NEWS
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2007
5A
LAWRENCE
Fire code extinguishes apartment barbecues
New law prohibits use of charcoal, propane grills on decks, balconies
BY RUSTIN DODD
rdodd@kansan.com
On a sunny fall afternoon, Matt Miller is grilling cheeseburgers on his apartment balcony at the Chase Court Apartments. Through the grill's rising smoke, Miller can look across the street and see Station No. 5 of Lawrence-Douglas County Fire and Medical at 1911 Stewart Ave.
Miller, Overland Park Junior, has lived at the Chase Court Apartments, 1942 Stewart Ave., since August 2005. He said he liked the short walk to campus, the close proximity to 23rd Street and the quiet surroundings at the apartments. About a few times a month, Miller invites friends to his apartment to play poker and cook burgers on his second-floor balcony.
"I usually cook out once or twice a week," Miller said.
But because of a new city law, Miller's grilling days might be coming to an end. And his next juicy cheeseburger might be served with a $100 fine from the fire department.
At the Sept. 25 Lawrence City Commission meeting, the commission passed Ordinance No. 8055, which adopted the 2006 edition of the International Fire Code. Richard Barr, division chief for Lawrence-Douglas County Fire and Medical, said the new code prohibited the use of charcoal and pramane barbecue grills
on apartment decks or balconies made of wood or other combustible materials. Barr also said the law affected other multi-family dwellings, such as a Greek chapter houses and lodging houses. A lodging
owners and managers had advocated this type of law for years
"For years the property managers and property owners have called and said, 'Does the fire department have a law that does not allow cooking on balconies?' " Barr said. "I would tell them, 'No we don't, but we discourage it.'"
Barr said he suggested to most property managers to ban cooking on balconies in their leases and told them Lawrence-Douglas County Fire and Medical would support such bans.
The Legends Place Apartments,
4101 W 29th Place, already had
a rule that banned barbecue grills on balconies. Susan Rinke, property manager at The Legends Place, said if tenants used barbecue grills, they had to be at least 10 feet away from the building. The Legends Place also offers commu-
ered a lodging house. Mutert said he and his roommates had used their grill about 10 times on their two-story deck since August.
Mutert said he didn't understand why the city differentiated between single-family houses and lodging houses.
"I think it's unfair because I think we're just as responsible as a family would be living here," Mutter said.
"I know that the population of people that live in apartments are going to be concerned with the government restrictions being put on them."
nity grilling areas at designated places in the complex. Rinke said she didn't anticipate the new law affecting her tenants.
house is a home in which more than three people who are not related live. The new law does not affect single-family homes or duplexes.
RICHARD BARR
Lawrence-Douglas County Fire
and Medical division chief
Barr said the solution for lodging houses was simple.
Barr said most additions to the city fire code dealt with safety issues. Although Barr couldn't give specific numbers, he said he remembered numerous issues with grills and apartment fires within the past few years. He also said that Lawrence property
"If you just move the grill into your yard, then you're fine," Barr
"Residents here have always been good about complying with the rules," Rinke said.
The Avalon Apartments.
"I think it's unfair because I think we're just as responsible as a family would be living here."
officials had not notified her, but she would inform her tenants if the department confirmed the new law.
Apartment dwellers are not the only people affected by the new law. Andy Mutert, Prairie Village senior, lives in a house in the 1200 block of Ohio Street. Mutert lives with six roommates, so his house is consid-
ANDY MUTERT
Prairie Village senior
said.
"It'll definitely affect our tenants." Lemferany said.
Apartments,
905 Avalon
road., will be
affected by
the new law.
Owner Mary
Lemerfany
said her tenants
were allowed to use
portable minigrills
that use 1-pound propane canisters.
She said fire
But apartment still have questions. Miller wanted to know how the new law would be enforced. Barr said the penalty for grilling on a balcony was a misdemeanor fine of $100 to $200. But Barr
said Lawrence-Douglas County Fire and Medical was not an enforcement agency.
"We don't cruise the streets looking for violations," Barr said. "But if we observe it, we are technically bound to correct it."
For a student such as Miller, who lives 500 feet from a fire station, this could be a problem.
"I just hope they don't find out I'm still using it," Miller said. "But I'm not getting rid of my grill until somebody forcibly makes me."
Barr envisions that enforcement will be complaint-driven. If property owners call him with complaints and the fire department witnesses a person grilling, it will issue that person a citation.
"I know that the population of people that live in apartments are going to be concerned with the government restrictions being put on them," Barr said. "But we do it because we have fires."
The 2006 edition of the International Fire Code, which the city adopted, is edited every three years. The International Code Council will issue the next edition of the International Fire Code in 2009.
Edited by Elizabeth Cattell
》 COURTS
Supreme Court could let Exxon avoid punitive damages for 1989 oil spill
BY MARK SHERMAN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
WASHINGTON — Eighteen years after the worst oil spill in U.S. history, its victims suddenly face the prospect of having a $2.5 billion judgment wrested away from them by the Supreme Court.
A federal appeals court had already cut in half the $5 billion puristic damages award that a jury decided Exxon Mobil Corp. should pay for the huge Exxon Valdez oil spill that fouled more than 1,200 miles of Alaska coastline in 1989.
Working in 1989 to clean up the oil spilled by the tanker Exxon Valdez, fishing boats patrol the waters off Erlington Island on Prince William Sound, Alaska. The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide whether Exxon Oil Corp. should pay $2.5 billion in punitive damages in connection with the huge Exxon Oil spill that fouled more than 1,200 miles of Alaskan coastline.
The justices said Monday they would consider whether Exxon Mobil, which already has paid $3.4 billion in cleanup costs and other penalties, should face any punitive damages at all.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Eleven million gallons of oil poured into Prince William Sound when Exxonx supertantricker hit a reef, an environmental disaster that killed hundreds of thousands of seabirds and marine animals.
Few companies could afford the award as easily as Exxon Mobil, the plaintiffs' lawyers said in urging the court to turn down the case. The money is "barely more than three weeks of Exxon's net profits," they said.
Irving, Texas-based Exxon Mobil is the world's largest publicly traded oil company and last year posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company — $39.5 billion. That result topped the previous record, also by Exxon Mobil, of $36.13 billion set in 2005.
Roughly 20 percent of the original plaintiffs have died since the lawsuit began. The plaintiffs still living include about 33,000 commercial fishermen, cannery workers, landowners, Native Alaskans, local governments and businesses. "After more than 18 years, it is time for this protracted litigation to end," they said, quoting the appeals court judges who ratified the $2.5 billion figure.
Still, even after being halved, the
award would be the largest punitive damages judgment ever. Exxon said it should not have to pay a penny of it.
Mike Webber of Cordova, Alaska, a Native Alaskan fisherman, said any money would be insufficient. "I ... would have been able to make twice what I make now if the fisheries had stayed healthy," Webber said Monday after learning of the court's action.
The justices on this business-friendly court agreed that the issues laid out by the company were worthy of review. Exxon contended it should pay no punitive damages under the Clean Water Act and centuries-old laws governing shipping, saying the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals mistakenly upheld the $2.5 billion judgment. The Supreme Court reverses lower court
decisions about 75 percent of the time.
decisions about 75 percent of the time. John Paul Jones, a University of Richmond law professor and expert in maritime law, said the court was right to jump into the case because lower courts long have been divided on some of the issues peculiar to the laws concerning accidents on the water.
Justice Samuel Alito, who owns between $100,000 and $250,000 in Exxon stock, did not take part in the decision to accept the appeal.