Appeal 33606

705.5 Fire-Resistance Ratings

Exterior walls shall be fire-resistance rated in accordance with Table 601, based on the type of construction, and Table 705.5, based on the fire separation distance. The required fire-resistance rating of exterior walls with a fire separation distance of greater than 10 feet shall be rated for exposure to fire from the inside. The required fire-resistance rating of exterior walls with a fire separation distance of less than or equal to 10 feet shall be rated for exposure to fire from both sides.

Allow the exterior wall assembly and associated roof projections on the South and West façades, which have a fire separation distance of less than 5 feet, to remain. The wall assembly is (from outside to inside) old-growth wood shiplap siding (3.5” reveal) over 1x6 wood shiplap over 2x4 old-growth framing (1.75” x 3/5”). The inside walls are lath and plaster (3/8” thick).

The exterior of the South façade, including associated roof projections, will be coated with intumescent paint followed by an intumescent topcoat for exterior use to provide passive fire protection. (See attached technical specs and testing data.) This process cannot be completed during the winter months; we kindly request the city grant us the ability to move forward on all other efforts with final sign-off upon completion of this process, which would be after April 1, 2025.

The west façade abuts a small empty lot, unlikely to be developed due to its size, and unlikely for development to be allowed so close to our structure. Due to cost burdens, we prefer to hold off on coating this side of the building. If coating is required, we propose an interior intumescent coating on the west interior walls abutting the staircase to provide passive fire protection. (Attached are specs and testing data for the exterior coating which also holds for interior usage. Interior usage does not require the topcoat.)

** Reconsideration Text:
The exterior of the South façade, including associated roof projections, will be coated with intumescent paint followed by an intumescent topcoat for exterior use to provide passive fire protection. (See attached technical specs and testing data.) This process cannot be completed during the winter months; we kindly request the city grant us the ability to move forward on all other efforts with final sign-off upon completion of this process, which would be after April 1, 2025.

To provide passive fire protection to the west façade we propose an interior intumescent coating on the west interior walls abutting the staircase to provide passive fire protection. The application of the paint will meet the manufacturer's directions for both the interior & exterior applications. Additional information of am ICC-ES Listing Report has been submitted to provide clarity to the Board regarding the intumescent coating. **

Our building is located on the corner of SE Harrison and SE 12th. The building adjacent to the South property line was built in its current position in 1893 and our building was constructed in 1909. (Both structures are on their original foundations.) This was during the era of the development of Ladd’s Addition, a wagon-wheel planned neighborhood that’s now on the National Register of Historic Places, the center spoke of that wheel pointing due west down Harrison -- and the easternmost border of the historic neighborhood a block away on SE 12th.

Our corner property is notably located and uniquely Victorian in its small footprint and its close proximity to the neighbor to the south.
The building adjacent to the South property line is a distance of 28”, which requires a 1-hour wall assembly per Table 705.5. The West property line is assumed to be less than 5’ from the exterior wall. Assuming the existing South and West walls are not built to a 1-hour tested wall assembly, the passive fire protection of the intumescent paint will provide thermal protection in the chance of a fire. The existing restaurant use and the impact to both sets of stairs preclude any additional gypsum board material being added to the interior walls at the South and West façades.

1003.2 Ceiling Height

The means of egress shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet 6 inches above the finished floor.
Exceptions:

Allowable projections in accordance with Section 1003.3.

Allow an exception to code requirements due to the nature of the pre-existing conditions. Maintain existing basement ceiling height and install visual markings along the means of egress circulation path.

The ceiling above the circulation path between the two required exits varies between a gypsum board finished ceiling and exposed framing of the floor above. We propose to add ½” gypsum board to the bottom of the floor joists above the 36” wide means of egress circulation path. Additional lighting will be added along the means of egress circulation path, ensuring a minimum illumination of 1 footcandle. A painted striped pattern illustrating the path between exits will assist in wayfinding and ensure that storage elements will not be placed within that area.

We are proposing no alteration to the existing ceiling height due to the financial burden of digging the basement floor lower in an attempt to meet the required ceiling height. The occupancy at the basement level is calculated as 3 (Group F-1), although typically there is only 1 person in the basement at any one time. Since the basement is not open to the public, the only people in this space are staff/tenants who are aware of the basement’s characteristics.
The existing finished ceiling in the basement level is approximately a height of 6’-10” (82”). Modifying the ceiling height to conform to the required 7’-0” (84”) at the storage area and 7’-6” (90”) along the path of travel is disproportionate to the costs of the alterations.

Adding a finished gypsum ceiling along the egress circulation path, the additional lighting and painted markings will provide a clear path of travel while the remainder of the space can be maintained for storage & roaster production. There are two locations along the egress circulation path where beams lower the ceiling to a level below 80”. We propose to paint these beam locations in a way that illustrates a hazardous “low head clearance” at non-compliant overhead areas.

** Reconsideration Text:

The Basement floor plan illustrating the location of the egress path & low head clearance markings @ beams has been updated to show the clear height under the projecting beams. **

1010.1.1 Size of Doors

The required capacity of each door opening shall be sufficient for the load thereof and shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 32 inches. The clear opening width of doorways with swinging doors shall be measured between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90 degrees. The minimum clear opening height of doors shall be not less than 80 inches.

Allow a new proposed door between the back hallway & basement stairs to have a partially reduced head height (angled top) based on the encroachment of the existing stair stringers.

** Reconsideration Text:
Allow the existing opening between the back hallway & basement stairs, which is a component in the exit access from the basement, to remain with a partially reduced head height (angled top) based on the encroachment of the existing stair stringers. **

A door needs to be added to comply with OSSC Section 712.1.9 Two-story Openings. The proposed door is customized to have an angled top to allow installation around the existing stringer.

** Reconsideration Text:
The design has been altered to add a 1-hr rated wall & ceiling in the hallway with a door to the basement. This allows the new proposed door to remain a standard rectangle with a compliant landing, but the opening in the wall to the basement stairs remains with an angled opening because of the existing stringer. We propose to install visual markings at the existing opening to warn users of the reduced head height @ the upper corner.
Additional information has been uploaded to illustrate the dimensions of the opening and the addition of this new door in the hallway. Based on the existing hallway width of 36", the maximum allowable width of the new door is 2'-10". **

The existing stringer doesn’t allow the installation of a door to meet the 80” height requirement of OSSC Section 1010.1.1. Modifying the stair stringer to allow for a code-compliant door is technically infeasible and would render the stairs unusable. Although the existing stairs have a vertical rise greater than 12’-0”, they are being maintained per OSSC Section 3405.3.1 exception 1: The existing space and construction doesn’t allow a reduction in pitch or slope.

** Reconsideration Text:
The existing stringer doesn’t allow the opening between the hallway & the basement stairs to meet the requirements of OSSC Section 1010.1.1.1 regarding the projections into clear openings between 34" & 80" not exceeding 4". Modifying the stair stringer to allow for a code-compliant opening is technically infeasible and would render the stairs unusable. Although the existing stairs have a vertical rise greater than 12’-0”, they are being maintained per OSSC Section 3405.3.1 exception 1: The existing space and construction doesn’t allow a reduction in pitch or slope. **