* 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. [00:00:02] GOOD MORNING. UH, IT IS NINE 12 AND, UH, THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD OF SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CO SUBCOMMITTEE WILL NOW BEGIN. UH, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL? FRED ANDES. THOMAS FRANKS HERE. DR. LINDA LOPEZ RODRIGUEZ. HERE. KAYLA MIRANDA. HERE. JOANNE NELSON. HERE. JOEL SOLIS. CLAY THOMPSON. JASON VASQUEZ. ALSO PRESENT IN THE MEETING FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SAVITA R AND FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AMIN TOMAS. INTERIM DIRECTOR MELISSA RAMIREZ. INTERIM DEPUTY DIRECTOR DANNY LEGGE, CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR. JENNY RAMIREZ. CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER DEL RUSSELL. CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR. INGRID CASTILLO. MECADO MANAGEMENT ANALYST. MONIQUE CORMAN. INTERIM DSD ADMINISTRATOR. EMILY REYES PLANNER. VALERIE RODRIGUEZ, SENIOR PLANNER. AND MYSELF. JUDY KRUM. BSB LIAISON CHAIR. CORRUM IS PRESENT. UH, I DON'T SEE IT ON THE AGENDA, BUT WE HAVE THE MINUTES. DO WE NEED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? NO, NO. UH, WE'LL REVIEW THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING AND THIS MEETING AT THE UPCOMING MEETING. NOVEMBER 20TH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, AND SINCE THERE IS NO ONE HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, UH, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND, UH, [ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items  ] DIVE BACK IN WHERE WE LEFT OFF AT. UH, ITEM NUMBER 66. OKAY, THANK YOU CHAIR. UH, DAN LEGAS, CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR. WE WILL START WITH ITEM 66 AND 67. UM, 66 IS A, UM, RECOMMENDED IPMC UPDATE. UM, IT'S A REVISION TO SECTIONS 3 0 1 0.2. UH, THE SECTION OF RESPONSIBILITY, UH, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE WORKING DOCK THERE, THIS ENTIRE SECTION IN BLUE IS NEW TO THE IPMC. UH, WE ARE APPROVING OR WE'RE OKAY WITH APPROVING THE, UH, RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE. UM, IN REGARDS TO THE, UM, THIS SECTION 3 0 1 0.2, UH, ADDITIONALLY, AND, AND THERE WAS A, UH, EXTERNAL AMENDMENT SUBMITTED AS WELL, UH, FROM THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. UH, IN REGARDS TO THE SECTION, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S IN BOLD AND BLUE. UH, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING, UH, WE ADD THE LANGUAGE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED. UH, WE'RE OKAY WITH IT PROVING, UM, THAT VERBIAGE AS WELL. ADDITIONALLY, AFTER THE, UH, SUBMISSION PERIOD CLOSED FOR, UH, THIS PARTICULAR SECTION, OR RATHER FOR ANY EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS OR INTERNAL AMENDMENTS, UH, THERE WAS A REVISION SUBMITTED ALONG WITH, BY THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, AND I BELIEVE EVERYBODY HAS A COPY IN FRONT OF THEM. UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'D ASK THE BOARD, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION. IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THE, UH, IN THE WORKING DOCK AT THIS POINT, 'CAUSE IT WASN'T SUBMITTED IN TIME. HOWEVER, UH, THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE STRIKE OUT OR AND REPLACE WITH AT THE WORD OR TENANT AND BY THEM. SO IT WOULD SLIGHTLY CHANGE THE, UH, PROPOSED LANGUAGE FROM THE IPMC. AGAIN, THIS IS SUB SUB SUBCOMMITTEE TO CONSIDER AT THIS POINT SINCE IT WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE FACT. DWAYNE NELSON QUESTION, UH, IF WE, UH, ACCEPT THE, WHICH THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED, DOES THE CITY HAVE THE ABILITY THEN TO IDENTIFY, UH, THAT KIND OF INFORMATION WHEN THEY'RE ACTUALLY VISITING OR INSPECTING A STRUCTURE? GOOD MORNING. I MEAN, TOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UH, YES. DNE TO YOUR QUESTION, YES, WE CAN IDENTIFY WHEN THE BUILDING WAS BUILT AND WHAT CODE THEY WERE UNDER. SO YOU STILL MAINTAIN THAT LIBRARY REGARDLESS. Y YES, CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I, I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, THIS IS ALREADY THE WAY THAT WE DO THINGS. SO IS IT NECESSARY TO ADD THE LANGUAGE IN THERE? UM, I'LL GIVE AN EXAMPLE. I, THE BUILDING I LIVE IN WAS BUILT IN 1939. AND, UM, IT HAS THE MAJOR, IT HAS NOT HAD MAJOR RENOVATIONS, SO IT'S STILL SUBJECT TO 1939 CODE. AND IF THEY, IF ANYONE DECIDED TO DO RENOVATIONS, THEN THE CODE WOULD HAVE TO BE UPDATED TO THE CURRENT CODE. AND THAT'S THE WAY WE'VE ALWAYS DONE THINGS. SO, UH, I GUESS I'M JUST QUESTIONING WHY ARE WE ADDING THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE? THOSE WERE OUR COMMENTS TO THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION WHEN THEY PRESENTED THAT. WE SAID TO US, IT'S CLEAR ENOUGH, BUT THEY WANTED TO ADD THAT LANGUAGE JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S EXTREMELY CLEAR, I GUESS. UH, SO ADDING THAT LANGUAGE WILL NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT WE WILL LOOK AT THE CODES THAT THEY WERE UNDER AT THE TIME THE BUILDING WAS BUILT. BUT AS YOU STATED, IF UH, THERE IS ADDITIONS OR REMODELS TO A POINT WHERE WE CALL IT LEVEL THREE REMODELING, [00:05:01] THEN THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH TODAY'S CODE. SO ADDING THAT LANGUAGE WILL NOT CHANGE THE FACT, BUT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. OKAY. AND MY, UM, I GUESS MY CO MY OTHER COMMENT'S GONNA BE, UM, I WOULD NOT, UH, I WOULD NOT WANT TO PUT THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE, UH, THAT'S IN THE YELLOW. THE, THAT WAS ADDED AFTER WE CLOSE. UM, I DON'T SEE A POINT IN ADDING, UH, OR SUBTRACTING OR, OR ADDING A TENANT, UM, AS WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, THAT, UH, IT'S STILL THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY, UM, AND CONSTRUCTION BY THEM. I THINK IT KIND OF OPENS IT UP, LIKE IF WE SAY IT'S CONSTRUCTED BY THEM. SO IF THE WORK IS NOT CONSTRUCTED BY THEM, THEN IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE UP TO CODE. LIKE IT, IT JUST CONFUSES THINGS FOR ME. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I AGREE, MADAM CHAIR, DWAYNE NELSON. I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE 2024, UH, IPMC CODE, UH, AS THEY HAVE PROPOSED IT AND NOT ADOPT THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS PROPOSED BY, UH, THE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL, UH, LANGUAGE THAT WAS PROPOSED, UH, IN THE SECOND AMENDMENT. SO THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE ONLY THE, THE TEXT THAT CAME OUT OF THE 2024 IPMC PROPOSAL IS THOMAS FRANKS. I SECOND THAT MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION? JUST TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU WANTING TO ACCEPT THE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED TEXT, OR ARE WE STRIKING THAT WE WANT TO ADOPT THE 2024 IPMC LANGUAGE ONLY? AND, AND WHAT IS THE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT DO? AND YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS, WELL, THAT WAS A PROPOSAL OUTSIDE THE IPMC. YEAH. UH, AND I WAS NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE ADOPT AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED, NOR WOULD WE ACCEPT THE CHANGES TO OWNER, TENANT, ET CETERA. THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD NOT BE ADOPTED. YEAH, DEFINITELY NOT THE, THAT WORST STUFF THAT GOT SUBMITTED AFTER THE, THE TIME, THE, UM, I JUST WAS WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WHY, WHY THAT HECK TO BE PUT IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT IT'S FINE. WELL, I, I, I WOULD THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BECAUSE WE USE S-A-P-M-C INSTEAD OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE AND WE ADOPTED THEM, AMEND THE INTERNATIONAL CODE. ANYWAY, I'M, I'M GOOD WITH THE, UH, MOVING FORWARD. OKAY, SO ALL IN PAPER. AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. OH, I'M SORRY. UM, THAT WAS FOR 66 AND 67. OKAY. CORRECT. YES, THAT IS CORRECT. NEXT ITEM WE'RE LOOKING AT AS NUMBER 68. THIS IS, UM, A PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED INTERNAL, UH, FOR A NEW SECTION TO BE ADDED TO THE, UH, UPCOMING S-A-P-M-C. UH, IT IS A SECTION IN REGARDS TO BUILDING STANDARDS OR BOARDING STANDARDS RATHER. UH, THIS SECTION IS ALREADY INCLUDED. IT'S AN APPENDIX IN THE IPMC. UH, WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD THIS SECTION TO OUR S-A-P-M-C. UH, WE REALLY FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES SET BY THE IPMC WHEN IT COMES TO SECURING OF VACANT UNOCCUPIED STRUCTURES. THIS IS MORE, UM, I GUESS YOU FEEL MORE MORALIZING THAT THAT PROCESS INTO OUR S-A-P-M-C. SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE ACCEPT THE, UM, THE PROPOSAL TO ADD BOARDING STANDARDS TO THE S-A-P-M-C. ANY QUESTIONS? JUST, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, THIS IS JUST ADDING IN LANGUAGE INTO THE I INTO THE S-A-P-M-C THAT ALREADY IS IN THE APPENDICES OR CORRECT. WE WOULD ADD AN APPENDIX TO THE END OF OUR S-A-P-M-C THAT WOULD MIRROR, UH, WHAT ALREADY EXISTS IN THE IPMC. UM, SO, SO, YEAH, IT DOESN'T HAVE IT CURRENTLY, BUT WE'RE GONNA PUT THAT IN THERE. BUT WE ALREADY HAVE THESE KIND OF STANDARDS IN NOTHING, CORRECT? YEAH. SO, YEAH, SO EXACTLY. SO THESE STANDARDS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN OUR CURRENT S-A-P-M-C, BUT THEY DO LIVE IN THE IPMC. DID THAT SATISFY YOUR QUESTION? OH, YEAH. YEAH. IT WAS [00:10:01] ING STUFF. OKAY. UM, MOTION, I, UH, PROPOSED A MOTION TO ACCEPT OR ADOPT THE IPMC CODE, UH, REVISION ON LINE 68 TO SECTION 3 0 1. POINT THREE 0.1, UH, BOARD STANDARDS. DWAYNE NELSON SECOND, THE MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM. WE'LL LOOK AT ITEM 69. UH, THIS IS AN EXTERNAL AMENDMENT AS WELL THAT WAS SUBMITTED, UH, TO REVISE SECTION 3 0 2 0.7 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO STRIKE OUT, UH, THE LANGUAGE AND FENCES FROM THE EXISTING S-A-P-M-C UH, STAFF IS APPROVING OR RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO REMOVE FENCES FROM THE THIS PARTICULAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, SECTION YOU SAID EXTERNAL. EXTERNAL, I APOLOGIZE. I, I I SAID EXTERNAL IS AN INTERNAL, UH, POST AMENDMENT ARE FENCES DEALT WITH AT SOME OTHER SECTION WITHIN THE, UH, CODE. YES, SIR. FENCES ARE DEALT WITH AN ENTIRELY SECTION OF ITS OWN AND, AND THE CODE. VERY GOOD. MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE OF DELETING AND FENCES FOR ITEM NUMBER 69. SECOND, I SECOND LIN MIKE ERLIN A SECOND. OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. SO THE NEXT SECTION WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, UH, NUMBER SEVEN ROW SEVEN 70. EXCUSE ME. UH, THIS IS AN INTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED. UH, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE A REVISION TO OUR EXISTING, UH, S-A-P-M-C 3 0 2 0.8 MOTOR VEHICLES. UH, CURRENTLY THE, UH, LANGUAGE IN THE S-A-P-M-C UH, SIMPLY REFERS THIS, UM, UH, MOTOR VEHICLES TO CHAPTER 19 OF OUR CITY CODE. UH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD BE TO ADD THE LANGUAGE IN BLUE, UM, WHICH AT THIS POINT WE'RE RECOMMENDING, UM, NOT TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. UM, ALONG WITH THAT, UH, THERE WAS A EXTERNAL AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION AFTER THE SUBMISSION DATE CLOSED, AND EACH OF YOU SHOULD HAVE A COPY IN FRONT OF YOU. UM, THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE THERE THAT WAS, UM, IN YELLOW, AS YOU SEE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED, UM, TO BE CONSIDERED IF, UM, THIS SECTION WAS APPROVED. SO MOTOR VEHICLES ALREADY HAS LAW IN PLACE AND, UH, APPEAL PROCESS THROUGH THE COURT. UM, I FEEL THAT THIS IS A CIVIL MATTER AND I DON'T FEEL THAT IT IS, UH, UP TO US TO ENFORCE, UM, THAT, UM, SO I RECOMMEND THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THIS. IN ADDITION TO HAVING EXPERIENCED, UH, A PERMIT SITUATION, UH, IN ANOTHER LOCATION WHERE WE PERMITTED VEHICLE REPAIRS, IT BECAME AN ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE. AND WITH THAT, THE MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE NOT ACCEPT THE, UH, IPMC CODE FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX. ITEM NUMBER 70, NOR DO WE ACCEPT THE PROPOSED, UH, AMENDMENT PROVIDED BY OUTSIDE GROUP MS. CLAY THOMPSON. I SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 72 71. WAS THE, OH, I'M SORRY. YEAH, 71. OKAY. MOVING ON TO ITEM 71. UH, THIS IS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT WAS, UH, FOR PART OF THE 2024 IPMC UPDATES. UH, IT IS A REVISION TO OUR SECTION OF 3 0, 3 0.2 ENCLOSURES. POOL ENCLOSURES. UH, THEY WERE ADDING SOME SUGGESTED LANGUAGES [00:15:01] YOU SEE IN BLUE, UM, FURTHER CLARIFYING, UM, THE NEED WHEN THERE'S A, UH, POWER SAFETY COVER AND A, UM, SAFETY COVER. UM, AS YOU RECALL, WE ADOPTED THOSE DEFINITIONS, UM, EARLIER IN THE PROCESS OF OUR LAST MEETING. SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE APPROVE. WE DID NOT ADOPT WE TABLE. NO, I'M SORRY. WE TABLED IT. OKAY. I APOLOGIZE. WE TABLED THOSE ITEMS. UH, WE'RE GONNA TABLE TO DISCUSS THIS SECTION, UM, AND THEN, BUT WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS SECTION. SO, UM, WHAT WAS THE ITEM NUMBER, UH, THAT WE TABLED FOR THE DEFINITION? DEFINITIONS? UH, GOING BACK TO THE DEFINITION, WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEM 61 AND 62, POWER SAFETY COVER AND SAFETY COVER. THE DEFINITIONS. YEAH. 61 AND 62. UNDER 2 0 3. YEAH, UNDER TWO. TWO DEF GENERAL DEFINITIONS. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEM 61, 62, AND 71. 71. ANY QUESTIONS? MY ONLY QUESTIONS CLARIFICATION. THIS IS THE SAFETY COVERS THAT GO OVER THE POOL, RIGHT? IT'S NOT SOME KIND OF ELECTRIC, UH, SAFETY DEVICE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP LAST TIME, I BELIEVE CO CORRECT. UH, BASICALLY THEY'RE GIVING TWO OPTIONS. ONE IS A MANUAL COVER, I GUESS YOU JUST PUT COVER ON TOP OF THE POOL. AND THE OTHER ONE IS MOTORIZED COVER. AND AGAIN, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS WE TABLED THE DEFINITIONS BECAUSE IF WE DON'T ADOPT THIS, THEN THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. THEREFORE, WE DON'T NEED DEFINITIONS. SO IT'S KIND OF ALL IN ONE. EITHER WE ADOPT ALL THREE OF THEM, THE DEFINITIONS WITH THE SECTION, OR WE DON'T, AND THE WHOLE THING'S ABOUT JUST BASICALLY PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE BACKYARD. THESE KIDS JUMPED FENCES AND WHATNOT. MADAM CHAIR, THOMAS FRANKS HAVE A MOTION? OKAY, I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ITEM 61, 62 AND 71. NO. YEAH, IT MAKES THE OTHERS BE OKAY. OKAY. IS DEREK SECOND? IT'S CLAY THOMPSON A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT, MOVING ALONG. ITEM NUMBER 72, 72 AND 73. UH, BOTH ARE RELATED TO SECTION 3 0, 3 0.2 POOL ENCLOSURES. UH, THESE WERE, UM, SUBMITTED EXTERNAL, BUT THERE THEY WERE MORE COMMENTS THAN ANYTHING ELSE, UH, AS OPPOSED TO ANY SUGGESTED LANGUAGE. UM, ONE OF THE COMMENT WAS IN THIS REGARDS WAS THAT, UM, THAT OUR ORDINANCE OR OUR S-A-P-M-C SHOULD MIRROR THE STATE POOL RULES, AND THAT STATE POOL YARD STATUTE MAY BE PREEMPTS OUR S-A-P-M-C. SO THESE WERE COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE, UH, APARTMENT ASSOCIATION FOR CONSIDERATION. UM, AGAIN, THERE WAS NO PROPOSED LANGUAGE OR ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE COMMENT MADE. SO DO WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING WITH THESE? SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S, THERE'S COMMENTS. I'M JUST READING TO THE RECORD. THERE'S NO ACTION NEEDED FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE. OKAY. OKAY. MOVING ON TO ITEM 74. UH, AGAIN, 74 IS A, UH, INTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT. UM, THERE IS NO RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ONE, JUST MERELY DISCUSSION AS WELL. UH, FOR SECTION 3 0 4 0.18, UH, WHICH IS BUILDING SECURITY, UH, THE LANGUAGE OR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT CAME IN WAS TO CONSIDER ADDING SOME LANGUAGE TO THE SECTION. HOWEVER, NO CURRENT LANGUAGE EXISTS IN THE, UNDER THIS SECTION. SO, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, LET'S SEE, AS SOON AS WE GET THIS PULLED UP HERE, UH, 3 0 4 0.18 MM-HMM, 3 0 4 18. OH, OKAY. SO WE, WE DEAL SOMEWHERE THEN ELSEWHERE WITH LOCKING DOORS, WINDOWS, AND SLIDING DOORS. [00:20:01] CORRECT. SO, SO, YEAH, SO EXACTLY, SO THE TWO SECTIONS THAT WERE, WHERE IT'S COVERED IS, IS THE RIGHT UNDERNEATH IT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT, UM, RIGHTO THERE, RIGHT? UH, POINT 18.1 OCCUPIED, PARTIALLY OCCUPIED STRUCTURES, AND THE FOLLOWING SECTION, WHICH PERTAINS TO, UH, VACANT BUILDINGS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. SO IT'S COVERED UNDER TWO SECTIONS BELOW. SO AGAIN, THE DISCUSSION WAS IF, IF THE SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD CONSIDER OR MAYBE WANNA ASK SOME JUST SUGGESTIVE LANGUAGE TO MERELY REFERENCE THOSE TWO SECTIONS IN THE S-A-P-M-C OR, OR LEAVE IT, UH, AS IS, AGAIN, THERE WAS NO PROPOSED LANGUAGE OR SUGGESTION OTHER THAN, UH, SO YOU JUST WANNA CROSS LIST, SORRY, YOU JUST WANT TO THE, IT'S TO CROSS LIST IT THEN, RIGHT? LIKE TO REFERENCE BACK? YEAH, EXACTLY. MAYBE JUST TO REFERENCE IT, CORRECT? MM-HMM. , YEAH. I MEAN, WHAT IS, WHAT DOES BUILDING SECURITY LOOK LIKE AS FAR AS THE, I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE WHAT I THINK BUILDING SECURITY, I THINK LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, COMMERCIAL SPACE, THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, A REQUIREMENT FOR SECURITY OUTSIDE, UH, IF THEY DO CERTAIN ACTIVITIES, UM, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? EVEN IN A, UH, CITY HOUSE, YOU KNOW, UH, PROPERTY MAINTENANCE KIND OF, UH, WORLD HAVE BUILDING SECURITY, IS IT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE POLICE ALREADY HAVE THE REQUIREMENT. IF WE HAVE LIKE A ELECTRIC, IF WE HAVE AN ELECTRONIC, UM, UH, SYSTEM AT THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSE WITH THE CITY. UH, YOU HAVE A LOCK LOCKING REQUIREMENTS WITH DOORS. WHAT OTHER THINGS WOULD BE NEEDED IN A BUILDING SECURITY SECTION FOR THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE? YEAH, THAT'S IT EXACTLY. SO AS YOU SEE IN SECTION HERE FOR OCCUPIED OR PARTIALLY OCCUPIED STRUCTURES, UH, SIMPLY REFERRING TO, UM, BASICALLY HAVING LOCKS ON YOUR DOORS AND WINDOWS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, RIGHT? OR RATHER TEXAS PROPERTY CODE. UH, THAT WAS SOME SUGGESTED LANGUAGE THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN, UH, PREVIOUS, UM, PMC CYCLES. UM, BUT AGAIN, IT'S TO YOUR POINT, IT'S JUST THAT MAKING SURE, UH, THE TENANT OWNER RESIDENT FEELS SAFE IN THEIR HOME, THAT THE DOORS AND WINDOWS DO LOCK. UM, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR ANY ADDITIONAL, LIKE ADDED ALARM FEATURES, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT HISTORY HERE. SO, UM, THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE IN SECTION 3 0 4 POINT 18, IT'S TITLED BUILDING SECURITY. AND IT HAD ONE SECTION UNDER IT WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT DOORS, WINDOWS, EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE SECURED WITH THE DEVICE OR WHATEVER. FEW CYCLES AGO WE ADDED THE VACANT BUILDING, UH, PROGRAM, WHICH IS OHP PROGRAM TO THE CODE. AND WHAT WE DID IS WE CREATED 3 0 4 POINT 18.1, AND THEN 0.2, SO 0.1 IS FOR OCCUPIED STRUCTURES, 0.2 IS FOR VACANT. THAT'S WHAT WE DID. THE STAFF IS SAYING WHEN THEY LOOK AT 3 0 4 POINT 18, THERE IS NO VERBIAGE UNDER IT, BUT IN MY MIND THERE IS TWO SECTIONS UNDER IT, IMMEDIATELY 0.1 AND 0.2. SO YOU EITHER DO 0.1 OR 0.2, I MEAN, IT'S ALREADY THERE. THAT'S WHAT THEY, THEY JUST SAID THAT WE, WE MIGHT NEED TO ADD SOMETHING, BUT THEY NEVER GAVE US ANY RECOMMENDATION. SO THE ITEM DOES NOT NEED A VOTE. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? THAT THE ITEM FOR THE VOTE WAS TO SEE IF WE WANTED TO CROSS LIST IT OR MAKE A REFERENCE TO IT, SO THAT WAY IF YOU'RE READING THROUGH IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S REFERRING BACK TO THAT SECTION. I, I THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE JUST ASKING FOR US TO ASK A QUESTION SO THAT THEY COULD ANSWER IT DOWN THE ROAD IN THE, IN THE COMING MONTHS, AND THEN PROVIDE IT TO, TO Y'ALL AT THE, UH, THAT OTHER BOARD TO, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY LIKE, HEY, COULD STAFF COME UP WITH A SENTENCE THAT YOU COULD PUT INTO THE DOT 18 SECTION? THAT KIND OF STUFF. OH, I DIDN'T GET THAT AT ALL. I MEAN, I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS CROSS LISTING, LIKE YOU JUST PUT ON THERE, SEE THIS SECTION, LIKE, SO THAT WAY THEY KNOW IT EXISTS. SO JUST FOR, YEAH, JUST FOR A LITTLE MORE CLARIFICATION, AND MAYBE THIS WILL MUDDY IT MORE OR CLEAR IT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT IN THE IPMC, CURRENTLY IPMC, THIS IS NOT A NEW ADDITION. THIS IS JUST CURRENTLY WHAT'S BEEN TRACKING THE TITLING IS CALLED 3 0 4 0.18 BUILDING SECURITY. EMILY, IF YOU COULD SCROLL UP JUST A LITTLE BIT TO THE TITLE ABOVE, AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE MISSING ANY, ANYTHING WITH THAT CURRENT. THIS IS S-A-P-M-C, BUT NOW WHAT OUR IPMC BOOK CURRENTLY HOLDS, WHICH IS THE ICC BOOK, IT CURRENTLY STATES DOORS, WINDOWS, OR HATCHWAY FOR DWELLING UNITS, ROOM UNITS OR HOUSEKEEPING UNITS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH DEVICES DESIGNED TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR THE OCCUPANTS AND PROPERTY WITHIN. SO YOU, YOU SEE WHERE WE IN PRIOR ADOPTIONS, IT DROPPED TO THAT 0.1 [00:25:01] 8.1. JUST JUST TO HELP KIND OF CLARIFY WHAT WHAT AMIN WAS, WAS SPEAKING TO, JUST TO GIVE YOU GUYS SOME CLARIFICATION IN COMPARISON TO WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WAS POINTED OUT. NOT NECESSARILY A SOLUTION, BUT WAS JUST POINTED OUT. OKAY. SO THE EASIEST SOLUTION WOULD BE FOR 3 0 4 0.18, BUILDING SECURITY C ITEMS 3 0, 4 0.8 POINT AND 3 0 4 0.182. YES. AND THEREFORE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NECESSARY. THAT WAS A RECOMMENDATION. THAT IS NOT A VERY GOOD RECOMMENDATION. THEREFORE, I MOVE THAT WE DISREGARD WHOA, WHOA, WHOA, WHOA. BEFORE YOU MAKE A MOTION. OKAY, GO AHEAD. I, I HAVE A COMMENT HERE AND I, I, UH, OH, I'M SORRY. JUST THE, IT'S VERY SHORT. UM, MY QUESTION IS, UH, WHY, UH, WHY DO WE NOT HAVE, UH, SECURED WITH A DEADBOLT, UH, FOR RESIDENTIAL? UH, WHY DOES IT NOT SAY THAT? IT DOES SAY THAT IN THE IPMC, AND IT IS A HUD REQUIREMENT IS THAT EVERY, UH, RESIDENTIAL UNIT OR HOUSEKEEPING UNIT HAS A DEADBOLT FOR SECURITY. AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHY THAT LANGUAGE IS NOT THERE. IF THAT'S UNDER, THAT'S COVERED UNDER BUILDING CODE, CORRECT? NOT PROPERTY CODE. YES, IT'S IN THE BUILDING CODE AND IN THE TEXAS PROPERTY CODE. NOW, KEEP IN MIND, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THIS. IF YOU HAVE AN OLD BUILDING THAT'S BUILT IN THE THEORIES OR WHATEVER, UM, MAYBE DEADBOLTS WERE NOT IN PLACE AT THE TIME. SO THAT'S WHY I THINK TWO CYCLES AGO WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS, WE REMOVED THAT BECAUSE SOME OF THE OLD BUILDINGS DO NOT HAVE A DEADBOLT. IT'S FOR THEIR BENEFIT TO DO THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DON'T HAVE IT, WE CAN'T HOLD THEM TO IT BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD IT IN THAT BUILDING AT THE TIME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD. OH, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR MOTION. YEAH, THE MOTION IS TO MAKE NO CHANGES, AS FOR ITEM NUMBER 74 AND KEEP WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTLY IN THE, UH, 2021 CODE. I SECOND. DO WE NEED TO HAVE A VOTE? DISREGARD I SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR A. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. UH, THE NEXT ITEMS, IF WE COULD LOOK AT, UH, ROW 75, 76, 77, AND 78. UM, ALTOGETHER, UH, IT'S RELATED AT 3 0 7 0.1. UM, GENERAL, UH, IN REGARDS TO, UM, HAND RAILS, UH, THERE WAS PROPOSED AMENDMENT SUBMITTED, UH, OR RATHER A REVISED LINE, WHICH SUBMITTED FROM THE IPMC, UH, AS YOU SEE ON THE BOARD HERE TO, UH, STRIKE OUT EVERYTHING THAT'S IN RED, WHICH IS EVERYTHING CURRENTLY IN OUR EXISTING S-A-P-M-C AND REPLACE IS SIMPLY WHAT'S IN BLUE WITH HANDRAILS AND STAIRS. UM, AND ADDITIONALLY THERE WERE SOME SECTIONS, SOME NEW SECTIONS THAT WERE ADDED. THEY JUST KIND OF FURTHER BROKE DOWN. UM, THE, AS YOU SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT, IF YOU CAN, EMILY, UM, THEY TOOK IT AND BASICALLY BROKE IT DOWN INTO FURTHER SUBSECTIONS, WHICH IS GONNA BE A SUBSECTION FOR HEIGHT GUARDS, AND THEN HEIGHT AGAIN, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY ALL FOUR SECTIONS THAT KEEP THE, YOUR MIC WENT OUT AT THE VERY END. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, ? I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO DENY ALL FOUR, UM, UH, REVISIONS, UH, AND NEW SECTIONS FROM THE IPMC AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. WHY IS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDING DENYING THEM? I THINK THEY'RE ALREADY MENTIONED IN THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C, THEY ONLY DID WAS, UM, LIKE MAKE TWO ADDITIONAL BULLETS. YEAH, EXACTLY. TO YOUR POINT, THE SECTIONS ALREADY INCLUDED. THE, THEY JUST, WHAT THEY DID IS IPMC AND THEY JUST BROKE IT DOWN IN FURTHER SUB BULLETS. IT'S A MATTER OF FORMATTING, WHICH IS, I LIKE THE NEW FORMATTING. IT, IT'S EASIER TO READ WITH IT, WITH IT BEING BULLET POINTED INSTEAD OF ALL TOGETHER. AND, BUT IT, I AGREE. I I MIGHT NORMALLY AGREE WITH YOU. HOWEVER, I EXPERIENCED A SITUATION WITH PROPERTY CODE RECENTLY WHERE THERE WERE, WERE BREAKDOWNS FOR INDIVIDUAL PARAGRAPHS IN PROPERTY CODE. AND AS A RESULT, WE GOT INTO A BIG BATTLE ABOUT WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN. AND IF IT HAD ALL BEEN KEPT TOGETHER THE WAY IT IS ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT WOULD'VE BEEN EASY TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS. THERE'S NO DISCUSSION ABOUT PARAGRAPHING OR TITLING OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE. SO BASED ON JUST THAT ONE EXPERIENCE ALONE, [00:30:01] I WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOU. I, I ALSO AGREE WITH DWAYNE, UM, IF WE BREAK IT DOWN, THAT THAT GIVES MULTIPLE SECTIONS THAT WOULD BE IN VIOLATION. IT'S ADDING ADDITIONAL POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS AND FINES WHERE IT'S NOT NECESSARY. THEY CAN DO THAT WITH THIS. SO IT DOESN'T ADD, THEY CAN STILL DO IT EACH ONE JUST BECAUSE IT'S NOT FORMATTED. AND, AND DWAYNE, TO YOUR POINT, I AGREE 'CAUSE I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT I ALSO DISAGREE THAT JUST BECAUSE OF ONE, ONE SITUATION DOESN'T FACTOR IN ALL SITUATIONS. , THAT CAN BE SAID BY EVERYTHING. YOU, YOU DIDN'T ENJOY THE PLEASURE OF ALL THE ATTORNEYS THAT I WAS FIGHTING WITH. AVITA. I PROBABLY, I'LL SHARE THAT WITH YOU, THAT YOU GET A REAL HONEST OPINION SOMETIME, BUT WE WON'T DO THAT TODAY, , OKAY? IS THERE, AND WITH THAT MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE NOT, UH, ACCEPT ANY OF THE CHANGES THAT WE KEEP WITH THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C CODE FOR ITEMS NUMBER 75 THROUGH 78. CLAY THOMPSON. SECOND DISCUSSION? NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. I I THINK WE NEED TO DO A ROLL CALL ON THE VOTE. IT JUST ME. IT'S JUST YOU. YEAH, I DIDN'T HEAR A VOTE FROM YOU. OH, I ACCEPT, UM, DWAYNE'S OKAY. PROPOSAL. ALL RIGHT, SO ONE NO. YEAH, ONE NO. THOMAS FRANK SAYS NO. SO THE VOTE IS FOUR TO ONE? YES. ON THIS ONE. JUDY, DID YOU CAPTURE THAT? YES, I DID. FOUR TO ONE NAME. MR. FRANKS. THANK YOU. . PUT YOU ON THE SPOT. I KNOW YOU'RE USED TO IT BY NOW. MY RANDOM NOSE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL. NEXT SECTION WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ROW 79. UM, THIS IS A INTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT. IT'S A REVISION TO SECTION, UH, 3 0 9 0.1 INFESTATION. UM, LET ME SEE HERE. OKAY, HERE WE GO. SO, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, AS YOU SEE HERE, WE'RE STRIKING OUT OR PROPOSED, STRIKE OUT THE WORD STRUCTURE AND REPLACE WITH THE WORD, UH, PREMISES. UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UH, DO NOT TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN, UH, WITH THE WORD STRUCTURE AS OPPOSED TO PREMISES IN REGARDS TO INFESTATION, IF THAT I, I AGREE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. UH, I MEAN, THAT CAN GO WILD. LIKE OUT IN THE, OUT IN THE YARD, THERE'S INSECTS. UM, MY, MY, MY TENT IS A PREMISES . I'LL JUST ASK WHAT'S THE PREMISES? 'CAUSE THE STRUCTURE I'M, I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH YOUR PREMISES WOULD BE YOUR ENTIRE LOT. UM, SO EVERYTHING OUTSIDE TO INCLUDE STRUCTURE, I GUESS WOULD BE THE ENTIRE PREMISES. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THIS BUILDING, THIS IS THE STRUCTURE, BUT THIS ENTIRE PARKING LOT, AND FROM LIKE RIGHT AWAY TO LIKE, EVERYTHING, IT'S, IT'S THE PREMISES AND MY TENT. SO, SO, YOU KNOW, THEORETICALLY SOMEONE HAS 13 ACRES IN THE CITY, THEY, THEY, THE WHOLE PREMISES, RIGHT? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. THAT, YEAH, THAT'S A LITTLE WILD. I DISAGREE WITH. I'LL TAKE A MOTION. MOTION TO DENY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO REVISE THE 3 0 9 0.1 INFESTATION RULE TO DENY STAFF REVISION. WAIT, YOU WANT TO DENY THE STOCK STAFF RECOMMENDATION, OR YOU WANNA NO, THE STAFF REVISION, THE RECOMMENDED THE REVISION THAT IS PROPOSED BY DSD STAFF. I, I, I GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THAT, LEMME TRY THIS AGAIN. AND THEREFORE WE KEEP THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IN 2021 S-A-P-M-C. VERY GOOD WITH THAT. I SECOND THAT MOTION. JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT IT TO BE A PREMISES? SO IF YOU OWN 13 ACRES, DO YOU WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING, ENSURING ZERO INSECTS AND ZERO RODENTS AND THOSE 13 ACRES? ABSOLUTELY. ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE INSIDE THE CITY, BECAUSE IF YOUR RODENTS AND YOUR ITEMS THAT ARE ON YOUR LAND AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBORS AS WELL, RIGHT? SO FOR EXAMPLE, GRAY ONE IS F FLEECES, OKAY? FLEAS CAN BE OUT IN YOUR YARD, SO YOUR PREMISES RIGHT, MAY NOT BE IN YOUR HOUSE, BUT THEY CROSS [00:35:01] OVER TO THE NEIGHBOR'S YARDS AND THEIR PREMISE AND THEN GET ON THEIR DOGS AND THEN GO INTO YOURS. SO WHY SHOULD WE NOT HOLD HOMEOWNERS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR PREMISE BEFORE THEIR NEIGHBORS AND FOR THEIR CITY? SAME THING WITH COCKROACHES. SO WHAT, DO YOU ACTUALLY GO OUT ON YOUR PROPERTY AND CATCH ALL THE RATS AND MICE AND BUGS ON YOUR PROPERTY THROUGHOUT? OR DO YOU WANT TO TAKE CARE OF YOUR HOUSE, THE, THE BARE GROUND AND, AND, UH, PROPERTY? YEAH, ACTUALLY I HAVE AN INSECT COMPANY. I HAVE A PEST CONTROL COMPANY THAT COMES OUT. THEY DO MY YARD AND THEY ALSO DO THE INSIDE OF MY HOUSE. DOES HE DO THE ENTIRE YARD EFFECT ON MOST OF, WE PUT GRANULES DOWN. AND WHAT'S THAT EFFECT ON THE, UH, SO LET'S SAY THAT THERE'S A FIVE ACRE LOT IN THE CITY THAT HAS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON IT, BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I DO. UM, AND IT'S PURPOSE IS FOR PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE IN THE CITY, UM, AND THE BENEFIT OF THE, UH, YOU KNOW, GRASSES AND TREES OF THE AREA. UM, SO SH SHOULD I THEN RECOMMEND TO THAT LANDOWNER TO CUT ALL HIS TREES DOWN AND BEAR EARTH THE GROUND BECAUSE, UM, AND, AND DESTROY HIS STORM WATER ABSORPTION BECAUSE HE NEEDS TO GET RID OF POTENTIAL INSECTS ON THE PROPERTY. KEEP IN MIND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INFESTATION, RIGHT? SO THE, TO BE CLASSIFIED AS THAT A CODE OFFICER WOULD COME OUT, THAT WOULD BE A KNOWN PROBLEM. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CITY GOING TO RANDOM PROPERTIES AND, AND DOING INSPECTION, ESPECIALLY ON JUST RANDOM LAND. WELL, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT RANDOM LAND THOUGH. 'CAUSE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY. AND, UH, THE NEIGHBORS ALREADY MIGHT COMPLAIN ABOUT, UH, NATIVE TREES THAT ARE GROWING IN THE YARD, UM, JUST BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT OF THEM, OR POSSIBLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE A BIRD OF PREY THAT LIVES ON THEIR PROPERTY, UM, THAT THAT'S IN THE BENEFIT OF ALL OF THE CITIZENS OF, UH, SAN ANTONIO. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE SHOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, SPRAY EVERYTHING AND, AND BEAR IT THE GROUND SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY FOR INSECTS OR INFESTATION TO BE EXISTING ON THE PREMISES. IF THEY'RE CREATING HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, THEN YES. MADAM CHAIR, HOW WOULD THAT BE DEFINED? YES. I'M SORRY. CAN IF, I'LL GO DOWN A RABBIT HOLE ON THIS MADAM CHAIR. YES. UH, JUST, UH, GOING BACK TO THE DEFINITION PREMISES, IT ALSO INCLUDES, UH, YOUR ALLEYWAYS, YOUR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS YOUR EASEMENTS. AND SO FOR AN EXAMPLE, UM, IF THERE'S CONSTRUCTION, AN ALLEYWAY WAS PAVED, IT CAUSED ALL THE RATS TO ENTER INTO THE, THE YARDS, THE PREMISES OF, UH, EACH OF THE HOUSES WHERE THE ALLEYWAY WAS. SO IF YOU INCLUDE THE DEFINITION AND PREMISES, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR HALF OF THE ALLEYWAY UP TO THE POINT THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND YOU MEETS IT. AND SO YOU WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RATS GOING EVERYWHERE. AND SO THAT'S THE CONCERN THAT THE PREMISES IS SO BROAD THAT YOU WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RODENT IN INFESTATION THAT IS CAUSED BEYOND YOUR CONTROL. CORRECT? THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA BRING UP. LIKE ON THE WEST SIDE, WHEN IT RAINS AND THE THE STORM DRAIN FLOOD UP, ALL THE RATS ARE RUNNING UP AND DOWN THE STREET, YOU KNOW, AND YOU DON'T WANNA BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. MR. THOMAS, IF, IF, IF I MAY JUST QUICKLY, UM, I, I THINK THERE'S A SECTION IN THE CODE THAT COULD ADDRESS MAYBE THE CONCERN YOU MAY HAVE. SO, UH, IT'S A SECTION WE DIDN'T LOOK AT FOR CONSIDERATION, BUT 3 0 2 0.5 ROAD AND HARBRIDGE, THE VERY FIRST LINE THERE, IT READS ALL STRUCTURES AND EXTERIOR PROPERTY SHALL BE KEPT FREE FROM ROAD AND HARBRIDGE AND INFESTATION. SO IT'S ALREADY COVERED WHERE WE CAN ADDRESS IT. UM, IF TO THE POINT WHERE YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FLEAS, IF THERE'S A, A FLEA INFESTATION ON THE PREMISES. 2.5 YES, CORRECT. 3 0 2 0.5. EMILY, CAN YOU SCROLL UP TO 3 0 2 0.5 PLEASE? MM-HMM, , THERE WE GO. I THINK THAT VERY FIRST LINE, UM, ADDRESSES EXTERIOR PROPERTY. MM-HMM. , UH, IN REGARDS TO ROAD AND HARBOR INFESTATION. I AGREE, BUT DISAGREE. OKAY, , SO WHAT, WHAT, WHAT DO YOU DISAGREE WITH AT THIS POINT? I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE, WE, WE UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN, THE VERBIAGE, THE REJECTING OF THE, THE VERBIAGE, YOU KNOW, WHEN PREMISES VERSUS STRUCTURE. I ALSO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THIS CAN BE LOOKED AT DIFFERENT WAYS, RIGHT? SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROPERTIES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUILDINGS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EVERYTHING. IF YOU OWN A PROPERTY, OKAY, YOU SHOULD [00:40:01] MAINTAIN THAT PROPERTY, WHETHER IT'S INFESTATION ON THAT PROPERTY, WHATEVER PROPERTY IT IS, RIGHT? IF IT'S A CONSERVATION PROPERTY, THEN THERE ARE DIFFERENT LAWS THAT APPLY TO THAT, RIGHT? NOPE. NO. NOW, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO, DO YOU HAVE TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY? YEAH. PROTECTED TREES. THEY'RE PROBABLY INFESTED. THEY'RE ALL, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE DEAL IS THAT I COULD GO IN THERE AS A NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T LIKE YOU AND SAY, OH, YOU'VE GOT A TREE THAT GROWS OVER MY FENCE LINE AND I WANT YOU TO GET RID OF THAT TREE. BUT YOU SAY, OH, NO, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT PROVIDES SHADE ON THE WESTERN, UH, PORTION OF MY HOUSE, RIGHT? SO IT CUTS DOWN ON MY ELECTRIC BILLS AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT, THAT, THAT BENEFITS. BUT I, AS YOUR NEIGHBOR COULD SAY, WELL THAT TREE'S INFESTED, IT'S GOT, UH, TERMITES OR IT'S GOT, UM, STARLINGS IN IT, OR IT'S GOT SQUIRRELS IN IT, WHICH IS A RODENT. ONCE AGAIN, I LOVE SQUIRRELS 'CAUSE WE ALL LOVE SQUIRRELS, RIGHT? BUT ALL OF THAT STUFF I CAN GET, I CAN GET CODE OUT THERE AND I CAN, YOU KNOW, IF, IF I PLAY MY CARDS RIGHT, I CAN GET YOUR TREE CUT DOWN BECAUSE IT'S INFESTED IF IT'S ON YOUR PREMISES. I THINK THAT'S GOING A LITTLE LITTLE MORE OVER THAN WHAT IT IS FOR WHAT THE CITY IS GOING TO DO. UM, AND I JUST, I KNOW ONE OF MY, OKAY, I KNOW IT'S ON. CAN I TALK? YEAH, SORRY. PLUS THE TREE THAT'S ON MY PROPERTY IS PROTECTED. IT'S A STATE PROTECTED TREE, RIGHT? MY ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, UM, FOR ALL OF THEM. SO I'D SAY WE GO AHEAD AND FINISH THE MOTION. OKAY. I MOTION WE DENIED THAT. WELL, IT, WE ALREADY HAD A MOTION AT A SECOND. A SECOND. YEAH. SO IT'S CALLED, UM, I, I JUST WANNA ADD ONE COMMENT. AND THIS IS D MOST, I'M FROM D FIVE. SO WE ARE THE MOST AFFECTED BY CODE. WE HAVE MORE THAN DOUBLE OF EVERYONE ELSE, UH, THE PROBLEM, AND I, I HAVE SEEN FIRSTHAND THE WAY THAT THE, THIS TYPE OF LANGUAGE CAN BE ABUSED . SO I, I, WE CAN AGREE TO DISAGREE, BUT, UM, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL, ANY POST, UH, ONE POST THOMAS FRANKS MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM, NEXT ITEM. UH, OR ITEMS RATHER. WE CAN LOOK AT SECTIONS. UH, ROW 81, OR EXCUSE ME, ROW 80 AND 81. UH, THESE ARE BOTH, UM, NEW SECTIONS THAT WERE ADDED TO 2024. UM, IPMC IN REGARDS TO ACCESSIBILITY, UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO NOT ADOPT OR DO NOT ACCEPT, UH, AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN WITHOUT THIS SECTION OF ACCESSIBILITY. AND WHERE IS ACCESSIBILITY, UH, SPOKEN TO IN THE IP OR IN THE, UM, PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE CURRENTLY? OR IS IT, IS IT PART OF THE BUILDING CODE OR, YEAH, AS YOU RECALL, WE, WE HASHED THAT OUT. I THINK THE, MAYBE THE LAST MEETING, UM, ABOUT THE STATE IS ENFORCING OR RATHER EN ENFORCE ACCESSIBILITY, AND WE ALSO HAVE AN OFFICE OF, UH, DISABILITY THAT DOES THE, UH, A DA COMPLIANCE AS WELL, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY. ANY QUESTIONS? UH, I DO WANNA ASK, IS THERE, IS THERE A LEGAL REASON WE DON'T WANT TO ADD THIS? UH, LEGALLY IF THIS WAS ADDED TO THE S-A-P-M-C, THEN CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF UNDERSTANDING ALL THE A DA COMPLIANCE ISSUES, WHEREAS WE ALREADY HAVE A DEPARTMENT THAT'S EDUCATED AND KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT IT. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND JUST TO ADD TO THAT, UH, SO THE STATE IS THE ONE WHO ENFORCES A DA, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THAT. SO IF WE PUT IT IN THE CODE, YOU ARE TELLING ME TO ENFORCE SOMETHING I REALLY CANNOT ENFORCE. MADAM SHERIFF THOMAS FRANKS HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM 80, UM, TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF NOT ADOPTING THE 2024 IPMC FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. WOULD YOU INCLUDE ITEM NUMBER 81 AS WELL? YES, I SECOND THE MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION? [00:45:02] ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THAT WAS FOR 80 AND 81? YES. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO NEXT ITEMS WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT IS ROW 82, 83, AND 84 IN REGARDS TO STORM SHELTERS. AND IF WE CAN GO BACK ALSO TO ITEM NUMBER 63, WHICH IS THE, UH, DEFINITION, UM, UH, FOR STORM SHELTERS THAT WE TABLED LAST MEETING AS WELL. SO, UH, THESE ARE ENTIRELY NEW SECTIONS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE 2024 IPMC. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE THERE, RELATES TO STORM SHELTERS. UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO NOT ADOPT THE, UM, NEW SECTIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE IPMC AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN TO INCLUDE, UH, THE DEFINITION, NOT TO ACCEPT THE DEFINITION. ANY QUESTIONS? WHY IS STAFF NOT WANTING TO INCLUDE THIS? IS IT COVERED SOMEWHERE ELSE? A NEW STORM SHELTERS ARE INCLUDED IN THE BUILDING CODE, UH, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR EXISTING. AND THIS REFERENCE IS IC 500. WE HAVEN'T ADOPTED THAT EVER BEFORE. RANDOM QUESTION FOR STAFF, ARE WE GOING TO EVENTUALLY PUT ANYTHING IN THERE ABOUT STORM SHELTERS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE WAY MOTHER NATURE IS ADDED? I WOULD, I WOULD SAY MAYBE IN THE FUTURE, SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY HAVE A NEW CODE, UH, SOMETIMES IT TAKES A COUPLE OF CYCLES TO REALLY ADOPT IT. SO MAYBE IN THE FUTURE. ALRIGHT, WHAT WAS THE TABLING OF THE DEFINITION FOR STORM SHELTER? 63. OKAY. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS HAVE A MOTION. MOTION IS TO, UH, APPROVE LINE ITEM 63 ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, WITH DEFINITION CLARIFICATION. AND THEN ON ITEM 82, 83 AND 84 TO DENY, UM, AND ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENYING FROM THE 2024 IPMC AND LEAVING THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C THE WAY IT DOES DWAYNE NELSON SECOND, THE MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? JUST, YEAH, GO AHEAD. SO WE JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM YOUR MOTION. CAN YOU RESTATE THAT REAL QUICK? WE JUST, JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE ALL FOR DENIAL. YEAH. EXCEPT FOR 63 WHERE STAFF WANTED TO CLARIFY. NO, NO. SO 63, WHAT WE TABLED AT LAST MEETING, IT'S A DEFINITION THAT WOULD, IF WE ADOPTED THIS SECTION OF, UH, STORM SHELTERS, WE WOULD BE CONSIDERING THE DEFINITION AS WELL. HOWEVER, SINCE WE'RE NOT AT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OR ADOPTION OF THE NEW SECTION, WE'RE ASKING THE DEFINITION BE NOT ACCEPTED AS WELL. OKAY. THEN LET ME CLARIFY MY MOTION DENYING 63, 82, 83 AND 84 AND GOING WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF LEAVING THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C THE WAY IT IS. THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE APPROVING ALL SUB STAFF RECOMMENDATION. YEAH, IT WAS NO, NO, NO, BECAUSE I SAID ACCEPT AND I ASSUME EVERYONE IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT. YES. OKAY. YES, WE ARE. YES. WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT. UH, COULD WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS IF THE CHAIR SAYS YES? YES. UH, IT'S 10 0 2. WE'RE GONNA TAKE FIVE MINUTES. OKAY, LET'S, UH, GET STARTED AGAIN. IT IS 10 10 AND, UH, WE ARE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. 85. 85. ALL RIGHT, MADAM CHAIRMAN. UM, SO ITEM NUMBER, [00:50:01] ROW NUMBER 85. UM, GIMME ONE SECOND HERE. IF WE COULD, CAN WE LOOK AT NUMBER 85, 91, 91 AND 92, UH, ALTOGETHER? UM, THESE ARE, UH, EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. THERE IS NO REVISION OR SUGGESTED LANGUAGE. IT'S RATHER A QUESTION OF FORMATTING. UM, AS YOU'LL SEE, UM, IT'S JUST, I GUESS CLARIFYING. AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE MOVING THE DOOR DELETING A SPACE BETWEEN TWO LETTERS, RIGHT? SO, UM, WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. I MEAN, WE WOULD FORMAT IT EITHER WAY IN THE FINAL PRODUCT, UM, BUT IT MAY HAVE JUST BEEN AN OVERSIGHT ON THE LAST CYCLE. SO WE'RE JUST, UM, NEVERMIND BEFORE CYCLES, BEFORE . UM, CURIOUS TED. IT WASN'T , BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO, UH, AGAIN, ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO FORMAT IT AND JUST, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN, IT'S 85, 91 AND 92. ANY QUESTIONS? YOU WANT A MOTION OR YOUR YEAH, I, I WOULD LOVE ONE. MADAM CHAIR DWAYNE NELSON. I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE FORMATTING CHANGES FOR ITEM NUMBER 85 91 AND 92. THIS IS THOMAS FRANKS. I SECOND THAT MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, NEXT ITEM, ITEM 86. UH, IT'S A, UH, EXCUSE ME, A PROPOSED, UH, NEW SECTION UNDER THE 2024 IPMC, UM, IN RELATION TO SECTION 4 0 4 0.3, MINIMUM CEILING HEIGHTS AND EXCEPTIONS. UH, AS YOU SEE THERE, THE SUGGESTED LANGUAGE IN BLUE IS THE ADDED LANGUAGE IN THE IPMC, UH, STAFF IS OKAY WITH THE NEW SECTION AND RECOMMENDS THE ADOPTION OF THIS NEW SECTION IN THE S-A-P-M-C. ANY QUESTIONS? MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE 2024 IPMC WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? THIS IS ERLINDA. I SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 87. THIS IS AN EXTERNAL, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT. UH, IT'S A REVISION TO SECTION FOUR, 4.4 HABITABLE ROOM AND BEDROOM REQUIREMENTS. UM, THE LANGUAGE IN RED IS THE RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE THAT WE STRIKE OUT FROM THE EXISTING S-A-P-M-C. UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT. AND DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHY THEY WANTED BEDROOM REMOVED SO THEY CAN CONVERT CORRECT. DURING A REMODEL. THAT'S WHY THEY WANTED IT REMOVED. YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL THE REASON, UH, FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND WHY THEY WANTED THAT LANGUAGE STRUCK. I MEAN, STRIKED OUT, REMOVED, I GUESS, IF YOU WILL, FROM THE S-A-P-M-C, STRICKEN OUT . ANY PARTICULAR REASON WHY STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOT HAVE THAT CHANGE? YES. UM, SO BEDROOM SIZES, UM, BASED ON THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE IS DIFFERENT THAN A REGULAR, LET'S SAY, LIVING ROOM OR HABITABLE ROOM. SO WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT, UH, SPECIFICALLY DISTINGUISHED. WE DON'T WANT EVERYTHING TO BE JUST HABITABLE AREA OR HABITABLE ROOMS. [00:55:01] SO HYPOTHETICAL, RIGHT? IF I CONVERT MY GARAGE AND IF I HAVE SOMEONE SLEEPING IN MY GARAGE, WHAT, HOW DOES THAT CONSIDER A BEDROOM? SO I CONVERT IT, REMODEL IT, THE, HOW DOES THAT APPLY TO THAT RULE IF WE DON'T HAVE A BEDROOM BECAUSE IT'S HABIT TO WHOLE HOUSES. SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT EV EVERYTHING IS AND BEDROOMS, THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE BEDROOMS. SO BASICALLY, UM, YEAH, IF, IF YOU REMOVE THE WORD BEDROOM, BASICALLY THERE IS NO REQUIREMENTS FOR IT ANYMORE, RIGHT? THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO KEEP IT THERE. AND IT GIVES YOU THE SECTIONS YOU NEED TO COMPLY WITH. 4 0 4 0.4240 4.5. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS CLAY. UM, THERE'S, THERE'S CERTAIN RESTRICTION OR REQUIREMENTS ON HABITABLE ROOMS AND THERE'S MAYBE MORE STRICT REQUIREMENTS ON BEDROOMS. OKAY, MADAM CHAIR THOMAS SPRINGS MOTION, UH, MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF KEEPING THE 2021 SAPM AS IS SECOND. MR. CLAY THOMPSON, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, I'M LOOKING AT ITEM NUMBER 88. THIS IS AN EX DANNY, I'M SORRY, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. SO THE ONE, MS. SAVITA, CAN YOU PULL IT A LITTLE CLOSER? UH, THE ONE THAT WE JUST APPROVED, 87, WE DENIED THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION REQUEST AND THEN UNDER PROPOSED AMENDMENT, THAT WAS THEIR REQUEST, CORRECT? THIS IS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT FROM THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. UH, WE REJECTED THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEPT THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY, MOVING ON TO ITEM 88. UM, THIS IS AN INTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT. UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT RECOMMENDED ADDING A NEW SECTION TO THE SECTION OF 4 0 4 0.5 OVERCROWDING. UM, IT WOULD RECOMMEND, OR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT RECOMMENDED, ADDING THE TABLE BELOW, UH, THAT KIND OF OUTLINES THE MINIMUM ERROR REQUIREMENTS, UM, FOR OVERCROWDING, UH, THIS SIMILAR TABLE LIVES, UH, CURRENTLY IN THE IPMC, UM, IT STAFFS RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEEP THE UM, S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. ANY QUESTIONS? DID YOU SAY IT ALREADY LIVES IN THE, UM, I CAN SEE ON THE S-A-P-M-C? NO, IT EXISTS IN THE IPMC. DANNY, JUST MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING. WE'RE WANTING TO KEEP JUST THE VERBIAGE NOT, UH, THE CHART, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE KEEP JUST THE LANGUAGE IN BLACK AND NOT ADOPT THE, UH, THE TABLE, UH, AS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT. MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS MOTION ON ITEM 88 TO GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF NOT, UM, ACCEPTING THE 2024 IPMC CHANGES AND KEEPING THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C AS IS SECOND CLAY THOMPSON SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, NEXT ITEM WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ITEM, UH, 89. THIS IS, UM, A RECOMMENDED CHANGE REVISION IN THE 2024 IPMC, UH, SECTION FOUR, 4.6 FISHING UNITS. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE LANGUAGE IN [01:00:01] RED HAS BEEN, UH, REMOVED AND IS REPLACED WITH THE LANGUAGE IN BLUE. UH, REMOVING IT FROM THE, UM, THE TWO 20 TO THE ONE 90 FOR MINIMUM CLEAR FOOTAGE. AND FROM THE 3 22 60 FOR THE MINIMUM CLEAR FOOTAGE FOR, UM, ALL UNITS OCCUPIED BY THREE UNITS, THREE OCCUPANTS. UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO ADOPT OR DO ACCEPT THE UM, IPMC UPDATES AND, UM, AMEND THE, UH, 24 24 S-A-P-M-C, UH, WITH THE CHANGES QUESTIONS? YEAH, JUST A SIMPLE ONE ON THE, UH, EFFICIENCY UNIT, UH, LANGUAGE. UM, SECOND SENTENCE, UH, WE'VE GOT THE OCCUPANT SPACE S CAN WE ADD THAT AS WELL INTO THIS? IF WE DO CHOOSE TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION OCCUPANT SPACE S OH YEAH, GOOD CATCH. BY THE WAY, WE'RE NOT REDOING THIS. OH, YEAH. OKAY. SO DO WE HAVE A YEAH, MADAM CHAIR, WE WERE JUST CONFIRMING THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY IN THE BOOK WRONG AND IT IS WRONG. SO WE'RE, WE JUST DIDN'T WANNA MAKE SURE THIS WAS A TYPO IN OUR TABLE. SO IT IS, THERE IS A SPACE IN THE BOOK. MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS MOTION TO ACCEPT THE 2024 IPMC CHANGES AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND TO MAKE THE, UH, FORMATTING CORRECTION ON 4 0 4 0.6 SUBSECTION ONE, UH, LINE TWO, TWO OCCUPANTS, SECOND DWAY NELSON SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? I'LL JUST FOR THE DISCUSS PIECE OF DISCUSSION, BECAUSE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT, THIS IS KIND OF LIKE IN LINE WITH, UH, ALL THE CA RULES AND STUFF THAT THE CITY'S BEEN PASSING, RIGHT? TO KIND OF SHRINK DOWN OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENTS SO THAT MORE PEOPLE CAN LIVE IN DIFFERENT STRUCTURES AND, AND LOCATIONS. YES, THAT THAT'S CORRECT. UH, CITY AND NATIONWIDE. UH, THE ICC, THEY'RE LOOKING AT MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SLASH THEY CALL THEM TINY HOMES, SO THE SPACE OR THE AREA IS A LITTLE SMALLER, SO THAT'S WHY THEY, THEY WENT THAT DIRECTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? UH, ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT, NEXT ITEM NUMBER 90. THIS IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, IN REGARDS TO SECTION 3 0 2 0.4 EMPLOYEE FACILITIES. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE THERE, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO, UM, REMOVE THE VERBIAGE IN RED, WHICH BASICALLY REMOVES ONE DRINKING FACILITY AND REPLACING IT. WHAT'S IN BLUE? UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT IF LAWFULLY CONSTRUCTED ARE TWO OCCUPANCIES, UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. YOU ASKED THE SAME QUESTION. I'M WONDERING WHAT'S A DRINKING FACILITY? IT WOULD BE A, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT PROVIDES WATER, CORRECT? WHETHER IT'S PORTABLE WATER OR, YOU KNOW, WATER FOUNTAIN, WHATEVER, RIGHT? WATER FOUNTAIN. YEAH. DOES A SINK COUNT AS THAT? NO. NO. OKAY. SO AT A CURIOSITY, WHY IS STAFF WANTING TO REMOVE THAT? NO, THIS IS FROM THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. IT WASN'T AN, IT WAS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT. MY BAD. IT'S A PLUMBING COST. WELL, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A WATER FOUNTAIN. YOU CAN HAVE ONE OF THOSE DISPENSERS. YES, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S DRINKABLE, WHICH, I MEAN, IF YOU'RE AN EMPLOYEE WORKING ALL DAY, I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO WATER. SO, AGREED. I I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD WANT IT TO BE REMOVED SINCE THEY'RE NOT HERE TO ANSWER, SIR. I, I THINK IT'S TOTALLY PLUMBING CAUSE RIGHT? I MEAN, YOU, YOU HAVE A SINK AND A TOILET AND YOU CAN CALL IT GOOD. YEAH. WITH THAT MADAM CHAIR, I [01:05:01] MOVE THAT WE NOT ADOPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE AND THAT WE KEEP THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IN THE 23 1 S-A-P-M-C, THOMAS FRANKS. I SECOND THAT. VERY, VERY FAST. BEFORE . ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? A. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK GOD FOR THAT. IT PASSES. OKAY, SO MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 93. UH, THIS IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. IT'S REVISION TO SECTION 6 0 1 0.2. RESPONSIBILITIES. UH, THE LANGUAGE AS YOU SEE IN THE WORKING DOCK IN BLUE IS THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE WHICH READS WHERE THE TENANT AND THE LANDLORD HAVE ENTERED INTO A WRITTEN CONTRACT IN WHICH THE TENANT ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUCH MAINTENANCE. IT STAFFS RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. DID THEY HAPPEN TO TELL ANYBODY WHY THEY WERE LOOKING FOR THIS? I MEAN, I THINK I KNOW WHY THEY'RE WANTING TO, BUT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. YEAH, IT'S THE SAME, THE SAME REASONS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WHEN THEY WERE HERE, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND THEY'RE SAYING IF THE TENANT DAMAGES SOMETHING OR DOESN'T MAINTAIN WHAT THEY AGREED TO MAINTAIN, THEN THEY WANT ALL THE NOTICES AND CITATIONS TO GO TO THE TENANT, NOT TO THE LANDLORD. SO I THINK WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION LAST TIME, BUT IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS, AND I'LL SAY THE SAME THING I SAID LAST TIME. AND ULTIMATELY, THE OWNER IS ALWAYS RESPONSIBLE. IT'S THEIR PROPERTY. YES. WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, UM, TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOGNITION OF DENYING THE ADDITIONS, UH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR ITEM 93. SECOND DWAYNE NELSON. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. ALRIGHT, NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 94. THIS IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION. IT IS A REVISION TO SECTION 6 0 4 0.2. UH, SERVICE. THE LANGUAGE IN BLUE, AS YOU SEE ON THE WORKING DOC, IS THE PROS LANGUAGE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED PERIODICALLY. UH, IT IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS POST AMENDMENT AND TO AMEND THE, UH, 2024 S-A-P-M-C. IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT IT. YES, CORRECT. WHY DO YOU WANNA EXPLAIN WHY ? GEEZ. ANY, ANY TIME WE, WE REFERENCE, UH, A STANDARD. NORMALLY IT IS WHAT'S ADOPTED. UH, I GUESS SO TO US IT, IT WITH IT OR WITHOUT THAT ADDITION. IT MEANS THE SAME TO US. BUT AGAIN, THE APARTMENT, WHEN WE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THIS, THEY, THEY SAID THEY WANTED TO BE VERY CLEAR AND, UH, WE, WE, WE SAID WE ARE OKAY WITH IT. ISN'T IT A LITTLE REDUNDANT THOUGH? YEAH. I'M JUST GONNA LOOK OVER HERE TOO. I, UH, STEAMED LAWYER ON, ON ON THE STAFF. UH, WHAT IS THIS REALLY, DOES THIS CHANGE ANYTHING? IS THIS GONNA GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S OUTSIDE OF CODE OR CONFUSED CODE SOMEHOW BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT CODE SECTIONS OR NO, IT'S ACTUALLY MEANINGLESS. OKAY. I GLAD YOU SAID IT. WITH THAT MADAM CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION. UM, MY MOTION IS TO DENY THE, UH, ITEM 94 PROPOSED BY THE SAN ANTONIO APARTMENT ASSOCIATION AND TO KEEP THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C AS IS A SECOND. HE'S DYING DOWN AND WE'RE ALMOST DONE. , I'M KEEPING, OKAY. YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T DENY IT WELL, YEAH, EXACTLY. I'M KEEPING THE SAPM THE SAME. I MEAN, DANNY, IT MAKES NO SENSE. AND I SECOND HIS MOTION TO, OKAY. UH, CLAY SECONDS. UH, ANY DISCUSSION WHY ? I I HATE CHANGING THINGS IF IT HASN'T, DANNY, IT, IT'S LIKE ADDING THINGS FOR THE SAKE OF BAT. DANNY WAS JUST ENJOYING ALL YESES. YES, WE HAVE TO PUT ONE . OKAY. UM, ANYWAYS, UH, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. [01:10:01] ANY OPPOSED? MY MOTION CARRIES. AND IF YOU, IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A YES, I I LIKE THIS. THE NEXT ONE. SO . THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. SO THE NEXT ITEM, NUMBER 95. THIS IS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, FROM INTERNAL STAFF. IT IS A REVISION TO 6 0 4 0.3 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM HAZARDS. UH, IT SETS RECOMMENDATION TO ADD THE LANGUAGE YOU SEE IN BLUE TO FIRST RESPONDERS. UH, IT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE S-A-P-M-C. LIKE I SAID, I LIKE THIS ONE. ANY QUESTIONS? DISCUSSION, MADAM CHAIR. MOTION TO APPROVE TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM 95 TO CHANGES TO THE 2024 IPMC. THIS IS . I SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. CAN CAN WE JUST CLARIFY, YOUR MOTION WAS TO ACCEPT THE CHANGES FOR THE IPMC AND I GUESS WE ARE LOOKING AT THE SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. JUST ADDING THE WORD FIRST RESPONDERS. YOU WERE, YEAH, CORRECT. I SHOULD HAVE SAID PROPOSED AMENDMENTS INSTEAD OF IPMC. BUT DANNY, YOU GOT WHAT YOU WANTED. , WE UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. OKAY, GOOD. ALRIGHT, NEXT ITEM. . I'M GETTING A LOOK FROM FRANKLIN. THERE YOU GO. . NEXT ITEM NUMBER 96. UH, THIS IS A, UM, PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, OR RATHER A NEW SECTION THAT WAS ADDED TO THE IPMC, UM, FOR, UH, DUCT SYSTEMS THAT WILL CLOSE DRYERS EXHAUST. UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADD THIS LANGUAGE INTO THE, UH, S-A-P-M-C, UH, UNDER SECTION 6 0 6 DUCT SYSTEMS. I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT THE ONLY QUESTION IS, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT OLDER BUILDINGS THAT MAY NOT HAVE IT? THEY, THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE AN EXHAUST DUCT FOR DRYERS, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YEAH, I, I KNOW SOME OLDER BUILDINGS THAT DON'T HAVE IT AND THEY'VE ACTUALLY HAD TO PUT HOLES THROUGH WALLS. I'M JUST SAYING, WOULD THIS, IF THEY WERE CAUGHT WITHOUT IT, WOULD IT ENFORCE THEM TO HAVE TO NO. NO. IF IF IT, IF IT'S NOT AVAILABLE OR THEY DON'T HAVE IT, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY IF YOU HAVE IT. OKAY. I MEAN, I AGREE WITH Y'ALL. I'M JUST CURIOUS, DO WE NEED TO DEFINE THE WORD PERIODIC VERSUS ANNUAL? BECAUSE I THINK THE INDUSTRY IS RECOMMENDING ANNUAL WE, IT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. WE, WE CAN, I I WOULD ACTUALLY, INSTEAD OF ANNUAL, I WOULD SAY QUARTERLY, BECAUSE QUARTERLY IS GOING MORE TOWARDS PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE, UH, THROUGHOUT THE INDUSTRY. QUARTERLY IT MEANS EVERY THREE MONTHS. MM-HMM. . CORRECT. I'M NOT GONNA MOVE MY DRYER EVERY QUARTER, BUT I WOULD ANNUALLY, BUT PERIODICALLY. UH, I GUESS, I GUESS YOU COULD CLASSIFY PERIODIC AS QUARTERLY THEN, COULDN'T YOU? YEAH. SO HERE'S, I'LL USE, UH, EXAMPLE. SO I HAVE ONE OF THE NEW LG DRYERS. UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I FOUND OUT ABOUT IS THE DRYER. IT COLLECTS A LOT OF VENTS IN THE HOSE OUT THERE. MIND YOU, MY HOUSE IS ONLY A YEAR AND A HALF OLD, AND IT'S SOMETHING ABOUT THE WAY THAT THAT DRYER WAS MANUFACTURED. IT, THAT'S WHY I SAY THAT. AND I, I GUESS, FILTERS IN INVALID OR NOT DOING ITS JOB FOR YOU. THAT WAS A SIDEBAR CONVERSATION. SO NO, NO, BUT TO ANSWER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I THINK THE CODE SAYS PERIODIC REMOVAL OF THE ACCUMULATION OF LINT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURERS OPERATING IN INSTRUCTIONS. SO, AS YOU SAID, DEPENDS ON THE UNIT. SOME OF THEM MIGHT NEED MORE THAN LESS, I GUESS. UH, THAT'S WHY THEY DIDN'T STAY IT QUARTERLY OR ANNUAL. THEY JUST SAID PERIODIC. BUT IF I'M EXPECTING THOUGH, AND I'M SORRY CLAY, GO AHEAD. I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, 'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT APARTMENTS HERE AND THERE, YOU KNOW, IN A LOT OF APARTMENTS THEY WILL HAVE THESE, UH, YOU KNOW, IT KIND OF, THE, THE HAVE A HAVE A WASHER DRYER. AND SO, YOU KNOW, BY PUTTING AN ANNUAL INSPECTION IN THERE, WE AT LEAST PUT A REQUIREMENT THAT, HEY, YOU KNOW, IF YOUR MAINTENANCE GUYS HAVE TO GO DO THAT AS WELL. RIGHT. SO PERIODIC COULD KIND OF LEAVE IT OPEN TO INTERPRETATION AND PERIODIC COULD BE, OH, WE, WE HAVE A NEW, UH, RENTER IN THE APARTMENT. SO, AND THEN ON THE FLIP SIDE, I THINK IT'S JUST GOOD FOR EVERYONE TO THINK ABOUT, OH, THERE'S A, A DRYER VENT BACK THERE. 'CAUSE THIS IS A [01:15:01] FIRE HAZARD. I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF WHEN WE, WHEN WE BOIL IT DOWN, FOLKS DON'T THINK ABOUT IT. BUT MAY, MAY, MAY I RECOMMEND SOMETHING THEN, UH, SURE. WE CAN SAY SHALL UNDERGO PERIODIC NOT LESS THAN YEARLY OR ANNUAL REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATION. I, I LIKE THAT. SO YOU CAN DO QUARTERLY IF YOU CHOOSE TO, BUT AT MINIMUM YOU NEED TO DO A, A YEARLY, YOU ALREADY SOLVED THAT PROBLEM BY SAYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S OPERATING INSTRUCTION. SO WE THAT COULD OVER, THAT COULD JUST SUPERSITE WHAT YOUR ANNUAL PERIODIC IF, IF THE MANUFACTURER WANTS IT MONTHLY. WELL, YES, BUT I'LL PICK ON ANOTHER COMPANY. TURBO. THEY, THEIR SYSTEM IS BUILT WITH PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE WHERE IT HAS BACKFILL FLANS. SO THEY ONLY HAVE PMS WHERE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT ONLY EVERY TWO YEARS. I KINDA, I AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF, YOU KNOW, MAKING IT TO WHERE MINIMUM AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR THEY'RE DOING IT. BECAUSE IF APARTMENTS AS WELL, IF YOU'RE GOING IN THERE TO DO THAT, AT LEAST HOPEFULLY THEY'RE GONNA BE CHANGING THE FILTERS IN THE UNITS AS WELL FOR THE HVAC SYSTEMS. SO HOPEFULLY THEY CAN COMBINE IT AND DO ALL I I HAVE A QUESTION HERE. UM, OH, THE FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE, CAN WE SEPARATE IT IN SINGLE FAMILY VERSUS MULTIFAMILY? BECAUSE IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT APARTMENT COMPLEX, THAT'S GONNA BE A LOT MORE LENT BUILDUP THAN IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. UH, AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS, UM, THE, IT DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION, BUT A LOT OF TIMES IT IS THE, THE DRYER DOES NOT BELONG TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX OR TO THE, UH, LANDLORD. IT BELONGS TO THE TENANT. AND THEN THAT ALSO IS A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE GONNA GO ONCE A MONTH TO CLEAN OUT THE LYNCH OUT OF A DRYER. LIKE THAT'S, THAT SEEMS A LITTLE UNREASONABLE. UM, VERSUS THE DUCT SYSTEM THAT IT'S PLUGGED INTO. LIKE, BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS COVERS A LOT, IT COVERS MECHANICAL AND HEATING COMPONENTS. UH, THE LINT TRAP. THAT, THAT'S JUST IT. THAT'S MY QUESTION IN HERE IS, IS IT OVERSTEPPING A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH? MY OPINION ON THAT IS IT'S KEEPING THE EQUIPMENT AND THE STRUCTURE, UM, IN A MORE HEALTHIER CONDITION AND KEEPING, AS CLAY POINTED OUT, ALSO MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S NOT A FIRE HAZARD THAT, SO LET ME, LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY. IT'S A 300 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX. DRIER DO NOT COME STANDARD INSIDE THE UNITS. EVERY, EACH OF THE 300 UNITS HAS AN INDIVIDUAL DRYER OWNER THAT THEY BROUGHT THEIR OWN DRYER. SO YOU WANT MAINTENANCE TO GO CLEAN THEIR DRYERS. THE, THE, THE EXHAUST FOR THE DRYER, NOT, NOT THE ACTUAL PIECE OF EQUIPMENT WHERE IT PLUGS IN. RIGHT. THAT OF THAT MAINTENANCE TECH FOR THE APARTMENTS ARE ALREADY CHANGING FILTERS. MM-HMM. RIGHT. QUARTERLY. SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH THEM DOING IT YEARLY? BECAUSE LET'S BE HONEST, MOST PEOPLE DON'T STAY IN THE SAME APARTMENT FOR LONGER THAN A YEAR. RIGHT. SO THAT GIVES THEM, I MEAN SOME DO, SOME DON'T. RIGHT. BUT IT ALSO GIVES THEM THE AVAILABILITY TO DO IT ONCE A YEAR BY ADDING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THIS SAYS THE LINT TRAP, MECHANICAL AND HEATING COMPONENTS AND THE EXHAUST DUCT SYSTEM. YEAH, I THINK I, I DIDN'T REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO IT. SO YOU'RE SAYING IT NOW, SO YOU'RE, THE WAY THIS READS JUST CONFIRMING WITH STAFF, IS THAT EVERY PART OF THE DRYER THAT CONNECTS TO THE DUCT AND THEN THE DUCT ITSELF ALL HAVE TO BE MAINTAINED? OR IS THIS JUST SAYING THAT THERE'S LIKE, I GET YOUR POINT. I'M READING SOMETHING IN ADDITION TO THE EXHAUST DUCT SYSTEM THAT'S EXTERNAL OF THE DRYER THAT HAS TO BE CLEANED. I GUESS THAT'S MY MM-HMM. MY CONFUSION. IS IT INSIDE INTERNAL TO THE DRYER SYSTEM ALL THE WAY OUT OR OUTSIDE OF THE DRYER SYSTEM THROUGH THE DUCT WORK. SO READING IT AGAIN AND LISTENING TO THE DISCUSSION, I WITHDRAW MY RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE YEAH, THIS, THIS IS TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT COMPONENTS. THE LIN TRAP, THAT'S SOMETHING AT LEAST FOR EXAMPLE, AT MY HOUSE, WE, WE CHECK THAT AND CLEAN IT ONCE A WEEK. I WANNA SAY SOMETIMES EVEN MORE. MY, MY WIFE WASHES ALMOST EVERY DAY. SO LIKE YOU HAVE TO, I CAN'T KEEP THAT FOR LONGER THAN A WEEK OR TWO MAX. I MEAN NOW THE MECHANICAL AND HEATING COMPONENTS, THAT'S DIFFERENT. AND THEN THE FULL EXHAUST DUCT GOING OUTSIDE, THAT'S POTENTIALLY ONCE A YEAR I WOULD SAY. SO THAT'S PROBABLY WHY WHEN THEY PUT THIS IN, ADDING ALL THESE COMPONENTS THEY SET PERIODICALLY. BECAUSE AGAIN, EACH COMPONENT HAS DIFFERENT [01:20:01] REQUIREMENTS. SO IF WE SAY YEARLY, THAT'S, THAT'S A PROBLEM. I MEAN, IF WE DON'T CLEAN THE LENGTH TRAP TILL A YEAR, THAT'S A PROBLEM. AND, OR, OR QUARTERLY. SO THAT'S WHY I WOULD JUST LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. WHAT, WHAT IF WE JUST TOOK ALL THAT OTHER LANGUAGE IN FRONT AND JUST BROUGHT IT DOWN TO THE EXHAUST DUCT SYSTEM. JUST CUT ALL THE OTHER, THAT OTHER BUSINESS ABOUT THE LINT TRAP AND MECHANICAL AND HEATING COMPONENTS AND JUST GO CLOSE DRYER EXHAUST, DUCT SYSTEM MAINTENANCE. THE EXHAUST DUCT SYSTEM OF THE CLOSED DRYER SHALL UNDERGO PERIODIC NOT LESS THAN ANNUALLY. UM, REMOVAL OF ACCUMULATION OF LIN, YADA YADA YADA. YEAH. YEAH. THE ACCORDANCE TO MANUFACTURERS OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS. YEAH. BECAUSE THEY COULD BE DIFFERENT THAN ANNUALLY AS POINTED OUT EARLIER. BUT THE FLIP SIDE OF THIS, WHAT ABOUT LAUNDROMATS? WE'RE TAKING THE CODE AWAY FROM LAUNDROMATS UNLESS THAT'S CLASSIFIED UNDER BUILDING CODE, WHICH I DON'T THINK IT IS. IT'D BE COMMERCIALS. SO, SO, UH, EMILY OR VALUE, CAN YOU SCROLL UP TO 6 0 6 0.1, THE SECTION JUST ABOVE? THAT'S VERY GENERIC STATEMENT. SO THAT I GUESS COVERS THE MAJORITY OF THE ISSUES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT THE EXHAUST OR THE DUCT SYSTEM. AGAIN, DOESN'T SAY IT HAS TO BE CLEANED, BUT IT SAYS IT NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED FREE OF OBSTRUCTION. SO I THINK, UH, AT LEAST MY MOTION, I'M THINKING IF WE'RE READY, WOULD BE TO DENY THE IPMC UPDATE. I'LL SECOND THAT ON ITEM 96. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. THAT WAS VERY DE DELAYED. THAT WAS A VERY WEAK, I, I UNDERSTAND, BUT IT'S STILL, I, SO LET, LET ME JUST MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD. SO YOU'RE DENYING TO ADD THIS SECTION INTO THE CODE, CORRECT? YES. SO YOU'RE HURTING DANNY'S FEELING SECOND TIME NOW. I HAVE A FEELING I'M PROBABLY GONNA HURT IT HERE IN A SECOND. AGAIN, 4 35, HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON. NEXT SECTION 97 . THIS IS, UH, INTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, TO ADD A NEW SECTION, UH, FOR ELEVATORS, UH, WHICH IS, UH, AS YOU SEE HERE, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DENY THIS, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. UM, IS THERE A REASON YOU DON'T WANT TO ADD THIS? SO THE REASON WHY, UH, WE THINK WE SHOULDN'T ADD IT IS IT STATES BASICALLY IN BUILDINGS EQUIPPED WITH PASSENGER ELEVATORS. NOT LESS THAN ONE ELEVATOR SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN OPERATION OF ALL TIMES. AT ALL TIMES. I'M SORRY. SO WHEN YOU HAVE BUILDING AND HAS FIVE OR SIX OR 10 ELEVATORS, THIS IS SAYING ONLY ONE IS OPERATIONAL, THEN THEY ARE NOT IN VIOLATION. SO WHEN WE WALK INTO A BUILDING AND I HAVE NINE ELEVATORS DOWN, ONE IS OPERATING, THIS TELLS ME THEY'RE OKAY TO GO. AND, AND THAT'S WHY WE, WE STATED WE DON'T THINK WE NEED THAT IN GENERAL IN THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. UH, AND MAYBE DANNY WILL HELP ME FIND IT, BUT WE HAVE SECTION ABOUT WHEN YOU HAVE ANY MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT HAS TO BE IN OPERATIONAL CONDITION. CHAPTER SIX. OKAY. IT HELP DALE OR DANNY OR JENNY? THAT'S CORRECT. EMILY, IF WE CAN GO DO SECTION 6 0 1 0.2. YEAH. THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AND AND ALSO 6 0 3 0.1. IF YOU CAN GO DOWN TO 6 0 3 0.1. I THINK THAT KIND OF FURTHER CLARIFIES. UM, MECHANICAL APPLIANCES. YEAH, THAT'S THE ONE. IT DOESN'T SPECIFY ELEVATOR IN HERE THOUGH. SO COULD WE ADD ELEVATOR IN THERE? MM-HMM. THAT WOULD SOLVE THE OTHER, I MEAN IT STATES ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WHICH WOULD COVER THAT, BUT IT'S FURTHER. [01:25:01] I MEAN THEN IT SAYS FIREPLACE LIKE IT, SO IT KIND OF OUT OUTLINES THEM. SO WHY COULDN'T WE JUST ADD ELEVATOR TO THIS? SO IT JUST MEETS THE OTHER STANDARD THAT THEY'RE, UM, SAYING WE DON'T NEED. YEAH, IT LISTS APPLIANCES AND OTHER ITEMS, BUT I WOULD THINK MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT DOES ITS OWN CATEGORY LIKE THE, UH, THE FANS OF YOUR BATHROOM AND MM-HMM. ELEVATORS MECHANICAL. AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, APPLIANCES IN ADDITION. YEAH. SO FROM THE COMMERCIAL SIDE OF IT, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO ME TALKS ABOUT ELEVATORS. IT TALKS ABOUT HUEC UNITS. IT TALKS ABOUT BOILERS, IT TALKS ABOUT ANYTHING THAT WELL IS MECHANICAL. IT'S A SEPARATE MECHANICAL CODE. CLAY, DO YOU MIND USING YOUR MICROPHONE? I'M SO SORRY. SORRY. YEAH. NOW THE MECHANICAL IN A MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ALSO FALLS UNDER MECHANICAL CODE AS WELL, RIGHT? I MEAN YOU HAVE LIKE THE WHOLE ENGINEERING SECTION, CORRECT. ENGINEERING SECTION, BUT YEAH. YES, WE HAVE THE, THE INTERNATIONAL, UM, MECHANICAL CODE THAT WE, WE ADOPT AND WE UTILIZE. BUT THE REASON WHY THEY HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, FIREPLACES. NOT EVERY FIREPLACE IS MECHANICAL, RIGHT? UM, APPLIANCES, NOT EVERY APPLIANCE IS MECHANICAL. I MEAN THEY HAVE MECHANICAL COMPONENTS BUT COULD BE ELECTRICAL APPLIANCE. BUT THAT'S WHY THEY SAID ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, IF YOU TALK TO ANYBODY, UH, ELEVATOR IS A MECHANICAL COMPONENT OR, OR EQUIPMENT. SO I JUST KNOW THAT THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH ELEVATORS AND WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S IN A WHEELCHAIR OR IS UH, HAS MOBILITY PROBLEMS AND THEY'RE STUCK UPSTAIRS FOR TWO OR THREE, FOUR HOURS AND CAN'T GET DOWN, IT'S A PROBLEM. I JUST SAID I'D FEEL BETTER HAVING ELEVATORS IN THERE. MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS MAKE A MOTION TO UH, DENY THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR ITEM 27, UH, 97. I'M SORRY. 97 . LET'S START OVER AGAIN. . UH, YOU SAID DENY NUMBER NINE? UH, ITEM 97, CORRECT. GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. UH, SECOND MS. CLAY THOMPSON. I'LL SECOND MA. CLAY THOMPSON. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. WE GOT TWO MORE? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, NEXT ITEM. YES, THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM 98. UM, AND IF WE COULD PROBABLY LOOK AT 98 AND 99 AT THE SAME TIME. 'CAUSE I THINK THE LANGUAGE IS VERY SIMILAR. UH, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION, UH, FROM THE IPMC. IT'S A REVISION TO THE EXISTING SECTIONS OF, UH, 7 0 2 0.1 GENERAL AND 7 0 2 0.2 AISLES. BASICALLY THEY'RE MOVING, UH, THE LANGUAGE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE OR REPLACING WHICH CODE UNDER WHICH THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED. UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE AND AMEND THE S-A-P-M-C. THIS IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, DANNY. WHY, UH, IS STAFF WANTING MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS INSTEAD OF GOING WITH INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE? BECAUSE THE, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTIONS, UM, I GUESS IF IT WAS ADOPTED OR RATHER, UM, REGULATED BY THE IBC OR THE IRC RIGHT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FIRE CODE AS WELL. SO I THINK THIS HERE JUST FURTHER CLARIFIES UNDER WHICH CODE IT WAS CONSTRUCTED OR WHICH, UM, YEAH, WHICH CODE UNDER THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED. SO WE, WE, WE DO THAT TODAY BASICALLY. SO, UM, AGAIN, WE, I THINK WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. IF WE HAVE A OLD BUILDING AND THERE ARE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS AT THE TIME FOR EGRESS, IF THEY DIDN'T DO ANY MODIFICATIONS OR MEASURE CHANGES AND WE GO INSPECT TODAY, WE STILL INSPECT IT UNDER THE FIRE CODE, BUT REALLY UNDER THE FIRE CODE AT THE TIME, THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE DID NOT, ICC ACTUALLY DIDN'T START TILL 2000. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY BUILDING BEFORE 2000, THERE WAS NOTHING CALLED INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE. IT WAS UNIFIED FIRE CODE OR WHATEVER BEFORE THAT EVEN. SO I THINK WE, WE COMPLY WITH THE NEW CHANGES, ALTHOUGH IT WASN'T WRITTEN THAT WAY. SO FOR US, THE CHANGE CLARIFIES IT AND MAKE SURE WE GO BACK AND WE MAKE SURE THE EGRESS MEANS OF EGRESS DO COMPLY WITH THE, THE, THE TIME THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED. SO ON 98, I, I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT ON 99 I DON'T, UM, BECAUSE 99 TALKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE AISLES, RIGHT? IF WE GO [01:30:01] BACK AND LOOK AT A 19 60, 19 50, 19 30 BUILDING, THOSE AISLES BASICALLY ARE NON-EXISTENT, RIGHT? SO A DA WILL COME INTO PLAY WITH THAT ON THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL, BUT I ALSO THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE THE REQUIRED, YOU KNOW, 36, 37 INCH, 4 88. I WOULD HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE LIKE I, I LIVE IN A BUILDING THAT WAS BUILT IN 1939 AND IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR, UM, THOSE UNITS TO BE UP TO CURRENT CODE, UM, THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF OUR UNIT. MY UNIT IS A THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT AND IT'S 784 SQUARE FEET TOTAL. THERE IS NO WAY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN WITHOUT REBUILDING. REBUILDING. YEAH, I'M NOT ASKING FOR THAT. I'M, I'M SAYING WHERE IT, IT TOOK OUT INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE. I'M SAYING IT SHOULD BE LEFT WITH AN INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE. RIGHT? 'CAUSE THAT ALSO ALLOWS, UH, INTERPRETATION AS WELL WITH THAT. I'M, I'M READING THIS AS A LOOPHOLE BECAUSE THAT COMMERCIAL AND OTHER PROPERTIES CAN USE, UM, TO SAY, WELL WE, IT WAS BUILT IN 1950S, 1960S, KINDA LIKE WHAT YOU WERE SAYING SO THAT THEY CAN DECREASE AISLE SPACE. RIGHT. UM, THAT'S WHY I'M LOOKING AT THAT. I MEAN, I SEE BOTH SIDES AGREE WITH BOTH OF IT, BUT I'M LOOKING AT HOW EASILY NOW I CAN SHRINK AND SHRINK DOWN AISLE SPACES TO WHERE A DA CAN'T GET IN THERE. AND ALSO WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT COMMER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, RIGHT? I LOVE USING CALL CENTER, RIGHT? BECAUSE NOW WE CAN RESTRICT THAT AS WELL, BUT IT'S, IT'S CODE UNDER WHICH THE BUDDING WAS CONSTRUCTED. OH, OKAY. AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM UNDER WHICH IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. BUT IF THEY'VE DONE RENOVATIONS LIKE IT'S A COMMERCIAL BUILDING, THEN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER THE LAST RENOVATION CODE, NOT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OUTSIDE STRUCTURE. THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED THOUGH, RIGHT? THAT WOULD BE A, LIKE A A THREE LEVEL THREE MM-HMM. REMODEL. SO THEN THEY WOULD FALL INTO MODERN CODE. WELL WE KNOW THAT, BUT IF IT SAYS UNDER WHICH IT WOULD CONSTRUCTION, IT'S THOSE SPECIFIC WORDS THAT MAKES IT A PROBLEM UNDER WHICH IT, THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED NOT UNDER THE LAST RENOVATION. THE TOTAL BUILDING. YES. I, IT'S JUST THE WORDING THAT I DON'T, I I DON'T LIKE IT. THAT'S, I MEAN WE CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON 98 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE 98 EVERYBODY'S IN AGREEMENT ON, BUT IT'S 99 THAT I JUST DON'T LIKE THE WORDING OF THAT. AND IF, YOU KNOW, I'M A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, I'M A A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, I CAN, I'M ALREADY THINKING OF WAYS I CAN LOOPHOLE THAT. UH, I LOVE TO GET THROUGH THE ONE OF THEM QUICKLY. BUT IF YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH 90 99, THEN I THINK YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT 98 AS WELL BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME VERBIAGE. MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. MY MOTION IS TO APPROVE 98 N 99 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, WITH THE CHANGES AND UM, FROM THE 2024 IPMC, CLAY THOMAS, MY SECOND. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. WHAT DO YOU THINK? AYE. AYE. OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. HUNDRED PERCENT. WHY NOT TABLE IT? 'CAUSE MAJORITY PEOPLE. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM AND THEN WE HAVE, UH, TWO TABLE ITEMS THAT WE'LL PROBABLY REVIEW NEXT MEETING. RIGHT? OKAY. BECAUSE WE STILL SEE THIS UNDER FOUR BOARDS, SO WE CAN STILL DISCUSS THIS BACK ONE MORE TIME. OKAY. SO THE LAST ITEM WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ITEM 100. UM, IT'S AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, WHICH IS A REVISION TO SECTION 7 0 3 0.2 SMOKE ALARMS, UH, IS YOU SEE ON THE WORKING DOCK THERE. THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE IS TO ADD, UH, STATE STATUTE OR UM, TO THIS SECTION, UH, IT ASSESS RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN. IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STATE STATUTE AND INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE? THERE IS, AND AND ALSO THE CONCERN IS, UH, STATE STATUTE [01:35:02] IS, UH, DEPENDENT ON THE POLITICAL WINDS AT THE TIME. MM-HMM. SO THEY CAN CHANGE. WHEREAS THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE HAS GONE THROUGH A FAIRLY STRINGENT, UM, REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND SO THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE IS UH, MORE APPLICABLE TO THIS SITUATION THAN STATE STATUTES, WHICH WILL CHANGE FAIRLY FREQUENTLY. OKAY. MADAM CHAIR, DWAYNE NELSON. I MOVE THAT WE DENY THE PROPOSED CHANGE FOR ITEM NUMBER 100 AND WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C CODE FROM 2021 LANGUAGE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? CLAY THOMPSON SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. LET'S PULL BACK UP THE TABLED ITEMS. WHAT, WHAT NUMBERS FOR THOSE? OH, I THOUGHT WE TOOK CARE OF, I THOUGHT WE TOOK CARE OF TABLED ITEMS. UH, WE STILL HAVE SOME. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS. WE STILL HAVE THREE ITEMS TABLED, UH, THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS, BUT I KNOW IT'S ALL, THERE'S ONLY THREE MINUTES LEFT. OH YEAH, I KNOW. I DO HAVE A HARD STOP TOO. SO WE CAN, WE CAN TECHNICALLY ADDRESS THIS NEXT MEETING NOW WE WERE LOOKING AT EXTENDING NEXT MEETING. I DON'T THINK WE NEED THAT ANYMORE, SO WE JUST KEEP THE TWO HOURS FOR NEXT MEETING AND WE HAVE ONLY THREE ITEMS TO DISCUSS. UM, AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD JOB EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. Y'ALL HAVE BEEN THE BEST TASK FORCE I'VE EVER WORKED WITH. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO IT IS, UH, 10 57 AND WE ARE ADJOURNING. WOO. * 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.