Appeal 31932

IEBC 507.1 + OSSC 1023.1 + 2019 OSSC 310 + 2019 OSSC 907.2.9 - 907.2.10

APPEAL ID 26120, ITEM 1 - Re-Approval of former appeal #5 for 1021-25 NE 33rd Avenue was originally heard on 9/8/2021 and a Decision Rendered as follows:

"Reconsideration of granted appeal #5 on 03-24-1993 for upgraded exit enclosure openings with protections required by Board to not be reduced: Granted as proposed. Note: items separate from appeal item of 03-24-1993 will require separate building code appeals."

The intent of this current appeal / reconsideration is to clarify specific requirements of the original conditions of Appeal #5-1993 as they relate to current code and design of the fire alarm system for the proposed building design that was approved by Appeal ID 26120.

As this is a resubmittal / reconsideration of Appeal ID 26120 Item 1, the original text from that appeal has been included in each section, followed by the new, "RECONSIDERATION TEXT" that is relevant to this current appeal discussion.

ORIGINAL APPEAL ID 26120, ITEM 1 TEXT:

Plan check Comment: Unenclosed exit stairs were approved by appeal in 1993. This will need to be re-appealed under the current code for this project due to the changes that have occurred since the last approved permit records were recorded (including, but not limited to, partial changes of occupancies throughout the building and modifications to the means of egress system). Once the appeal has been granted, include information in permit drawings stating the date the appeal was granted, the appeal number, the decision, and the language of the decision.

General Information for all Appeals
Please note that the current building is divided into two portions with a 3HR separation wall:
a. 1910/1953 Historic Building (listed on the National Register of Historic Places) and the
b. 1993 Addition.

In 1993, the 1910/1953 Historic Building was renovated, and the 1993 Addition was originally constructed under separate permits.

As part of the Historic Building renovation, life/safety upgrades were included by Appeal #5-1993. These appeals only address the Historic Building, not the Addition.

The following were the conditions of Appeal #5-1993 (also please see attached documents).

1. Openings at exit enclosures: GRANTED as proposed PROVIDED:

a. Relites and doors at stair enclosures are to be gasketed to remain smoke tight.
b. The corridors and “public”/general use areas are to have a complete smoke detection system installed to the requirements of the Fire Marshal’s Office.
c. The building alarm system shall be installed, upgraded, or modified as required by the Fire Marshal’s office to meet the requirements for the R-1 occupancy.
d. The building sprinkler system shall be checked, tested, and modified or upgraded as required by the Fire Marshal’s Office.
e. All door openings onto corridor are to be equipped with self-closing devices and are to be smoke gasketed.
f. Smoke detectors shall be installed at each unit. Detectors shall comply with the requirements of Section 1210 (a) items 1, 3, & 5. (1993 SSC)
g. Deactivation of the hold open devices at stair enclosures shall be upon activation of the building alarm system or upon water flow from the sprinkler system.

1. The Drawings show:

Sheets A1-A4
a. One hour separations between stairs and corridors.
b. One hour separations between corridors and dwelling/sleeping units.
c. Install door closers as required on corridor doors.
d. Transom glass replaced with wire glass and metal stops and/or two layers of ½” Type “X” gypsum board on corridor doors. (Sheet A5)

ORIGINAL APPEAL ID 26120 ITEM 1 TEXT:

Maintain the provisions of Appeal #5-1993 for this new permit that includes Partial Changes in Use/Occupancy/Additional Area AND minor changes to the egress system.

RECONSIDERATION TEXT - MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED:

Appeal #5-1993, Condition C, states that the building alarm system shall be installed to meet the requirements for the R-1 occupancy. The 1993, R-1 use of the building is the equivalent of an R-2 use per the 2019 OSSC. Request to modify Condition C to R-2 occupancy instead of R-1.

Appeal #5-1993, Condition F, states that smoke detectors shall be installed at each unit. 2019 OSSC Section 907.2.10 calls for smoke alarms to be installed. Request to modify Condition F to “smoke alarms” instead of “smoke detectors,” or to read “smoke detectors or smoke alarms” to align with current code.

ORIGINAL APPEAL ID 26120 ITEM 1 TEXT:

Part 1
The proposed project can maintain the approved provisions of Appeal #5-1993. See text above.

Part 2
The appeal is requesting that Changes in Use/Occupancy/Additional Area be allowed while maintaining the provisions of Appeal #5-1993. Partial Changes in Use/Occupancy and Additional Area in the proposed project do not change the egress requirements for the building. In general, existing A occupancies are being retained, as-is, OR they are undergoing a Change of Occupancy where the egress requirements meet current OSSC requirements. The existing, permitted sleeping units are being modified to dwelling units (apartments) which reduces the occupant load in the Historic Building by approximately 500 occupants.

Please review G0.002 where there is a list of spaces that are proposed as a Change of Use, Change of Occupancy or Floor Area being Added to the Building. Please see sheets G2.001-G2.007 for the shaded regions that correspond with the list of changes and additional area.

Part 3
Allow one egress door to be removed from the basement egress plan while maintaining the provisions of Appeal #5-1993. Please review sheets G2.001, A1.001 and Permit #93-101834 and please review G2.001 and A1.001 at gridline 0.C (0.7 through 0.10).

1. The existing permitted condition allows for egress from the south face of the building.
2. The proposed condition removes this exit door from the south face of the building, so the area can be used for dwelling units.

a. The proposed condition has two means of egress Stair #1 and Exit #9.
b. Stair #1: The common path of egress (+/-58 feet) satisfies Table 1006.2.1 for both a one and two-exits.
c. Stair #1: The travel distance for two dwelling units to the enclosed stair is +/- 10 feet.
d. Stair #1: If we consider Stair #1 as an exit access stair, the travel distance of +/- 198 feet meets Table 1017.2.
e. Exit #9: This means of egress was used on the Historic Building Renovation drawings.
f. Exit #9: The travel distance for two dwelling units to the Exit #9 is +/- 130 feet.
g. Exit #9: This travel distance crosses the 3HR separation wall/rated door, similar to a horizontal exit that would be allowed for a second means of egress.
h. The dead-end corridor of +/- 10 feet is allowed by current code 1020.4, Exception 2.

Part 4
Remove the fire escape as “Alternate Egress” from the building while maintaining the provisions of Appeal #5-1993. Please review sheets G2.005 and G2.007 and Permit #93-101834.

1. The existing permitted condition has a fire escape used as an “Alternate Egress” at the western leg of the U-shaped building for the 1st through 3rd floors.
2. The proposed condition strives to eliminate the fire escape as an alternate means of egress. (The fire escape structure may remain in-place, if required by SHPO.)

a. The area served by the fire escapes is approximately 2000 SF.
b. With the upgrades to apartment units, the occupancy in this area is reduced.
c. The proposed apartments in this area of the building are allowed to access one exit with less than 4 dwelling units and less than 125 feet travel distance per Table 1006.3.3(1).
d. The travel distances are noted below:

• Second Floor: 2 dwelling units; T.D. to #S1 is +/- 78 feet;
• Third Floor: 1 dwelling unit: T.D. to #S1 is +/- 90 feet

RECONSIDERATION TEXT – PROPOSED DESIGN

Note: This reconsideration only intends to modify Part 1 of the original proposed design text for Appeal ID 26120 as it pertains to clarifying the provisions of Appeal #5-1993. Parts 2, 3 & 4 of the original appeal text written above all still apply to the project and do not change.

Appeal #5-1993, Condition C:

To adhere to Appeal #5-1993, Condition C, the proposed design is for the building alarm system to be installed, upgraded, or modified as required by the Fire Marshal’s office to meet the requirements for an R-2 occupancy per the 2019 OSSC. This will bring this provision in line with current code for both the 1993 use of the building and its current use as apartments.

Appeal #5-1993, Condition F:

The proposed design is for smoke alarms to be installed at each unit. The smoke alarms shall be designed and installed in accordance with the requirements of 2019 OSSC, Sections 907.2.9 & 907.2.10 for R-2 occupancies, and will be hard-wired, 110volt.

ORIGINAL APPEAL ID 26120 ITEM 1 TEXT:

Request that the Appeal #5-1993 provisions and related drawings be maintained/re-instated for this permit for the following reasons:
a. The proposed upgrades change none of the conditions of approval as cited in the Appeal #5-1993.
b. Occupancy: The proposed partial Changes in Use/Occupancy/Additional Area do not change the egress requirements for the building. The overall occupant load is considerably decreased from the prior approved condition.
c. Egress Path: The proposed work modifies the egress of the building in only minor ways—removing an egress door in the basement and removing an “alternate egress route”— a fire escape.
d. The existing building contains three egress stairs, all of which could be considered “enclosed” by Appeal #5-1993 provisions.
e. Enclosures: The stair enclosures and corridors were considered 1HR fire-resistive/smoke-tight separations. The stair enclosures have rated doors with wired glazing. The corridor retains self-closing, solid-core doors that are smoke sealed. The transoms are modified with wire glazing and metal angles.
f. The upgrades and modification to the building are required for the new Owner to provide affordable housing (apartments) for their mission and the number of apartments are required by the funding source (PHB).

RECONSIDERATION TEXT

Appeal #5-1993, Condition C, Reason for Alternate:

Permit #93-101834 and Appeal #5-1993 indicate a change of use from I-2 to R-1. Per the 1991 UBC, R-1 Occupancy was for hotels, apartment houses, and congregate residences with more than 10 people. The R-2 Occupancy was not used in the 1991 UBC.

Additionally, The City of Portland Design Review associated with the 1993 permit and appeal, LUR 93-00014, indicates the proposed use of the building will include 75 full-time residents. This establishes the 1993, R-1 Occupancy as a non-transient use.

Per the 2019 OSSC, R-1 is now used for transient occupancies like hotels. Apartment houses and non-transient, congregate living facilities (with more than 16 occupants) are now considered R-2 occupancies. Therefore, although the Appeal #5-1993 language says R-1, that was R-1 per the 1991 UBC for non-transient, congregate residences, which is the equivalent of an R-2 occupancy in the 2019 OSSC, Section 310.

This occupancy clarification was also reviewed during building permit review for the current project, which converts the building into apartments. It was determined the current project was not considered a change of occupancy since the 1993, non-transient, congregate living and current apartments are both R-2 uses per the 2019 OSSC.

Modifying Appeal #5-1993, Condition C to meet the requirements for a R-2 occupancy per the 2019 OSSC will bring this provision in line with current code requirements for both the 1993 use of the building and its current use as apartments. Designing the building alarm system to current R-1 code standards would be incongruous with both the previous and current use of the building.

Appeal #5-1993, Condition F, Reason for Alternate:

2019 OSSC Section 907.2.9 says that “Fire alarm systems and smoke alarms shall be installed in Group R-2 occupancies as required in Sections 907.2.9.1 through 907.2.9.3.” And Section 907.2.9.2 states, “Single and multiple-station smoke alarms shall be installed in accordance with Section 907.2.10.”

The proposed design uses smoke alarms in the dwelling units per the stipulations of 907.2.9 and 907.2.10. Although Section 907.2.10.7 allows for smoke detectors as an “acceptable alternative” to smoke alarms, the primary code approach is for smoke alarms. Modifying Appeal #5-1993, Condition F to allow for smoke alarms to be installed at each unit, instead of smoke detectors, does not lessen life safety since it follows the requirements of the OSSC, and it will bring the building in line with what is typically required for safety in modern apartment construction.