Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Variance Deadbolts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Variance to require deadbolts at two Autumn Park properties denied
Summary
A request from Midstate Development to waive a housing-code deadbolt requirement at 3042 Muscatine Ave. and 913 Willow St. was denied after the panel concluded the variance criteria were not met; the discussion cited HUD/NSPIRE inspection standards, recent door replacements and contractor cost estimates.
Iowa City officials denied a variance request from Midstate Development for two Autumn Park properties — 3042 Muscatine Avenue and 913 Willow Street — after hearing that altering recently installed, HUD-rated unit doors to add deadbolts could damage the doors and trigger costly replacements.
The appellant, identified in the record as a Midstate representative, told the panel the properties had 64 unit doors replaced within the last three years and that the doors were fire-rated and installed to meet HUD inspection standards (NSPIRE). The representative said contractor quotes to add deadbolts to the units ranged from about $16,000 for lock installation to as high as $64,000 for other work and that rent-controlled units made cost recovery infeasible. “Adding deadbolts would damage the doors under the HUD standards, which would potentially require replacement of all 64 doors,” the Midstate representative said in the discussion excerpts.
City staff member Stan explained the 2018 local code change that places the security focus at unit-level doors rather than building entry doors. Stan told the panel the city receives tenant complaints about break-ins and that the requirement was intended to provide security at the unit door. He also said HUD standards do not prohibit deadbolts at the federal level but that the main concern is preserving the doors’ fire-rating and complying with NSPIRE inspection requirements.
Panel members reviewed the four variance criteria (practical difficulty/unnecessary hardship, arbitrary effect, suitability of an extension as remedy, and harmony with public health/safety intent). Several commissioners said they found the landlord’s cost concerns a practical difficulty but ultimately could not agree that all four criteria were satisfied. One commissioner recommended Midstate consult the door manufacturer about permissible alterations so that alterations would not void fire-rating labels.
A motion to deny the variance was moved and seconded; the motion carried unanimously, and the variance request was denied. Commissioners advising technical follow-up recommended Midstate contact the door manufacturer to determine whether a permitted alteration or interior auxiliary locking method could be used without compromising the rated doors.
The panel moved on to other agenda items after the denial.
