two books were just worded different.
The board agreed to highlight sections that they wanted to discuss further and then bring the highlighted sections back to the next meeting.
Pinnick asked if the board is wanting the design to be considered.
Chaney wants to make sure that it is clear that they need to redesign the system if they put on an addition.
Staff replied that the code is clear in saying that a redesign would be required and staff would enforce that provision.
Chaney said he would like it to be clear to make sure there is no argument.
Pinnick asked that they want it to be a standing reference.
Sparkes said that what he is wanting to make sure that they would have to enlarge the duct if they added an addition to the house.
Staff stated that the IRC references ACCA Manual D which is duct design and inspection staff would require a design before a permit would be issued.
Sparkes asked staff about when someone finishes a basement does the City require the duct system to be enlarged.
Staff replied that typically systems could accommodate additional load that would be added in a basement finish.
Wyatt stated that most manufacturers recommend a certain amount of static pressure and if a system is too large or too small, the system may not work properly.
Chaney suggested reading chapters 13-18 and highlight what they had questions on and come back to the next meeting and discuss it. He also stated that he didn’t like the way section M1502.6 is worded.
Sparkes stated that the manufacturer of dryers typically has a maximum duct length.
Chaney stated that he thinks they need to re-write the whole paragraph.
Sparkes still has a concern with the word plenum and allowing gypsum products to be used as a plenum.
Chaney suggested that they strike the word plenum.
Staff stated that no one could use an above ceiling space in a commercial building for return air.
Sparkes stated that his idea of a plenum is the ductwork coming directly off the top of the furnace.
Staff stated that the definition of a plenum is an enclosed space that can be used to convey air.
Wyatt agreed that the plenum definition needs to be changed.
Pinnick stated that the definition of plenum affects not only the mechanical but also the electrical systems and products exposed in them.
Sparkes stated that he does not want someone to come in and make a plenum out of sheetrock because he read the code wrong.
Staff stated that the installation would not be approved.
Sparkes said that if they don’t get a permit inspectors would never see it.
Staff replied that if that is the cased then no matter how the code is worded, there would be no way to enforce it.
Jarboe asked staff if other communities have been through this process that the board could compare to see what they have done.
Staff replied that most of the Johnson county areas have adopted similar codes and would be a good reference.
Sparkes stated that he believes they need clarification on these things.
Chaney asked staff to check on the existing amendments that are relevant to chapters 13-18 and bring them back for the next meeting.
The board agreed to review chapters 13-18 of the IRC for discussion at the next meeting.
Distribute IMC and IFGC books to board members
This process had already been accomplished before the meeting.
Distribute draft ordinance of flat permit fees
Staff distributed the draft of the flat permit fees and stated that the fees will pertain only to mechanical equipment. The fee will be for each piece of equipment and will include individual units in apartment complexes.
Chaney asked if it was for a system or just furnace.
Staff replied that the $65 fee would be for each piece of equipment.
Chaney explained to Jarboe that the board had requested a flat fee for equipment changeouts because the expense of a furnace and air conditioning system can have a wide range and no matter the expense of the equipment, the inspection is the same. So to make the permit fees more equitable, they asked to have a flat fee.
Wyatt asked about when a contractor is just charging labor how would the fee work.
Staff replied that it would still be the $65 fee for each piece of equipment changed.
Chaney made a motion to accept the recommendation on the fee schedule. Seconded by Wyatt. Pass 4-0.
Miscellaneous
Chaney brought up for discussion that since an energy code is going to be adopted that any time a contractor changes an air conditioner, it should be required to change the evaporator coil. He continued that if the coil is not changed also that the efficiency of the air conditioner will not be at its full potential. With the higher efficiency mandate by the Federal Government requiring that all air conditioner manufactured must meet a minimum efficiency rating of 13 seer. If the proper evaporator coil is not matched to the air conditioner, the efficiency rating can not be met. He stated that he has already gone behind other contractors and they have only changed the air conditioner and the homeowner is not happy with the previous contractor. He has to tell the homeowner that they need to change the evaporator coil to get the efficiency and the warranty.
Wyatt stated that he has homeowners that don’t want to changeout the evaporator coil and he tells them that they have to, to get the warranty.
Chaney suggested requiring that any time an air conditioner is changed that the evaporator coil must also be changed to match the a/c and get the maximum efficiency rating from the a/c.
Staff stated that the City could require the engineering sheet showing the coil being matched to the a/c to get the permit.
Chaney said the main concern is making sure every contractor knows that they have to do it.
Wyatt said that his concern is that he can have a different furnace with a different blower and get different efficiencies.
Chaney stated that he has seen that but only with a variable speed blower.
Staff’s main concern would be the City turns down an air conditioner change because the coil is not changed. The homeowner will be pretty upset that they will now have to pay for an evaporator coil.
Pinnick asked that as long as the match is made they could use the existing coil.
Chaney agreed and stated that the equipment would be limited to residential.
Staff stated that the paperwork would be easy enough to track for each permit.
The board to no action.
Motion to adjourn made by Chaney, seconded by Wyatt, passed 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m.