* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] ALRIGHT, THIS IS MIKE RU, IT'S NINE OH SIX ON OCTOBER 17TH. CALL THE MEETING ORDER. WE'RE GONNA START WITH THE INTERPRETER'S, UM, STATEMENT. CAN YOU, UH, SWITCH THE, GO TO THE NEXT RECORD I SIT ON. THANK YOU. YES. YES. UH, GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, JEREMY, CAN [ Roll Call  ] YOU DO THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES. MICHAEL, REST HERE. MARK ROSS PRESENT. LEWIS OLIS. ADRIAN CONTES. MAX HOSFORD. ROBERT HENLEY. BRIAN SMITH. KAREN CARPENTER. HERE. WILLIAM BURRIS. JACK MOORE. JOES HERE. SALVADOR. GARCIA? HERE. CORY PALMER. PRESENT. ALRIGHT, CHAIR, WE HAVE, UH, QUORUM. THANKS JEREMY. UM, ALL RIGHT. SO THE MINUTES [ Approval of Minutes  ] FOR THE TWO PREVIOUS MEETINGS WERE DISTRIBUTED, UH, BY JEREMY TO THE, TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE. UM, ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THE MINUTES? I'LL HEAR 'EM NOW. UH, THIS IS CORY PALMER. I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT MY LAST NAME IS MISSPELLED ON THE OCTOBER 11TH MEETING. MINUTES, UH, LISTED AS THE FIRST TO ACCEPT THE SUBCOMMITTEE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS DISCUSSED BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE. OKAY, THANKS. I THINK WE CAN MAKE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE ON, ON THOSE. YEAH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. OKAY. UM, FOR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'LL ACCEPT THE MOTION TO, UH, ACCEPT, UH, BOTH SETS OF MINUTES. SO MOVED. THANKS, CO. CAN I GET A SECOND? SECOND. THANKS, KAREN. UH, MOTION FROM COREY. SECOND FROM KAREN TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NO. ANY ABSTENTIONS, UH, MINUTES ARE ACCEPTED. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT LEWIS OLIS JUST, UM, ARRIVED AND, UH, WE'LL GIVE HIM A MINUTE TO GET SETTLED AND GET STARTED. AND WHILE, UH, [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] LEWIS IS GETTING SET UP. UH, SO THE AGENDA HAS, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO WOULD, WE DON'T NEED TO DO. THAT'S THE ADDING, UM, SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS IF WE WANTED TO, BUT I DON'T THINK ANY CHANGES ARE NEED TO BE MADE. UH, NOBODY'S PRESENTED THEMSELVES. UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE IS, IS THE BULK OF WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO TODAY, WHICH IS THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE. UH, BUT WE DID TABLE A FEW ITEMS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE LAST WEEK. UH, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THOSE, BUT WE DO HAVE THREE OF THOSE THAT ARE READY TO DISCUSS AND HOPEFULLY PUT TO BED, OR ACTUALLY FOR THE SIX, UM, SINCE WE HAVE SO MUCH OF THE FIRE TEAM HERE, INCLUDING, UH, CHIEF WESTBROOK, UH, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND JUST KNOCK THOSE OUT. UM, ADDITIONALLY, I KNOW, UH, ROBERT HENLEY SHOULD BE HERE AROUND 10 O'CLOCK. HE HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE, SO THAT GIVES HIM A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO GET HERE, UM, AS WELL. SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS THE REVIEW OF CHAPTER 11, SECTION 10 DASH 40, THE IFC AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UH, THAT WAS TABLED LAST WEEK. PULL UP THE, UH, SPREADSHEET. ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU CAN PROBABLY JUST GO TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UH, LANGUAGE. OKAY, EXCELLENT. SO THE FIRST TWO ITEMS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, WAS THE DISCUSSION OF LABORATORIES OR, UM, CONSTRUCTION IN DEVELOPMENT OR TESTING OF THE LITHIUM ION OR LITHIUM METAL, UH, BATTERIES. AND THE NEED OR REQUIREMENT FOR A SPRINKLER SYSTEM, UH, FOR THAT. UH, WE UNDERSTOOD, UH, BASED ON THAT DISCUSSION THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME SCENARIOS, SPECIFICALLY SOUTHWEST RESEARCH, UH, THAT, YOU KNOW, THOSE, THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN THEIR TEST AREAS DID NOT MAKE SENSE. UH, WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THAT. UH, WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DOES THERE, THE CMR PROCESS IS THE TYPICAL APPROACH THAT WE WOULD NORMALLY DO. A SUBCOMMITTEE KIND OF BROUGHT UP SOME CONCERNS OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S THERE OF REQUIRING IT. THEY'RE WORRIED THAT EVEN A CMR PROCESS WOULD NOT ALLOW THAT. UH, SO THIS WAS THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT THERE. UH, THE EXCEPTION IF THE STANDARD TESTING CONDUCTED WITHIN THE FIRE AREAS UTILIZED FOR THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF TESTING OF THE LITHIUM ION OR LITHIUM METAL BATTERIES WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSTALLATION. THE FIRE CODE OFFICIAL MAY ACCEPT ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF PROTECTION OF THE FIRE AREA AND SURROUNDING AREAS WITHOUT THE REQUIREMENT OF AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM. SO THAT REALLY JUST KIND OF SAYS, LOOK, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOME TYPE OF PRESCRIP OR, UM, PERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN, WHICH IS OUR CMR PROCESS TO SAY, INSTEAD OF A SPRINKLER SYSTEM FOR THIS AREA, YOU KNOW, IT'S A SEPARATION OF OTHER BUILDINGS AND, UH, STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE TO EVACUATE THE BUILDING, OR HOW TO, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS THE FIRE. UM, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS TYPICAL THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY CREATING IN THAT ENVIRONMENT, WHICH WE WOULD NOT SEE IN A LOT OF [00:05:01] THE TEST LABORATORIES, UH, THAT ARE OUT THERE. SO WE UNDERSTAND THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE SCENARIO. WE WOULDN'T MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO CHANGE THAT. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT PROPOSED EXCEPTION AND LETTING IT BURN TO THE GROUND AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T AFFECT OTHER BUILDINGS THAT ARE NEARBY WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS. I MEAN, WE WOULD DEFINITELY WORK WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT LANGUAGE WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT BE WHAT SWES PERSONNEL DOES, OF COURSE. BUT THEIR FIRST RESPONSE TO DO OF EVACUATING THE BUILDING IS TO CALL THE RESPONDING AGENCY, WHICH IS RIGHT DOWN THE STREET. AND THEN AT THAT POINT IT WOULD BE UP TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ADDRESS HOW TO HANDLE THE FIRE WITHIN THE BUILDING. OKAY. THANK YOU. BUT ONCE AGAIN, I'M SORRY, MISS, LAST WEEK OR TWO WEEKS AGO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, THE COMMENT WAS THAT WE WANTED KAREN'S INPUT. WERE YOU HERE LAST WEEK TO OFFER YOUR YEAH. OKAY, GOT IT. I, I WAS HERE AND I, UH, HAVE REVIEWED THIS LANGUAGE AND I THINK IT'S SATISFACTORY. GONNA TAKE CARE OF EVERYTHING WE NEED. ALRIGHT, THANKS. AND ALSO, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT BRIAN HAS ARRIVED. OUR FEARLESS LEADER IS NOW BACK IN CHARGE OF THE MEETING. YEAH. UM, BRIAN SMITH, I AM HERE ON THE RECORD. YES, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND, UH, SORRY ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. I, I MEAN, WE, IF WE WOULD'VE KNOWN IF WE WOULD'VE PUT THIS WHOLE CYCLE OFF, IF THEY WERE GONNA LET US KNOW THAT, HEY, WE'RE SHUTTING DOWN I 10, MAYBE WE DO AFTERNOON MEETINGS OR SOMETHING. I DON'T KNOW. THIS IS A LITTLE RIDICULOUS, BUT I DO APPRECIATE EVERYBODY, UH, FIGHTING THAT AND GETTING HERE FOR, UH, THESE MEETINGS. YEAH, YOU NEED TO LEAVE TWO HOURS EARLY. THAT'S RIGHT. UM, SO THAT WAS FOR A FIRE SPRINKLER REQUIREMENT. UH, 9 0 3 0.2, 2.2. UH, 9 0 7 0.2 IS THE EXACT SAME REQUIREMENT, BUT FOR A FIRE ALARM, UH, REQUIREMENT, UH, WITH THE AIR RESPIRATING SYSTEM OR, UH, DETECTION SYSTEM. UH, SO BASICALLY THE EXACT SAME LANGUAGE, UH, THAT IF THE TESTING, THE STANDARD TESTING WITHIN THAT BUILDING WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT, UH, THE SYSTEM. THEN THEY CAN PROVIDE, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, THROUGH THE FIRE CODE OFFICIALS APPROVAL, UH, TO, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE OTHER MEANS. UM, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THIS ONE MAY NOT BE, HEY, WE'RE GONNA PUT IN ANY THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM, BUT WE LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THERE DURING THE TESTING THROUGH AN SOP PROCESS. UM, HERE, YOU KNOW, HERE ARE ALL THE EXITS AND NOTIFICATIONS, UH, THINGS LIKE THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN WE, THE, THE TAKEAWAY FROM THIS AREA IS WHEN WE HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE A SMALL LAB SURROUNDED BY A BIG OFFICE BUILDING, UH, THAT ARE DOING THIS. BUT THESE ARE NOT THE SCENARIOS THAT WE'RE GONNA SEE AT SOUTHWEST OR PROBABLY OTHER SCENARIOS WHERE WE WOULD ACCEPT THIS AS A CMR. UH, SO WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH THAT APPROACH, BUT WE'RE GIVING THAT AVAILABILITY THROUGH THIS LANGUAGE. AND THEN IF THE PERSON WANTED TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF EITHER THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WOULD, IT WOULD COME CORRECT. EXACTLY. YEAH. CORRECT. THE CMR PROCESS IS APPEALED HERE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO THAT WAS THE TWO ITEMS TABLED FOR THAT. UM, THE NEXT ONE WAS THE INTERCONNECTIVITY OF CO UNDER CHAPTER NINE 15. SO WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT ALL THE CHANGES UNDER THE CARBON MONOXIDE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE 2024. UH, THE LAST ITEM THAT WE HAD WAS THE INTERCONNECTIVITY AND MAKING SURE THAT IT WAS INTERPRETED. I THINK EVERYBODY AGREED WITH HOW WE WOULD INTERPRET IT IS TO KIND OF FOLLOW THE SAME REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE ALARM OR SMOKE ALARM DETECTORS AND INTERCONNECTIVITY, UH, SAY IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT THE INTERCONNECTIVITY WOULD BE REQUIRED PER UNIT OR DWELLING SPACE AND NOT FOR ALL THE UNITS WITHIN ONE BUILDING. UH, SO THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY EVACUATING. SO WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT A CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM, ONCE AGAIN IS ONE OF THE STANDALONES WOULD BE 110. IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE OF THOSE WITHIN ONE DWELLING UNIT, THEN THOSE NEED TO BE INTERCONNECTED. SO THAT, SAY YOU HAVE ONE NEAR, UM, IN CASE YOU DID HAVE LIKE A GAS RANGE OR SOMETHING AND IT WAS GOING OFF AND YOU ALSO HAD ONE IN YOUR BEDROOM, THEN BOTH OF THOSE WOULD SOUND TO NOTIFY THE PEOPLE WITHIN THAT DWELLING UNIT, BUT WOULD NOT NOTIFY, UH, OR NOT SOUND ON ANY OF THE ONES IN THE OTHER UNITS. UH, SIMILAR TO HOW A SMOKE ALARM WORKS, UH, CURRENT, UH, CURRENTLY FOR ANY R ONE OR R TWO, UM, ANY SYSTEM DETECTOR, UH, CO DETECTOR, WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED, UH, TO TIE BACK INTO ANY FIRE ALARM SYSTEM OR OR DETECTION SYSTEM. LIKE SAY IF YOU HAD A CENTRAL BOILER FOR THAT BUILDING AND IT WAS TIED TO THAT ANYWHERE THAT'S KIND OF IN MORE COMMON AREA, THAT WOULD NOTIFY THE, THE PANEL DO AN OFFSITE AND THEN, UH, SET OFF THE STROBES AND HORNS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF IT BEING ISOLATED TO THAT SPECIFIC FIRE AREA. UM, AS PART OF THE, THE APPROVAL. SO THE AMENDMENT WE'RE MAKING IS REALLY TALKING ABOUT JUST THOSE SEAL ALARMS AND THE INTERCONNECTIVITY. AND JUST FOR A CLARIFICATION ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID, IF THEY CAN SEGMENT WHERE THE LIGHTS AND STROBES GO OFF BY ZONE, THEY WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED TO SET OFF THE, THE ALARM OR THE CORRECT I THINK IT SAYS FIRE AREA IN YES, SIR. IN THAT AREA, CORRECT. EXACTLY. YEAH. SO IF IT'S A LARGE MALL OR A LARGE BUILDING, SO AS THAT'S SEGREGATED OFF BY A FIRE AREA, WHICH IS DEFINED USUALLY BY SOME TYPE OF FIRE BARRIER, UH, [00:10:01] YOU KNOW, RATED WALLS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. BUT, UH, THEN, YOU KNOW, IF, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO RUN ADDITIONAL WIRING, BUT IT, THEY DO HAVE THAT OPTION, UH, TO DO THAT. AND AS WELL, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN, CMR PROCESS IS THERE. IF THEY COME UP WITH A VALID REASON AND THEY FEEL THE JUSTIFICATION'S THERE FOR, FOR ANY REASON, THEY CAN PRESENT THAT AS INSTEAD OF NOTIFICATION, HEY, WE'RE CALLING THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OUT. WE HAVE TRAINED PERSONNEL TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS IT AND GO TO THAT LOCATION. IF WE NEED TO EVACUATE THE ENTIRE BUILDING, WE COULD DO THAT. THERE'S A LOT OF PRO POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IN PLACE, UH, THAT WOULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF NUISANCE ALARMS THAT WOULD COME FROM ANY CO DETECTOR. UM, BUT, BUT THAT'S THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. I THINK IT KIND OF COINCIDES WITH OUR INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE. UM, AND ALSO, UH, WHAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE WAS BRINGING UP LAST WEEK. ALRIGHT. UM, THE LAST ONE WE ACTUALLY VOTED, UH, INDIVIDUALLY ON LAST TIME. UH, BUT WE WANTED Y'ALL TO SEE THE FINAL LANGUAGE AND WE MADE ONE MINOR MODIFICATION. THIS IS THE, UM, LITHIUM ION TECHNOLOGY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM. WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST WEEK WHERE IT WAS, IF YOU INSTALLED IT BEFORE 2018, THEN WE ASKED, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD HAVE TO KIND OF DO THIS HAZARD MITIGATION ANALYSIS OR THE, UM, AND LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, HEY, IS MY BUILDING STILL SAFE? BE, YOU KNOW, IF I STARTED USING THESE ESS BEFORE 2018, OR ACTUALLY WHEN WE ADOPTED THE 20 EIGHTEENS, WHICH WAS THE FIRST TIME THE IFC REALLY STARTED ADDRESSING ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS, UH, SUBCOMMITTEE ASKED US TO KIND OF GIVE A, A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT. SO WE'RE ANTICIPATING ADOPTING THE 2020 FOURS IN THIS SECTION ON APRIL 1ST, 2025. UH, SO WE'LL GIVE ABOUT NINE MONTHS, WE'LL GO OUT, WE'LL REACH OUT, UH, WE'LL TAKE THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, TRY TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, BUT IT'LL GIVE EVERYBODY ABOUT A NINE MONTH WINDOW BEFORE IT BECOMES ENFORCEABLE. UH, SO THEY CAN WORK WITH THE, WITH US AND WE CAN WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THOSE THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS, IF ANY. AND THEN, UH, FIND A SOLUTION. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO, THE CHANGE THAT WE MADE WAS, INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING JURISDICTION ADOPTION OF 2018, WE CLEANED THAT UP AND JUST SAID, HEY, WE ADOPTED IT ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2018. SO, UH, TECHNICALLY IF YOU INSTALLED YOUR EES SYSTEM BEFORE OCTOBER 1ST, 2018, THEN YOU'RE, YOU HAD TO ABIDE BY THIS BY JANUARY 1ST, 2026. OKAY. AND THOSE WERE THE FOUR THAT WE, UH, HAD TABLED THAT WERE PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT TODAY. THE LAST TWO, UH, WHICH WE WILL, UH, BE WORKING ON OVER THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS, UH, WILL BE THE, UH, , UH, WHICH IS THE WILD URBAN INTERFACE AND THE, UH, FOREST SYSTEM, WHICH WAS THE, UH, AIR ASPIRATING, UM, SUPPLY, AIR ASPIRATION SUPPLY FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT, UH, SPECIFIC BUILDINGS. GO AHEAD. MARK. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT AMENDMENT? YEAH. THE ONE DANGER BY PUTTING OCTOBER 1ST, 2018, WHICH IS THE DATE WE ADOPTED IT, IS THERE WERE BUILDINGS THAT WERE BUILT UNDER THE OLD CODE. IT'S 11. OH, GO AHEAD. SORRY. BUILDINGS BUILT UNDER THE OLD CODE THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN BUILT UNTIL 2019 OR EVEN LATER FINISHED. WELL THIS IS INSTALLATION OF THE EES. SO, BUT YOU'RE GIVING A DATE OF INSTALLATION PRIOR TO THAT DATE WHERE YOU MAY HAVE HAD BUILDINGS THAT WERE IN WHERE IT WAS INSTALLED IN 2019, IN EARLY 2020. NO. YOU SEE IF IT WAS OH YEAH, IT WOULD, YES, BECAUSE THE CODE, WE ADOPTED THE CODE IN OCTOBER, ANY BUILDING THAT WAS UN UNDERWAY OR PLAN REVIEW THAT WAS UNDERWAY AT THAT TIME WOULD'VE BEEN UNDER THE OLD CODE. CORRECT. WHICH DIDN'T HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR THAT. SO I LIKE THE LANGUAGE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, YOU KNOW, INSTALLED USING THE CODE VERSUS A DATE. CERTAIN, IF THAT MAKES, IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING HERE IS IF A BUILDING WAS COMPLETED OR THE INSTALLATION WAS OCTOBER 2ND, 2018, IT NEEDS TO HAVE IT RIGHT NOW AND IT DOESN'T GET NO, IT WOULD STILL HAVE UNTIL JANUARY 1ST, 2026. THE REQUIREMENT FOR THIS SECTION DOESN'T GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL JANUARY, 2026. IT'S JUST SAYING IF YOU INSTALLED YOUR SYSTEM AFTER OCTOBER 1ST, 2018, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO, UH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING PER THIS SECTION. 'CAUSE TECHNICALLY YOU SHOULD HAVE INSTALLED IT PER THE 20 EIGHTEENS. THIS IS SAL GARCIA. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT A BUILDING THAT IS PERMITTED PRIOR TO THIS DATE, OR A SYSTEM PERMITTED PRIOR TO THIS DATE BUT INSTALLED AFTER THIS DATE WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM HAVING TO COMPLY? IS THAT, IS THAT, THAT IT WOULD, IT WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO COM IT WOULD GET UNTIL JANUARY 1ST, 2026 TO COMPLY. CORRECT. YEAH. BUT THE WAY THIS IS WORDED IS IF THE INSTALLATION WAS AFTER 2000, OCTOBER 1ST, 2000, IT'S, IT'S IN EFFECT RIGHT NOW. [00:15:01] IT WOULD BE EFFECT WHEN THE CODE IS ADOPTED, WHICH MEANS THEY WOULDN'T GET THE GRACE PERIOD. NO. IF, IF IT WAS INSTALLED AFTER OCTOBER 1ST, 2018, IT'S NOT SUSPECT TO THIS CODE SECTION AT WHATSOEVER IT, THAT INSTALLATION DOESN'T, UH, FALL UNDER THIS CODE SECTION AT ALL. I THINK I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE HE WAS COMING FROM. I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE LOGIC. SAY YOU HAD A DATA CENTER THAT WOULD I INSTALL ONE OF THESE WHEN YOU WERE PERMITTED UNDER THE 20 FIFTEENS. UH, BUT YOU DIDN'T FINISH YOUR BUILDING UNTIL 2019. YOU KNOW, SO YOU GOT PERMITTED EARLIER THAT YEAR UNDER THE ODOR CODES AND IT TOOK YOU A COUPLE YEARS TO FINISH IT AND THEN YOU INSTALLED THE SYSTEM AT THE END OF THE BUILDING. 'CAUSE YOU'RE, THAT'S KIND OF A FINAL THING. SO YOUR INSTALLATION IS TECHNICALLY 2020. RIGHT. BUT YOU'RE DOING IT UNDER THE EXISTING CODE. WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO COMPLY AT ALL. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE INTENT. SO IS IF IT WAS PERMITTED, IF IT WAS INSTALLED UNDER THE 2018 CODE, SO MAYBE INSTALLED IN A BUILDING PERMITTED PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1ST, 2018. I JUST SAY PERMITTED UNDER THE 2018 CODE BECAUSE INSTEAD OF INSTALLED BUT PERMITTED PRIOR TO, IN OTHER WORDS, INSTEAD OF DATE, UH, SENSITIVE IT'S CODE, UH, CODE CODE, YEAH. WHICH IS THAT DATE? THE POINT OF THAT DATE IS TO SAY, THIS IS WHEN WE ADOPTED THAT CODE CYCLE. SO INSTEAD OF INSTALLED, YOU WOULD SAY CHANGE IT TO, BUT I PROMISE WHAT HE'S SAYING PERMITTED IT COULD BE STILL UNDER 2015. IT WAS INSTALLED AFTER THAT DATE, BUT IT'S UNDER A DIFFERENT CODE CYCLE. YEAH. WHICH IS, SO WHAT I'M SAYING, IF, IF IT'S, IF IT WAS PERMITTED UNDER THE 2018 OR WHATEVER PRIOR, PRIOR TO TWO PRIOR, UH, CODE CYCLE PRIOR TO 2018. RIGHT, EXACTLY. COULD IT, COULD IT JUST REFERENCEABLE SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED TO CHANGE INSTALLED TO PERMITTED. I THINK SO. I MEAN, I, I, I SEE THE LOGIC TO THAT, KAREN, OR I'M SORRY, UH, CRYSTAL, YOUR THOUGHTS CHANGE IT IN IT FROM PERMITTED OR INSTALLED TO PERMITTED 'CAUSE THEY WOULD'VE NEEDED TO HAVE PERMITTED IT EVEN IF IT WASN'T A NEW BUILDING. THAT'S KIND OF A CHANGE. IT'S NOT A CHANGE OF USE, BUT IT'S A CHANGE OF THE HAZARD. SO YOU'RE ADDING A DIFFERENT TYPE OF HAZARD, WHICH WOULD'VE REQUIRED A NEW OCL, WHICH WOULD'VE TRIGGERED MAYBE LIKE A DIFFERENT SPRINKLER SYSTEM OR, YOU KNOW, SOME ANALYSIS IN SOME FORM OF PERMITTING. SO I THINK THAT KIND OF FALLS IN LINE WITH THE INTENT. SO, UH, WHAT WILL, WHAT WILL AMEND THEN, I'M, I I AM IN FAVOR OF THEM HAVING TO DO THIS. THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED NOW IS THERE IS A GROUP THAT WOULD NOT CORRECT. YEAH. IF YOU KIND OF INSTALLED UNDER THE OLD CODES, BUT YEAH. YEAH. SO WE'RE GONNA CHANGE 2018. NO, BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE IT'S PERMIT. IF IT COULD HAVE BEEN PERMITTED AFTER 2018, WELL THEN IT WOULD'VE BEEN REQUIRED TO MEET THE 2018 CODES OF OCTOBER 1ST, 2018. IF I TURN, IF I TURNED IN MY, MY, MY QUESTION IS, IS IF I TURN IN MY PLANS ON OCTOBER 2ND, 2018, WHICH IS IN THAT NO MAN'S LAND, THEN YOU WOULD'VE BEEN INSTALLING, YOU WOULD'VE, YOU WOULD'VE BEEN REQUIRED TO BE PERMITTED UNDER THE 2018 CODES, WHICH IS ALLOWED, WHICH IS THEN YOU WOULD'VE BEEN REQUIRED TO THAT. WE'RE, WE'RE CATCHING EVERYBODY. I THINK YOU BROUGHT UP THE GOOD POINT. I THINK WE'RE CATCHING WHAT THEIR, WHAT THEIR CONCERN WAS WITH THAT. OKAY. SO, UH, AND THEN WE'LL STRIKE THROUGH INSTALLED AND, UH, THAT'LL BE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FOR THAT. SO THOSE ARE THE FOUR CHANGES THAT WE HAD TABLED, UH, BESIDES THE WWE AND THE FARS SYSTEM, UH, WHICH WE'LL STILL NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. UH, THOSE ARE KIND OF A BIGGER, BIGGER PACKAGE THAT WE'LL PRESENT AT A LATER TIME. UH, PROBABLY AT THE END OF THE, OF THIS SUBCOMMITTEE'S REVIEW OF THE IRC IN, IN A FEW WEEKS. OKAY. UM, BRIAN, DID Y'ALL WANNA GO AHEAD? AND SO THIS IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR. IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND BUTTON THAT ONE UP, THEN WE CAN MOVE TO THE INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE. ALRIGHT, BRIAN SMITH, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND BUTTON UP WHAT WE'VE GOTTEN IN THOSE FOUR. IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THAT. IS THAT OKAY, JEREMY? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO WE HAD FOUR THAT WE JUST REVIEWED AND DID, CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FOUR UH, ITEMS THAT WE JUST REVIEWED? THIS IS COREY PALMER. SO MOVED. CAN I GET A SECOND, MICRO SECOND. SO I'VE GOT A, A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THOSE FOUR ITEMS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY NEGATIVE MOTION PASSES NOW WE STILL HAVE THE TWO THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE, UH, WE WILL CARRY TILL NEXT WEEK. IS THAT CORRECT? UH, PROBABLY A FEW, LITTLE, FEW MORE WEEKS THE NEXT WEEK. BUT YEAH, WE DO HAVE THOSE TWO TABLED SO WE'RE NOT FULLY WRAPPED UP ON THE IFC, BUT, UM, WE'LL, WE'LL CONTINUE THOSE MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. WHAT WE GOT IN FRONT OF US IS THE PROPOSED UPDATES TO THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE CHAPTER 10 AMENDMENTS. UM, WE'VE GOT EIGHT ITEMS. [00:20:01] OH. OH, IS THAT RIGHT? OR DO I HAVE THE WRONG ONE? WELL, I'LL, UH, TURN IT OVER TO, UH, TEAM'S LEAD. OKAY. JASMINE ROA, UH, TO TAKE OVER FOR THAT, FOR THE EX EXISTING VOTING CODE. HI, GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. I'M JASMINE ROA, UH, PLANS EXAMINER SUPERVISOR OVER THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND COMMERCIAL ENERGY PLAN REVIEW TEAM. YOU MAY REMEMBER ME FROM PREVIOUS SUBCOMMITTEES SUCH AS THE IBC AND THE IPC . YOU'VE SEEN ME HERE HELPING OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR CRYSTAL GONZALEZ. SO SHE GAVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO RUN THE IEBC THIS MORNING. UM, AS STATED, THERE ARE ONLY EIGHT ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. WHEN WE DID OUR INTERNAL REVIEW. UH, WE REALLY JUST HONED IN ON, UH, THESE NEW SECTIONS LISTED HERE, UH, BEFORE THE MOST PART, NOT A LOT OF MAJOR CHANGES. UH, I ALSO WANNA INTRODUCE MY COPILOT HERE. THIS IS RAUL MELENDEZ. HE IS A SENIOR PLANS EXAMINER ALSO ON THE COMMERCIAL ENERGY TEAM. HE'LL BE HELPING US OUT. LET'S START WITH OUR FIRST ITEM. WE ARE IN SECTION 5 0 2 1 1. THIS IS A NEW SECTION REGARDING THE RISK CATEGORY ASSIGNMENT, UH, REGARDING WHEN THERE'S AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING. UH, THIS REALLY IS JUST MORE CLARIFICATION AS FAR AS, UM, MATCHING THE IBC AND HOW THOSE RISK CATEGORIES ARE ASSIGNED. CAN WE, THIS IS MIKE RICE. CAN WE LOOK AT THE CHAPTER OF RISK, UH, CATEGORY? YE ANYONE? BRIAN SMITH? ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, THIS IS MIKE GROSS. I WHAT ARE THE, CAN WE LOOK AT THE RISK CATEGORY? UH, SURE. JUST GIVE US A SECOND. PULL THAT UP. KEEP GOING. SCROLL RIGHT THERE. WE HAVE THAT PULLED UP FOR YOU. THAT IS IBC TABLE 1604 0.5. THE RISK CATEGORY ASSESSMENTS. AND Y'ALL AREN'T PROPOSING ANY CHANGES, JUST THAT IT BE ADOPTED AS CORRECT. YES. WE WILL JUST ADOPT, UH, AS WRITTEN. RIGHT. SO PRIOR TO THIS SECTION BEING IN THERE, IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN A RISK CATEGORY, THIS, THE, THE EFFECT OF THIS CHAPTER SEEMS TO BE THAT THEN YOU NOW NOW NEED TO, NEED TO GO BACK AND GET ALL NEW INSPECTIONS, NEW PERMITS TO CHANGE AN OCCUPANCY AND GET A, A NEW CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SO PRIOR TO THIS MM-HMM, , WHAT WAS THE PROCESS IF A RISK CATEGORY WAS CHANGED IN A BUILDING? SO THAT WAS, UM, OUR PROCESS ALREADY, UH, IT JUST WASN'T EXPLICITLY EXPRESSED THERE IN THE CODE, BUT THAT WAS OUR PROCESS. WHEN WE REVIEW AND WE ASSESS THAT THERE WAS A HIGHER RISK CATEGORY, UH, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO REVIEW THAT ADDITION PLUS THE EXISTING BUILDING AND REQUEST A NEW C OF O AND THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THAT C OF O PROCESS WITH INSPECTIONS. AND THEN I HAVE FLORENCE, OUR MANAGER, SHE CAN JUMP IN AND CORRECT ME ON ANYTHING . SO, BUT I, I HAVE A QUESTION. AND IT'S A REAL LIFE EXAMPLE. SO WE HAD A WAREHOUSE BUILDING THAT ORIGINALLY HAD A SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSTALLED FOR LOW PILE STORAGE, AND THE TENANT DECIDED THEY WANTED TO DO HIGH PILE STORAGE, WHICH INCREASED THE RISK CATEGORY, WHICH MEANT THAT THEY NEEDED A DIFFERENT KIND. BASICALLY WE PUT, TOOK THE OLD SPRINKLER OUT, PUT A BRAND NEW SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN THAT ALLOWED FOR THAT, PUT SKYLIGHTS IN THE BUILDING [00:25:01] TO LET THE FIRE OUT. BUT A NEW CFO, WE HAD NO INSPECTIONS REQUIRED ON THE BUILDING OTHER THAN THE FIRE SYSTEM. AND THE CFO WAS THE SAME BECAUSE THE USE OF THE BUILDING WAS A WAREHOUSE BEFORE. IT'S A WAREHOUSE AFTER. AND IT REALLY DOESN'T TALK ABOUT IN YOUR, YOUR CFO, IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT, UH, YOUR RISK CATEGORY. IT TALKS ABOUT THE USE OF THE BUILDING. AND SO I THINK WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS THAT OLD CFO, ONCE YOU WENT FROM LOW PILE STORAGE TO HIGH PILE STORAGE, WOULD TRIGGER INSPECTIONS ON THE WHOLE BUILDING AND A NEW CFO, WHICH MEANS THE WHOLE BUILDING WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT UP TO CURRENT CODE. AND SO I IF WE COULD JUST GET A CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THAT MEANS. SURE. AND IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE, IT JUST WENT, UH, YOU HAD SAID IT JUST WENT UNDER FOR THE FIRE SYSTEMS INSPECTIONS AS FAR, YEAH. IT WAS ONLY, THEY, THEY HAD A PERMIT FOR THE SPRINKLERS. OKAY. AND THAT WAS IT. THE, THE CFO WAS THE SAME CFO. ALL WE DID IS APPLY FOR A NAME CHANGE ON THE C OF O. CALL IT A DAY OVERDONE FINISHED, YOU KNOW? OKAY. YES. WE CAN LOOK AT THAT. UH, OUR INTERNAL PROCESS. SO JASMINE FLORENCE DOES A, UM, CHANGE TO THE OCL? THE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS CHANGE YOUR RISK CATEGORY. I I DON'T SEE THAT IN OUR RISK CATEGORY TABLE. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. YEAH. UH, THAT WOULD ALSO DEPEND ON WHAT YOUR STORAGE, UH, STORING, UH, YOU HAVE A COMMODITIES LIST TYPICALLY THAT YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT ON, UH, HIGH STORAGE, UH, FACILITIES. ABSOLUTELY, YES. AND WE A PROCESS FOR THAT. SO WE HAVE A PROCESS TO REVIEW THE OCO AND THAT TRIGGERED, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE NECESSARY. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT CORRELATED TO A RISK CATEGORY CHANGE. SO SECTION FOR STORING GLUE, THE, IT'S A PVC GLUE AND THEY, THEY SAID THAT THEY COULD STORE IT, YOU KNOW, ONE CONTAINER HIGH IN A WAREHOUSE. AND SO NOW THEY HAVE A WHOLE SECTION, YOU KNOW, OF THAT WAREHOUSE THAT IS STORING PVC PRIMER, PVC GLUE. AND SO UNDER THE CURRENT CODE, THE CFO WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE OR INSPECTIONS OTHER THAN SUBMITTING THE REPORT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, PUTTING THE SPRINKLER IN, DOING ALL THE, THE TWO CHANGES TO THE BUILDING TO PUT IN THE, THE FIRE SKYLIGHTS THAT I GUESS BURN OUT AND LET THE FIRE THROUGH THE ROOF RATHER THAN SPREAD THROUGH THE BUILDING. SO WOULD IN THAT, THE ADOPTION OF THIS, WITH THAT STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS STUFF THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE AND YOU DIDN'T, IT'S REALLY NOT COVERED BY THE C OF O REQUIRE A NEW C OF O AND ALL THE INSPECTIONS, NOT THE ADOPTION OF THIS SECTION, IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THE PROCESS THAT YOU WENT THROUGH THIS RISK CATEGORY. TABLE DOESN'T TALK ABOUT STORAGE OF ANY TYPE OF COMMODITIES OR, UM, I MEAN UNLESS YOU HAVE, IT'S MORE BUILDING TOXIC, TOXIC OR EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS. RIGHT. I SEE THAT IDENTIFIED IN A RISK CATEGORY THREE. BUT, UM, I, I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING TOTALLY SEPARATE THAN ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING BUILDING WHERE YOU'RE CHANGING THE RISK CATEGORY. IT IT'S NOT ASSOCIATED WITH, UM, THE STORAGE. YEAH. I THINK THE ONLY TIME THIS MAY TRIGGER, WELL THAT'S NOT EVEN THIS SECTION. 'CAUSE THIS IS PURELY ADDITIONS, CORRECT. YEAH. BUT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN THEY WOULD CHANGE OCCUPANCY TYPE IS IF YOU GO FROM STORAGE TO HAZARD. SO IF YOU'VE, FOR YOUR AQS GET SO HIGH, BUT THAT'S THROUGH THE OCL PROCESS AND KIND OF WHAT THIS DOES, YOU KNOW, AND THROUGH THE OCL PROCESS, YOU HIRE SOMEBODY THAT'S PROFESSIONAL TO COME IN, ANALYZE WHAT YOU'RE STORING INSIDE THERE AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE AN S YOU CAN'T STORE THIS MUCH. YOU EITHER HAVE TO MOVE IT OUT OR CHANGE YOUR OCCUPANCY TYPE TO AN H, WHICH, YOU KNOW, DOES TRIGGER ZONING AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS. SO YOU HAVE TO ASSESS THAT. UH, BUT THAT'S THE CHALLENGE THAT A LOT OF LOGISTICAL BUILDINGS HAVE. OKAY. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THIS. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS SECTION 5 0, 2 0.5, SMOKE BARRIERS GROUP I ONE, CONDITION TWO. THIS IS ALSO A NEW SECTION. IT'S GONNA CLARIFY WHEN SMOKE COMPARTMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE ADDED, UM, IN AN EXISTING GROUP. I ONE CONDITION TWO. UM, SPECIFICALLY FOR AN ADDITION. WHEN THAT, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, AND THE, UH, NUMBER OF CARE RECIPIENTS ON A SINGLE STORY, UH, THAT'S WHEN THIS SECTION WOULD APPLY. AND THERE IS AN EXCEPTION, [00:30:01] UH, THAT ALLOWS EXISTING BUILDINGS WITH SMOKE COMPARTMENTS, UH, THAT DO COMPLY WITH THE IBC. UH, THAT SECTION FOUR 20.6, UH, TO REMAIN AS IS AGAIN, AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT EXCEED THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, LISTED IN THE IBC, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE TRAVEL DISTANCE. THIS IS CORY PALMER. CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT GROUP I ONE IS IN CONDITION TWO? SO THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES. UH, CONDITION TWO WOULD BE THOSE, UH, THOSE OCCUPANTS THAT ARE RECEIVING, UH, ASSISTANCE TO EGRESS. UM, SO IT'S GONNA BE, UM, EITHER PHYSICAL OR VISUAL ASSISTANCE, UH, TO EGRESS OUT OF THE BUILDING. RIGHT. SAMANTHA, ANY QUESTIONS? NOPE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THREE. OKAY. ITEM 3, 5 0 3 POINT 16 AND 5 0 3 16 0.1 AGAINST, UH, SPECIFICALLY ON THE GROUP I ONE OCCUPANCIES, THIS IS SPEAKING ON THE SMOKE COMPARTMENTS AND WHEN SMOKE BARRIERS, UM, ARE GOING TO MEET, NEED TO BE MET, UM, SOME EXPLANATION THERE. PRIOR TO 2015, UH, THESE OCCUPANCIES DIDN'T HAVE TO DECLARE CONDITION ONE OR CONDITION TWO. AGAIN, THAT'S, UH, DECLARING WHETHER THOSE, UH, OCCUPANTS NEED ASSISTANCE IN EGRESS. UH, SO THIS IS KIND OF CAPTURING, UH, THOSE EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT DIDN'T HAVE A DECLARATION AT THE TIME. AND, UM, NOW A SMOKE BARRIER WOULD BE REQUIRED, UH, WHERE THE WORK AREA IS ON A STORY WITH SLEEPING ROOMS FOR MORE THAN 30 CARE RECIPIENTS. SO, CAN I JUST ON BOTH OF THOSE, THIS IS NOT A RETROFIT REQUIREMENT. THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IF YOU, IF YOU GET OVER 50% IN A FIRE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND YOU'RE HAVING TO RECONSTRUCT THE BUILDING, THAT'S WHEN IT WOULD KICK IN. WHEN WOULD THIS KICK IN? SO THIS SPECIFICALLY IS FOR ADDITIONS. THIS CHAPTER? YEAH, CHAPTER FIVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. ? YES. OKAY, WE'RE READY FOR ITEM NUMBER 4, 5 0 3 POINT 17 SMOKE COMPARTMENTS AND AMBULATORY CARE FACILITIES. UH, AGAIN, SO THIS IS ON AMBULATORY CARE AND WHEN THE WORK AREA EXCEEDS THE 50% OF THE BUILDING AREA, REQUIRING THE SMOKE COMPARTMENTS, UH, IF THE ALTERATION CREATES, UH, AN AREA GREATER THAN THE 10,000 SQUARE FEET ON A STORY. I, AND THEN THIS IS ALSO ADDRESSED IN CHAPTER NINE, UH, FOR THE, UH, PERFORMANCE, UH, COMPLIANCE METHOD AS WELL FOR, UM, FOR LEVEL LEVEL THREE ALTERATIONS. ANY QUESTIONS? NOPE. OKAY. EXCELLENT. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, WE'RE GONNA GO TO CHAPTER EIGHT, TABLE 8 0 4 0.51, PARENTHETICAL ONE. THIS IS STORIES WITH ONE EXIT. SO THESE ARE JUST REVISED TABLES. UH, IN OUR INTERNAL MEETING, WE THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD THING FOR, UH, OUR CUSTOMERS, OUR DEVELOPERS, UH, THESE TABLES NOW INCLUDE, UM, AN EXTENDED TRAVEL DISTANCE FOR THE GROUP R TWO OCCUPANCIES AND ALSO AN INCREASED OCCUPANT LOAD ALLOWANCE, UH, ON THE FIRST STORY. AND THESE TABLES ALSO ADDRESS OCCUPIABLE ROOFS. UH, THAT'S ALSO TO MATCH, UH, TABLES IN THE IBC WHERE, UH, THEY DECLARE THAT OCCUPIABLE ROOFS WITHIN THOSE, WITHIN THOSE LEVELS AS WELL AS THE STORIES THEMSELVES KEEP GOING. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER 6, 8 0 4 POINT 11, EXISTING STAIRWAYS ALTERATION. LEVEL TWO, ALTERATION. LEVEL TWO IS WHEN WE START RECONFIGURING THE SPACE OF AN EXISTING BUILDING. UH, THIS IS GOING TO CORRELATE THE STAIRWAY AND HANDRAIL ALLOWANCES, UH, FOR THE PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD. AND PREVIOUSLY, UM, IT WOULD REQUIRE NEW OR REPLACEMENT STAIRS TO FOLLOW SECTION 10 11 OF THE IBC AND THE PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD DID NOT. SO THE INTENT IS TO PROVIDE SAME ALLOWANCES, UH, THAT [00:35:01] COULD HAVE REDUCED OR NOT CHANGED, UH, OR EXCUSE ME, MAY EITHER REDUCE OR NOT CHANGE THE COST OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE WORK AREA METHOD. OKAY, THAT MAKES SENSE. ANY QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, KEEP GOING. OKAY, DOWN TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, SECTION 9 0 8. THIS IS YOUR EMERGENCY RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS ENHANCEMENT SYSTEM COVERAGE. UH, THIS IS ALSO, UH, COMPLIES WITH THE IFC SECTION. THAT'S IFC SECTION FIVE 10. UM, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE SYSTEM INSTALLATION, UH, BUT IT ADDS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE BUILDING TO UNDERGO AN EVALUATION, UH, OF THE PUBLIC COMMUNICATION SYSTEM COVERAGE. SO WE DID LIST THAT AS A POTENTIAL COST INCREASE FOR CONSTRUCTION, UH, JUST TO HAVE THAT EVALUATION DONE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS FOR, UH, ALTERATIONS. UH, AT A LEVEL THREE, WHAT WOULD A LEVEL THREE BE? UH, LEVEL THREE IS 50% OR MORE OF THE, UH, BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE AGGREGATE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. WHEN WE REQUIRED THIS LAST TIME ON A NEW BUILDING, DO WE REMEMBER WE HAVE WHAT THAT WE ESTIMATED THAT COST TO BE? BECAUSE THIS WENT INTO THE CODE LAST CYCLE, I BELIEVE WITH, I MEAN WE HAD A HUGE DISCUSSION ON THIS OVER AND OVER THE COST FOR AN EVALUATION FOR THE SYSTEM, FOR THE IRK SYSTEM. WELL, OUR, ALL OF OUR FIRE FOLKS JUST LEFT. THEY REVIEW AND INSPECT THAT SYSTEM. UM, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE COST. LOOK, UM, LOOK IN THE CODE, CHANGE DETAILS. YEAH. CLICK RIGHT THERE NECESSARILY. I THINK THEY HAD TO EASILY PUT IT IN OR EASILY RUN THE WIRE TO PUT THE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM SO THEY CAN HAVE IT ON EVERY FLOOR AND ALL THAT STUFF THERE. IT'S SO ON AN EXISTING BUILDING WHERE THE DAMAGE MAY, THE 50% MAY BE NOWHERE NEAR THE AREA THAT THIS SYSTEM USUALLY GOES IN. IT MAY BE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW ALL IT'S REQUIRING IS THAT YOU DO IT, BUT ONCE YOU DO IT, IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SAYS YOU HAVE TO PUT IT IN BIN, THAT COULD BE A HUGE COST. AND IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A NEW BUILDING WHERE YOU, YOU KNOW, IT'S EASIER TO PUT IT IN WHERE YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT A WIRE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TEAR EVERYTHING APART. MM-HMM. . AND IF YOU HAVE, UH, LEAD OR ASBESTOS OR SOMETHING ELSE IN THAT EXISTING BUILDING, IT COULD GET TO BE REALLY EXPENSIVE. SO CAN, YEAH. SO CAN WE, CAN WE TABLE THIS AND, AND HAVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COME AND LET US KNOW WHAT THESE KIND OF SYSTEMS WOULD COST TO PUT IN THIS SALVATION STORAGE BUILDING DOWNTOWN OR SOMETHING? MS. SAN GARCIA, I JUST WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION. YOU MENTIONED HERE THAT THIS DOES NOT TRIGGER AN INSTALLATION. YES. SO IF THE EVALUATION SAYS THAT YOU DO NEED ONE, YOU STILL DON'T NEED ONE. NO. IT TRIGGERS PUTTING, IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SAYS YOU NEED TO PUT IT IN, YOU NEED TO PUT IT IN. AND THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM. MM-HMM. . AND, AND IT'S JUST, IT'S REAL. THE LAST TIME WE WENT THROUGH IT, MY MEMORY SERVES ME. IT WAS VERY EXPENSIVE. AND IT'S GOING TO BE EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE TO PUT INTO AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT, THAT, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE NOT REBUILDING THE AREA THAT IS, YOU HAVE TO PUT IT IN WHERE, BECAUSE BASICALLY YOU'RE HAVING TO GO FROM THE BOTTOM FLOOR ALL THE WAY UP. MM-HMM. SOMEHOW WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, WHICH MEANS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A HISTORIC BUILDING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO BE DRILLING AN ASBESTOS OR YOU KNOW, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO ASBESTOS ABATEMENT BEFORE YOU CAN PUT IT IN. AND NOW YOU, YOU KNOW, THAT ALONE COULD COST 10 TIMES MORE THAN IT COSTS IN A NEW BUILDING. IF YOU'RE DOING A LEVEL THREE ALTERATION IN AN ASBESTOS, UM, SURVEY WOULD ALREADY BE REQUIRED. SO THAT'S WHEN THIS WOULD KICK IN IS IN THAT LEVEL THREE. SO WE WOULD ALREADY REQUIRE THAT ASBESTOS SURVEY IF YOU'RE REMODELING THE BUILDING. YEAH. BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE SURVEY THAT'S EXPENSIVE. IT'S DISTURBING THE ASBESTOS AND HAVING TO GET THE PEOPLE OUT IN [00:40:01] HAZMATS TO CUT THE HOLES TO MAKE THE CHASE TO GO WHERE THE WIRE NEEDS TO GO TO GET IT ALL THE WAY UP. MONITOR THE SAMPLES. YEAH. SO I, I JUST THINK WE NEED TO BE ASK OURSELVES, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS KAREN CARPENTER, I'M NOT READING IT AS YOU'RE EVALUATING IT. IF YOU NEED THE SYSTEM, IT JUST SAYS VALUE EVALUATE THE EXISTING SYSTEM FOR STRENGTH AND COVERAGE. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ABOUT EVALUATION TO SEE IF YOU NEED TO INSTALL IT. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE ONLY EVALUATING THE EXISTING SYSTEM, BUT IF THEY SAY THE EXISTING SYSTEM DOESN'T MEET WHAT THEY WANT, THEN THAT TRIGGERS A NEW SYSTEM. CORRECT. NEW SYSTEM. THEN YOU HAVE TO GO TO A NEW CODE. THAT'S WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT IS THE COST. AND I THINK IT'S BOTH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN IT'S AT, AT SOME LEVEL IT'S A RELATIVE COST. RIGHT. IF YOU'RE GONNA MODIFY 50% OF THE BUILDING YOU, YOU HAVE, THAT'S, THAT'S A LOT OF WORK. THAT'S, YOU'RE ALREADY TOUCHING SO MANY OF THE SYSTEMS, YOU'RE PROBABLY HAVING TO UPGRADE AREAS THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TOUCHED. JUST SIMPLY BRING THE BUILDING TO COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS. RIGHT. SO THIS IS JUST A, I DON'T WANNA SAY JUST, BUT IT'S, IT'S ANOTHER COST AND RELATIVE TO COST. YEAH. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT DOING. AND BRIAN SMITH, THE LEVEL THREE ALTERATION IS 50% OR GREATER OF THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE. YEAH. SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALREADY A BIG OBJECT, IF YOU WILL. AND COST WOULD HAVE A LOT OF FACTORS, ESPECIALLY ASBESTOS. HE'S GOT A POINT THERE. YEAH. IF YOU'RE ALREADY DOING 50%. OKAY. I MEAN, IF EVERYBODY ELSE IS OKAY WITH IT, YEAH. IF IT WAS A MINOR, I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY. BUT 50% OR MORE, IT, IT CALLS FOR THAT TO, IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO BRING IT UP TO CODE. OKAY. CRYSTAL OR ANYBODY? WHAT WHAT, UM, WHAT'S THE, ISN'T THERE LIKE A HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR THESE IRK SYSTEM? LIKE ISN'T THERE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF FLOORS IN THE BUILDING THAT YOU NEED BEFORE YOU NEED THIS? UH, IT'S SQUARE FOOTAGE BASED. I, I BELIEVE. YEAH. BRIAN SMITH. ANY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? ARE WE OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD OR ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT FORWARD. OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS OUR LAST ITEM. 10 11.2 0.1. NON-REQUIRED AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS. THIS IS A NEW SECTION, UH, AGAIN, MOSTLY JUST ADDS CLARIFICATION. UH, ALLOWS FOR NON-REQUIRED SYSTEMS TO BE REMOVED. UH, THE DESIGNER BUILDING OWNER WOULD HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE, UH, TO THE CODE OFFICIAL THAT THE BUILDING DID NOT NEED THE SPRINKLERS FOR OCCUPANCY, UH, FIRE AREAS OR TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION. UM, AND THIS IS MOSTLY FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS. UH, MAYBE THERE'S AN EXISTING SYSTEM THAT'S VERY OUTDATED, UH, WOULD BE COSTLY TO, UH, TO UPDATE. UM, THIS SECTION ALLOWS FOR THEM TO REMOVE IT AS LONG AS THEY DO DEMONSTRATE, UH, THAT THE SYSTEM ITSELF ISN'T REQUIRED. ANY QUESTIONS MS. SMITH? I THINK WE'RE GOOD ON THIS. OKAY. IS, IS THERE AN INSPECTION FOR REMOVING THE SYSTEM AS FAR AS FOR IT WOULD BE A DEMO PERMIT. IT WOULD BE A DEMO, YES. CORRECT. FOR THE SYSTEM? YES. OKAY. THAT WAS OUR LAST ITEM FOR THE IEBC CHANGES. SOMEBODY SHOULD TEXT ROBERT. OH, . ROBERT DID. ROBERT DID SEND IN SOME QUESTIONS. THANK YOU MARK FOR REMINDING ME. UM, I CAN RUN THROUGH THEM VERY QUICKLY. HE DID HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT FIRST ITEM FOR THE RISK CATEGORY. HE HAD A QUESTION, UH, ASKING IF IT WAS APPLICABLE TO RESIDENTIAL AND THOSE ARE THE SINGLE FAMILY OR TWO FAMILY, UH, DETACHED DWELLING UNITS. UM, THREE STORIES AND UNDER, UH, WOULD THAT BE APPLICABLE? AND THE RESPONSE TO THAT IS FOR IRC STRUCTURES, UH, MEETING IRC DEFINITION, THEY HAVE THE CHOICE TO COMPLY EITHER WITH THE IRC OR, OR THIS CODE, THE IEBC. UH, SO THAT WAS HIS FIRST QUESTION. AND HE ALSO DID ASK ABOUT ITEMS NUMBER NUMBER [00:45:01] FIVE AND NUMBER SIX, UH, WANTING TO UNDERSTAND WHEN THE PROVISION IS APPLICABLE. AND THAT'S, UH, THE QUESTION AS FAR AS THE WORK AREA COMPLIANCE METHOD. IF IT'S ONLY APPLICABLE FOR 50%, UM, 50% OR GREATER THAT YOU'RE TOUCHING, REMODELING. AND THE ANSWER IS YES 'CAUSE IT IS THOSE LEVEL THREE ALTERATIONS. AND THEN JASON DOESN'T, DOESN'T THAT TABLE ALLOW FOR LIKE LESS STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS THE TRAVEL DISTANCE OR FOR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE? YEAH. SO IT'S CHANGING. IT'S CHANGING. IT'S A MAXIMUM EXIT ASSET. TRAVEL DISTANCE IS 125 FEET. IS THAT INCREASING OR DECREASING? WHAT CURRENTLY IS ALLOWED? IT IS, IT IS TO MATCH WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED. AND WHAT HE'S ASKING IS, IS WHY ISN'T IT APPLICABLE BOTH TO LEVEL THREE, TWO, AND ONE, RIGHT? SO HE DID ASK IF THE BUILDING ADDITION REPRESENTS ONLY 30%, UH, WOULD THESE REQUIREMENTS, UH, BE APPLICABLE? SO WHEN YOU, UH, DO LEVEL ONE, TWO, AND THREE, IF YOU'RE DOING A LEVEL THREE, UH, ALL OF THE CHAPTERS OF LEVEL TWO AND LEVEL ONE ALSO APPLY. IF YOU'RE DOING A LEVEL TWO ALTERATION THOSE PROVISIONS ALONG WITH LEVEL ONE ALSO APPLY. SO YES, AT A LEVEL THREE ALTERATION SCOPE, UH, YOU'RE COMPLYING WITH ALL OF THOSE SECTIONS, ALL OF THOSE CHAPTERS. AND THEN HE DID, HIS LAST QUESTION WAS ON THE LAST ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. UH, WHY WOULD A NON-REQUIRED SYSTEM BE PERMITTED TO BE REMOVED? AND AGAIN, THAT'S, UM, WITH AN EXISTING BUILDING, IF THEY'RE CHANGING OCCUPANCY, UM, IF THEY HAVE AN OUTDATED SYSTEM, WE LOOK AT THAT CASE BY CASE. UM, THERE WAS ONE ACTUALLY THAT WE DID HAVE, UH, WITHIN A SHOPPING CENTER. IT WAS SPRINKLERED, UM, AND IT WAS AN OUTDATED SYSTEM. THE NEW TENANT, UH, WANTED TO REMOVE IT. SO THEY RECEIVED THAT DEMO PERMIT AND IT DID GO THROUGH THE REVIEW THAT IT WAS NOT NEEDED FOR TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION, UH, FOR OCCUPANT LOAD, UM, OR FOR THE CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY. IT WASN'T REQUIRED. AND THEN THOSE WERE ALL THE QUESTIONS FROM ROBERT HANLEY. ALL RIGHT. UM, CAN I GET RIGHT TO BRIAN SMITH? CAN I GET A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE THESE EIGHT ITEMS? THIS IS COREY PALMER. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE EIGHT ITEMS PRESENTED AS ACCEPT OR ACCEPT THE EIGHT ITEMS AS PRESENTED. I'VE GOT A MOTION FOR THE EIGHT ITEMS AS PRESENTED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? KAREN CARPENTER. SECOND. THANK KURT. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE ITEMS THAT WE ARE PRESENTED? I ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. NEGATIVE MOTION PASSES. PASSES, PASSES. THEY, THEY ARE NOTED ROBERT. THEY'RE NOTED. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, JEREMY, WE HAD THOSE ITEMS. YEAH, THIS, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AND, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL COME RIGHT BACK. ALL RIGHT. BRIAN SMITH. UM, IT IS TEN OH FOUR. UH, WE'RE GONNA CALL THE MEETING BACK IN ORDER. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO COME BACK IN SESSION? I OKAY. PORT ORDER. YEAH, GO AHEAD. UH, CHAIRMAN. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, CHAIR SMITH. UH, SO THAT KIND OF CONCLUDES ALL THE DISCUSSION WE HAD TODAY. WE ALSO HAVE THE IEBC ON THE AGENDA THAT'S THERE IN CASE ANYBODY DOES COME UP WITH SOMETHING. WE WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S THERE SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AND NOT HAVE TO PUNT INTO ANOTHER WEEK. UM, SO THAT WRAPS UP EVERYTHING FOR THE IEBC, THE IBC AND IFC, EXCEPT FOR THE TWO ITEMS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. SO THE LAST BOOK THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THIS SUBCOMMITTEE IS THE IRC. UM, WE CURRENTLY, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SCHEDULE UP HERE, UH, LOOKING AT THE LEFT COLUMN, UH, WE HAVE THREE MEET THREE WEEKS OF MEETINGS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR THAT. BUT WE DON'T REALLY ANTICIPATE THAT THERE WAS NO REAL MAJOR LIFTS OF THE IRC THIS LAST CYCLE. UM, WE'RE THINKING WE'LL PROBABLY GET IT WRAPPED UP IN TWO, UH, PROBABLY GO THROUGH THE BULK OF IT NEXT WEEK, HAVE [00:50:01] SOME IDEAS OF WHAT WE MIGHT NEED TO COME BACK TO, TO Y'ALL WITH SOME DISCUSSIONS THAT MIGHT GET TABLED. UH, FINALIZE THAT. AND UH, WITH THE MEETING ON THE, THE 31ST AND THEN THAT EIGHTH, YOU KNOW, IF WE NEED IT, UH, FOR A FINAL ONE, UH, IF WE NEED IT FOR THE IFC, THE TWO ITEMS OF THE IFC AND MAYBE ANY OTHER PENDING ITEMS. THERE'S ALSO SOME STUFF IN CHAPTER 10 WE KINDA NEED TO TALK ABOUT AS FAR AS RESIDENTIAL, UH, CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION AND STUFF LIKE THAT. WE'RE THAT, WE'RE TRYING TO MODIFY THAT A LITTLE BIT. LAST YEAR WE DID THE BIG CHANGE OF THE CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS IF YOU WERE A BUILDER INSTEAD OF A, UH, REMODELER. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE MOVING TO THAT REMODELER SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO GET THE CERTIFICATION. BUT WE KINDA WANNA REEVALUATE WHAT THEY CAN DO AND MAYBE CHANGE SOME DEFINITIONS THAT ALLOW THEM TO A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK. 'CAUSE WE KINDA SAY ANYTHING THAT'S STRUCTURAL, THEY CAN'T DO, THEY HAVE TO BE A HOME BUILDER. BUT WE, WE SEE KIND OF A GRAY AREA THERE AND WE WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO MORE CONTRACTORS TO BE ABLE TO WORK UNDER THAT REMODEL OR PERMIT, UH, WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH THAT FULL CERTIFICATION 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT BUILDING A BRAND NEW HOME OR DOING SOME MAJOR MODIFICATIONS THAT REALLY NEED THAT STRUCTURAL WORK. UH, SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL KIND OF BRING UP AT A LATER DATE. UH, BUT THAT'D BE KIND OF PART OF THIS. THE FINAL ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT WITH THIS SUBCOMMITTEE, WE'RE HAPPY HERE ON THE 15TH. AND ACTUALLY NO, WHAT I WANNA TALK ABOUT ON THE 15TH IS MOVING UP A FULL BOARD MEETING, UH, TO KIND OF COMPLETE EVERYTHING. SO WHERE WE STAND ON THE OTHER GROUPS, WE, WE'VE WRAPPED UP THE ELECTRICAL, THE FUEL GAS CODE AND THE PLUMBING. UH, ALL WE HAVE LEFT IS THE MECHANICAL AND SWIMMING POOL. UH, WE ANTICIPATE MECHANICAL, INSTEAD OF TAKING THREE WEEKS, PROBABLY BEING WRAPPED UP IN TWO, THAT'S INCLUDING THE IMC AND THE MECHANICAL SECTIONS OF THE IRC. SO WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE, WE'RE GONNA TRY TO MOVE UP THE SWIMMING POOL CODE TO THE SIXTH. UH, SO THAT ACTUALLY MEANS WE'RE COMPLETELY WRAPPED UP WITH EVERYTHING AT THE LAST MEETING OF THIS BOARD. UH, THIS SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE EIGHTH AND TRYING TO MOVE A FULL BOARD MEETING TO REVIEW ALL PROPOSED CHANGES AND ALL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEES TO THE 15TH. AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING. UH, WE HAVE THE, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THE SCHEDULE YET, BUT KIND OF WHAT WE HAVE IS THIS ROOM RESERVED ON DECEMBER 6TH. SO IT WOULD KIND OF BE, HEY, WE PRESENT EVERYTHING TO Y'ALL. ANYTHING Y'ALL HAVE THAT MAY REQUIRE A FOLLOW UP GIVES US A COUPLE WEEKS TO DIGEST THAT AND GET SOME INFORMATION, GET THROUGH THE THANKSGIVING BREAK, COME BACK FROM THAT AND HOPEFULLY WRAP EVERYTHING UP WITH THIS BOARD ON DECEMBER 6TH SO WE CAN START MOVING TO PCDC. AND IT REALLY ENSURES THAT WE KINDA MEET THAT APRIL 1ST, 2025 SCHEDULE, UH, THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. SO, I MEAN ONE CONCERN I HAVE WITH GOING TO THE FULL BOARD EARLY IS IN CASE THERE IS PEOPLE NEED TO REVIEW OUR WORK AND MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AND HAVE AN ISSUE, THE FASTER WE MOVE IT UP, THE LESS LIKELY THAT IT OUTREACH TO EVERYBODY. EVEN THOUGH WE'RE REPRESENTED HERE, THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE THAT MAY WANT TO COMMENT ON WHAT'S GOING ON. AND BY MOVING IT UP AND FAST TRACKING IT, YOU ARE PRECLUDING THAT PROBABLY FROM HAPPENING. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT , YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT UH, DECEMBER 6TH OF THE FULL BOARD MEETING. WELL, RIGHT NOW, NOVEMBER 15TH BEING THE FIRST BOARD MEETING TO REVIEW THE TABLE. YEAH. AND THEN HAVING TWO WEEKS BETWEEN OR ROUGHLY THREE WEEKS. SO WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE SA SPEAKUP PROCESS, IS THAT AFTER THE BOARD OR BEFORE THE, I MEAN THE SA SPEAKUP IS IS HAPPENING. I MEAN WE'RE WE'RE IT'S HAPPENING NOW. YEAH, CORRECT. I JUST REMEMBER THE LAST TIME WE, AND MAYBE IT WAS JUST 'CAUSE IT WAS, THE ENERGY STUFF WAS PRETTY CONTROVERSIAL THAT WE DID IT, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE DID A VERY EXPLICIT IN THE PAST, UM, PUSH FOR THAT AT SOME POINT BETWEEN HERE AND THE COUNCIL. CORRECT. I MEAN WE WOULD STILL DO THAT. UH, PROBABLY WHAT WE WOULD DO WITH THIS APPROACH IS HAVE THAT FULL BOARD MEETING ON THE 15TH WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WOULD COME BACK AND DO SOME COMMUNITY MEETINGS. 'CAUSE WE HAVE ROUGHLY THREE WEEKS BETWEEN THE 15TH AND THE SIXTH. UH, REALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CURTAIL IS LIKE HAVING MULTIPLE MEETINGS IN DECEMBER AND GETTING CLOSER TO THAT DECEMBER DATE AND POTENTIALLY MISSING PCDC. SO THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE IS OF CITY COUNCILS WHO WE WOULD GO TO FIRST BEFORE GOING TO CITY COUNCIL. IF WE CAN WRAP EVERYTHING UP ON BY DECEMBER 6TH, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE WE CAN MAYBE CATCH THAT DECEMBER MEETING OF THEIRS. UM, YOU KNOW, WITH IT BEING THE HOLIDAYS, THOSE THINGS MOVE AROUND SO NO GUARANTEES MIGHT MOVE TO JANUARY ANYWAYS, BUT IT JUST KIND OF ASSURES THAT. BUT WE HAVE THREE WEEKS SO WE CAN PUSH THE SAP SPEAK UP, PROBABLY DO SOME COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND OUTREACH. WE'LL BE COMMUNICATING, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S KIND OF WHY I'M, IF WE CAN DO THIS NOW, ALL OUR STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, WE'LL BE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GONNA HAVE OUR FIRST MEETING ON THE 15TH, NEXT MEETING IN DECEMBER 6TH, AS KIND OF A POTENTIALLY CONCLUSION. I MEAN IF WE DON'T, IF THERE'S ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE TABLED OR DISCUSSED, UH, THEN OF COURSE WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, COME BACK AROUND AND DO ANOTHER MEETING IN DECEMBER AS NEEDED. BUT WE'LL HAVE THAT THREE WEEK WINDOW, UH, TO KIND OF DISCUSS ESPECIALLY. BUT THE GOOD THING IS WE'LL BE ABLE TO PRESENT THE OVERALL KIND OF LIKE, HEY, HERE'S THE BIG PUSH TO THE BOARD. Y'ALL CAN DIGEST IT, SEE WHAT, WHAT ITEMS MIGHT BE, UH, NEED TO BE REVIEWED OR BROUGHT BACK. AND THOSE ALSO HIGHLIGHT WHAT WE NEED TO TAKE TO THE STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL. AND THAT GIVES US THAT THREE WEEK WINDOW TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS. UH, JEREMY, WHAT'S THE ORIGINAL SCHEDULE? SO [00:55:01] THE ORIGINAL SCHEDULE WAS MOSTLY THE SUBCOMMITTEES WITH THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD START DOING BOARD MEETINGS IN DECEMBER, BUT TO STILL TRY TO WRAP UP IN DECEMBER TIMEFRAME. JEREMY? UH, THIS IS JOSEPH. YES, SIR. UH, JUST FOR YOUR AWARENESS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ONLY THE PCDC FOR DECEMBER MOVED UP. IT'S NOW, IT'S NOW SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 13TH BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAY. YEAH, SO THAT'S EXACTLY, SO I MEAN WE COULD POTENTIALLY BE WRAPPED ON THE SIXTH THEN BE ABLE TO MEET THAT 13TH DATE. YEAH. BRIAN SMITH. UM, I I THINK IT'S GOOD IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT IT THIS NEXT WEEK. SO THE BOARD HAS THOSE NEW DATES, UH, AND IF THERE'S ANY CONFLICTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE GIVE THEM TIME TO RESPOND. OKAY. UH, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA. UM, YEAH, THIS IS MY GIRL. I, THIS IS A VERY PERSONAL POINT, BUT I'M, UM, BEING ATLANTA THAT WEEK AND RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, I, I'M TRYING TO TAKE A FLIGHT, LIKE A RED EYE BACK FROM ATLANTA THURSDAY NIGHT IN CASE WE HAD TO MEET ON THAT FRIDAY MORNING. OH, GOTCHA. ANY ANYWAY WE COULD PUSH THAT TO LIKE TUESDAY THE NEXT WEEK. I KNOW THAT YOU CAN'T REARRANGE IT FOR ONE PERSON EVEN THOUGH I'M VERY . I MEAN NO, I MEAN, YEAH. I MEAN, UM, YEAH THAT APPLIES TO BOTH OF US. . SAY AGAIN MARK, THAT THAT APPLIES TO BOTH OF, WE'RE BOTH TAKING A RED EYED FIVE GET HOME AT ONE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING BECAUSE WE JUST NEED ONE OF YOU MARK. YEAH, WE'RE ON THE SAME SIDE. THE ALTERNATE. WELL AGAIN, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE SCHEDULE AHEAD OF TIME. YEAH, EXACTLY. YEAH. AND THEN GO AHEAD AND RESPOND AND THEN, THEN JEREMY CAN LOOK AS FAR AS WHETHER WE HAVE QUORUM WHAT WE HAVE, IT ALSO GIVES, IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR THAT WE HAVE QUESTIONS ON CAN BE PUSHED TO THE DECEMBER 6TH. UH, SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING IN PARTICULAR THAT YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON, I MEAN WE HAVE MULTIPLE TIMES OTHER THAN JUST THE DATES YEAH. UM, TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT. BUT IF THERE'S ANOTHER DATE JUST CLOSE BY WHERE WE CAN STILL KEEP ON THE SCHEDULE, UH, WOULD MOVING IT TO THAT AFTERNOON I MEAN HELP ANY OR PROBABLY NOT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. WELL THEN I WON'T EVEN LOOK AT THAT AS IN ITS, I'LL LOOK AND SEE WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE FOR THAT. I MEAN WE, WELL I MEAN THE GOOD THING IS THIS BOARD SHOULDN'T BE TOO, THIS ROOM SHOULDN'T BE TOO RESERVED. THAT'S USUALLY OUR CONFLICT IS WE JUST GOT A LOT OF HEAVY LIFTS RIGHT NOW THAT REQUIRED THIS ROOM. 'CAUSE IT'S THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE BROADCASTED IN. UH, BUT I CAN LOOK AT THAT. THAT WOULD BE WEEK OF THANKSGIVING THOUGH. SO THAT'S KINDA THE CHALLENGE THERE. BUT BRIAN SMITH, AGAIN, IF YOU, IF YOU CAN JUST SEND IT OUT, THAT WAY WE CAN RESPOND. YEAH. AND THAT GIVES YOU PLENTY OF TIME IN BETWEEN IF WE NEED TO MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS, IF SOMETHING IS AVAILABLE. OUR BIGGEST THING IS MAKING SURE WE HAVE QUORUM. YEAH. UH, SO AS LONG AS WE HAVE THAT, UH, WE GOT EVERYBODY THAT OKAY. WORKABLE, UH, LET'S WORK WITH THAT SCHEDULE. PERFECT. SOUNDS GOOD. ALRIGHT, WELL THAT'S, UH, EVERYTHING THAT STAFF HAS AND THAT CONCLUDES UH, ALL THE PRESENTATIONS FOR TODAY. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS I GET A MOTION TO DISMISS. SHALL MOVE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CLOSE AT 10 13. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.