First it was a balcony, now it’s an elevator. Construction on a two-story outdoor patio on top of Quinton’s Bar & Deli downtown has slowed again because the city of Columbia said it does not meet building regulations.

Two months after stopping work on the project because of a balcony that protrudes 4 feet over the sidewalk along South Ninth Street, the city now has denied a final building permit for the two-story patio addition until it includes a handicapped-accessible route upstairs.

Don Shrubshell photo

The owners of Quinton’s Bar & Deli face a new obstacle in their plan to add a two-story addition. The city now says the addition needs to be wheelchair-accessible.

The 2006 International Building Code the city follows requires multilevel buildings to have at least one accessible route to connect each accessible level if the aggregate area of the non-accessible levels totals more than 3,000 square feet. Quinton’s two-level patio totals 5,069 square feet.

Michael McClung, who co-owns the bar at 124 Ninth St. and is serving as the project’s general contractor, appealed the city’s decision to the Building Construction Codes Commission and asked for a variance. The commission voted 4-3 on Nov. 26 to deny the variance.

When McClung’s building permit was denied, he proposed a plan to provide accessibility using two platform lifts.

Because platform lifts can’t travel the full 22-foot distance between the ground floor and the first patio, McClung proposed installing two lifts that could be used together to get people upstairs.

The city denied that option. John Sudduth, city building regulations supervisor, said it didn’t meet the requirements because people would have to be transferred from one lift to the other to get to the patio, and it was not safe to get people down in case of emergency. Sudduth said the regulations most likely will require McClung to install some type of an elevator.

In the request for a variance from the commission, project architect Eric Westhue said that because the primary function of the building - eating and drinking - was available on all floors, accessibility to the patio was not necessary.

Sudduth said, however, that the patios have a different use from the inside areas. "Our ruling is you have to look at the primary function," Sudduth said. "Patios allow dining, drinking and smoking. Our concern is that if people are disabled who smoke, they have to have a way to get up there."

McClung said he could easily put tables outside the front door on the sidewalk and allow people with disabilities to smoke there. Sudduth said that’s not the same.

Although it was not included in the variance application, Westhue and McClung at the commission meeting cited another section in the building code that lists exceptions for cases where alterations affect an area containing a primary function. The code says: "The costs of providing the accessible route are not required to exceed 20 percent of the costs of the alterations affecting the area of primary function."

McClung said he believes this exemption applies because he can’t buy an elevator for less than $80,000, excluding the cost of constructing an elevator pit and shaft. McClung estimated the cost of his project at $347,000. His building permit application estimated the total construction cost at $400,000.

McClung said he would be willing to install the pit and the shaft so he could work toward accessibility in the future, but right now an elevator is not feasible.

"Unfortunately, we can’t afford an elevator. I wish we could," McClung said.

Sudduth said the city doesn’t believe the 20 percent rule applies. "Once you start adding stories, you need to provide access," Sudduth said.

Sudduth said the city is waiting for McClung to submit a plan addressing how he will provide accessibility. McClung said he still doesn’t know whether he is required to spend whatever it costs to install an elevator.

"We want the city to make a decision," McClung said. "I have a project that’s pretty much stalled until they do. There are rules, and we want to abide by them, but we’re asking for an interpretation of the code so we know what we have to do."

•	Comment on this story.

Advertisement