Denise and Bobby Duncan are opening their residence located at 102 S. National Ave., to the public this evening at 6 p.m. to answer questions and concerns about their recent closure of the Beaux Art Center.
“We are hoping to have documents ready….there has been a lot of misinformation,” Denise Duncan said.
The event is “especially for people in the historic district,” Duncan said. “And people that rent historic buildings.”
Both she and husband, Bobby will be there, she said.
The Duncan’s have had several discussions about the building with city officials that have been unsatisfactory, she said.
Denise Duncan contends that because their residence is a historic building, a code footprint is not needed. Additionally, they contend that the code footprint provided to the city is incorrect, she said.
“The code footprint regulation, K.A.R. 22-1-7, defines minimum features… for an objective evaluation by uniform application of state law using minimum resources. It also makes the code footprint available to assist local fire and building officials (to) view new construction and changes in use,” according to http://firemarshal.ks.gov/division/prevention/plans-review-code-footprint.
“The State Fire Marshall verified that it (their building) is on the state historic register,” she said. “Since it is on the historic register they are giving the city power to make waivers, exceptions, and variances on such matters.”
The City of Fort Scott hired Zingre and Associates P.A. to make the code footprint.
“Zingre’s code footprint is full of errors,” Duncan said.
Among Zingre’s biggest concerns is lack of proper egress width for stairways and doors based on the calculated occupant load of the building and how this load would spread out among the building’s two exits, according to his letter to the city, which was provided by Duncan.
Egress is an exit, according to the dictionary.
The Duncan’s will explain these contentions and others this evening at the meeting they are hosting.
One thought on “Duncans Host Public Meeting To Answer Questions”
I don’t understand, what with the body of evidence being provided showing discrepancies between the code footprint and the physical corrections shown and stated above, that the city has not stepped in to review and correct, that no apology has been extended, at least as a manner of courtesy and manners, so the entire matter could have been reasonably discussed instead of leading to the closure of a fantastic business in this town.