Vero Beach appeals panel denies property owner’s appeal of sprinkler requirement for Ocean Drive unit

The Vero Beach Board of Appeals voted 3–1 to deny an appeal by Lauer Enterprises over a building official’s requirement that a second-floor unit at 3418 Ocean Drive be fitted with an automatic sprinkler system before receiving a certificate of occupancy.

The decision affects a condominium unit the owner proposed to convert from office to a single-family residence, a change the building official and staff said triggers existing-building provisions of the Florida Building Code that require sprinklers for Group R occupancies in mixed-use buildings.

Appellant Steve Lauer told the board his property has five fee-simple condominium units and argued the proposed single-family unit should be treated as a residential conversion exempt from sprinklers under his reading of state law. "Single family residences are not required to have automatic sprinkler systems," Lauer said, referencing Florida statutory exemptions and the city visioning plan that supports residential uses above Ocean Drive retail.

Scott McAdam, Building Official for Indian River County and City of Vero Beach, told the board the building and fire codes operate under separate Florida statutes and both may apply. "The building must comply with both the building code and the fire code where applicable," McAdam said, and he walked the board through the Florida Building Code sections addressing change of occupancy and automatic sprinkler thresholds for Group R occupancies in an existing commercial building.

Board members spent most of their discussion determining which code applied. Several members concluded the project is governed by the Florida Building Code existing-building provisions for a mixed commercial/residential structure and classified the altered unit under Group R (R-3). Under that interpretation, McAdam and board members said, the change of occupancy triggers requirements for sprinklers in the separated residential unit even though detached one- and two-family dwellings are exempt under the residential code.

Lauer told the board his contractor provided an initial sprinkler-cost estimate of $122,455, and later in the hearing a cost figure of about $43,000 was mentioned as a revised estimate for a less extensive NFPA 13D system; Lauer said the expense substantially raised the conversion’s cost. McAdam confirmed the contractor had provided bids for both a full NFPA 13 system and the less expensive 13D option and said the separation between units meant sprinklers would be required only for the residential unit rather than the entire building.

After discussion, the chair moved to deny the appeal "based upon competent, substantial evidence presented in this appeal," the motion was seconded, and the board conducted a roll-call vote. The vote recorded three yes votes to deny the appeal and one no vote; the board chair explained a denial upholds the building official’s interpretation and requirement for a sprinkler permit and inspection before a certificate of occupancy can be issued.

The denial means the applicant must obtain the required fire-protection permits and inspections associated with the sprinkler installation before final occupancy approval. Board members and staff noted the owner may seek further interpretation or an official code interpretation from state authorities if he desires, but today’s action was limited to the appeal before the local board.

Votes at a glance: A25-000001 (appeal by Lauer Enterprises, property at 3418 Ocean Drive) — Appeal denied (motion to deny based on competent, substantial evidence). Vote tally: yes 3, no 1.

The board adjourned after completing the appeal and a brief items check; no follow-up schedule for this matter was given on the record.