Appeal 33639
Appeal Summary
Status: DECISION RENDERED
Appeal ID: 33639
Submission Date: 1/7/25 10:15 AM
Hearing Date: 1/15/25
Case #: B-003
Appeal Type: Building
Project Type: commercial
Building/Business Name: National Alliance on Mental Illness - Oregon
Appeal Involves: Alteration of an existing structure
Proposed use: Business
Project Address: 147 SE 102nd Ave
Appellant Name: Lara Serecin
LUR or Permit Application #: Other IVR# 5085672
Stories: 1 Occupancy: B - Business Construction Type: VB
Fire Sprinklers: No
Plans Examiner/Inspector: Maureen McCafferty
Plan Submitted Option: pdf [File 1] [File 2]
Payment Option: electronic
Appeal Information Sheet
Appeal item 1
| Code Section | 1006.2.1 |
|---|---|
| Requires | Per 2022 OSSC 1006.2.1 Egress Based on Occupant Load and Common Path of Egress Travel Distance: "Two exits or exit access doorways from any space shall be provided where the design occupant load or the common path of egress travel distance exceeds the values listed in Table 1006.2.1." |
| Code Modification or Alternate Requested | Appeal to permit one exit from Education Center 121. |
| Proposed Design |
Refer to attached .pdf document "250107 - APPEAL REQUEST - FLOOR PLANS.pdf": A2.1 Building Code Appeal plan, drawing 2 for proposed conditions. |
| Reason for alternative |
"The space will be used for program trainings, where we train teachers and support group facilitators to lead our free programs back in their home communities. Those trainings are capped at 16, although on some occasions we’ll have as many as 20 trainees if the state trainers are OK with exceeding the cap. We can’t do more than that in a training due to rules set by our national organization and because beyond 16-20, it’s too much for our trainers to handle in a weekend training. |
Appeal Decision
Use of 1:20 occupant load factor for training room: Granted for this tenant and use only provided the occupancy is revised to B instead of A-3.
"The Administrative Appeal Board finds 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 the 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.
"The Administrative Appeal Board finds 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 the 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.