Appeal 28119

Appeal Summary

Status: Decision Rendered

Appeal ID: 28119

Submission Date: 10/20/22 9:39 AM

Hearing Date: 11/2/22

Case #: M-001

Appeal Type: Mechanical

Project Type: commercial

Building/Business Name: Darigold

Appeal Involves: Alteration of an existing structure

Proposed use: Making Darigold Products

Project Address: 2720 SE 6th Ave

Appellant Name: Erin Hedrick

LUR or Permit Application #: Permit 20-185694-FS

Stories: 3 Occupancy: F Construction Type: Commercial

Fire Sprinklers: Yes -

Plans Examiner/Inspector: Geoffrey Pena, John Duffy

Plan Submitted Option: pdf   [File 1]   [File 2]   [File 3]   [File 4]

Payment Option: mail

Appeal Information Sheet

Appeal item 1

Code Section

907.3.1 606.2.1

Requires

The code sections that apply are:
2019 OSSC, Section 907.3.1 which indicates that duct detectors in a building with a fire alarm system are to be monitored by the fire alarm system, however, they should also be listed for the temperature, air velocity and humidity present in the duct or area. In this case, it is suspected the humidity level is pushing or exceeding the upper limits of the acceptable environment. The concern is that over time this detector unit will malfunction and create a nuisance alarm situation for the owner.

2019 OMSC, Section 606.2.1 indicates detectors shall be installed on return air systems with a design capacity greater than 2000 CFM. In this case these units pull air from one room and deliver it to another room. We would like to question as to whether this is a type of make up air unit or whether the method in which air is moved through this unit is considered a return air system.

Code Modification or Alternate Requested
Proposed Design

Due to this unique environment, in lieu of attempting to place duct detectors on the HVAC/Fan Coil Units, we are proposing to locate an emergency HVAC/Fan Coil Shutdown Manual Station in the area where this station is monitored by the new building fire alarm system, and a fire alarm relay would be programmed to shutdown the HVAC/Fan Coil Units upon activation of the station. Additionally, this fire alarm relay could be programmed to activate and shutdown these HVAC/Fan Coil Units on any other fire alarm condition in the building. Darigold Staff would be trained on the location of this station and be instructed to activate the station on seeing any situation where smoke or combustion may be present. Since the Building Fire Alarm System would monitor this station an alarm or supervisory type of alarm signal can be annunciated on the FACP providing visual indication of the activation of the alarm signal, evacuation notification could be initiated throughout the plant, and this signal can be transmitted to the central station monitoring service for appropriate response by First Responders and/or Owner Representatives.

Due to the nature of the business and the environmental concerns we submit this alternative manual method (and possibly automatic method if programmed on any alarm condition) for shut down of the HVAC/Fan Coil Units in this area in lieu of provision of duct detection.

Reason for alternative

Within the building there is a room called the Pasteurizer Room and there are two (2) HVAC/Fan Coil units that are over 2000 CFM which provides/recirculates air for several rooms. All areas are exposed to a very high humidity level that push the limits of an environment in which duct detectors operate properly and prolonged exposure in this type of environment is believed to result in perpetual maintenance and nuisance trouble and potential alarm conditions of the detectors.

Appeal Decision

Relocation of duct detectors from two HVAC fan coil units in Pasteurizer Room to the Fire Alarm Control Panel: Granted provided activation of any detection device turns off the fan coil units and provided manual shut-off of units by staff is also available.

Appellant may contact John Butler (503 865-6427) or e-mail at John.Butler@portlandoregon.gov with questions.

The Administrative Appeal Board finds with the conditions noted, that the information submitted by the appellant demonstrates that the approved modifications or alternate methods are consistent with the intent of the code; do not lessen health, safety, accessibility, life, fire safety or structural requirements; and that special conditions unique to this project make strict application of those code sections impractical.

Pursuant to City Code Chapter 24.10, you may appeal this decision to the Building Code Board of Appeal within 90 calendar days of the date this decision is published. For information on the appeals process, go to www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/appealsinfo, call (503) 823-7300 or come in to the Development Services Center.