Appeal 33676

Appeal Summary

Status: Decision Rendered

Appeal ID: 33676

Submission Date: 1/30/25 7:52 PM

Hearing Date: 2/5/25

Case #: B-004

Appeal Type: Building

Project Type: commercial

Building/Business Name: 3825 se 32nd

Appeal Involves: Alteration of an existing structure,occ Change from r3 to r2 - 4 plex

Proposed use: 4 plex apartments

Project Address: 3825 se 32nd ave

Appellant Name: dave Spitzer

LUR or Permit Application #: Permit 24-102997-CO

Stories: 3 Occupancy: R2 Construction Type: VB

Fire Sprinklers: Yes - NFPA 13R per this permit

Plans Examiner/Inspector: Reday Radtke Buts

Plan Submitted Option: pdf   [File 1]

Payment Option: electronic

Appeal Information Sheet

Appeal item 1

Code Section

table 705.5

Requires

1 hr rated walls when within 5'-10' of the property line

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

To allow our new fire rated gyp. bd. to be installed just on the inside face of the wall.

Proposed Design

We have a SFR that is being converted to a 4 plex - structure has been permitted and built. current permit is for modifying interior layout for 4 units. both our South and North walls are approximately 7' from their respective property lines. All the exterior siding is in great shape. Rather than fire rate the wall from both sides, we would like to keep the exterior siding and install a new layer of 5/8" type 'x' gyp. bd. to the inside face of existing (or new) 1/2" gyp. bd. The new 5/8" type 'x' would be in all the units and also extend to the underside of the roof sheathing at the 3rd floor attic areas.

Reason for alternative

The existing siding is in great shape. The interior is being gutted - so much easier to fire rate from the interior.

Appeal item 2

Code Section

705.11

Requires

parapets on exterior walls that are required to be fire rated.

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

We do not want to build a parapet or rate the roof construction as we barely don't qualify for several cumulative exemptions

Proposed Design

Per that first appeal - we will construct modified fire rated walls at both exterior walls that are about 7' from the property line. Both of these walls have less than 10% openings per floor. Per 705.11 - ex. 1 - parapets are not required to be constructured when walls are not required to be fire rated per table 705.5. While we are sprinklering to NFPA 13R per this permit - that does not get us any benefit when it comes to exterior wall rating or openings. In addition 705.11 ex 2. - parapets are not required when each floor has less than 1,000 sf. We have three floors - one under 1,000 sf (915) and two over 1,000 (1,296). Both of the 1,296 floors are demised with a 1 hr fire partition to separate units.

Reason for alternative

With 7' setbacks, adding a sprinkler system, just being over 1,000 sf per floor, etc - all these are cumulative and the need for added protection from a parapet is minimized.

Appeal item 3

Code Section

1011.7

Requires

a 1 hr rated enclosure is required under stairs.

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

to install (2) layers 5/8" type 'x' to the underside of the stair serving apartment #4

Proposed Design

This stair just serves apartment #4 but it is in a common area so code requires more than 1/2" gyp. bd. The shaft walls are confusing in the field I've been told. I'd like to keep it simple and install (2) layers 5/8" type 'x' to the underside of this stair.

Reason for alternative

Both supporting walls are already fire rated as required by code. Installing (2) layers 5/8" type 'x' is simple and will provide equivalent protection.

Appeal item 4

Code Section

1029.3

Requires

requires one hour rated walls and openings w/ 45 minute ratings along an egress court.

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

To allow our North wall to remain as proposed.

Proposed Design

As proposed, and per the above appeal, we are intending to upgrade the entire North wall (higher than 10' even) to 1 hr equivalent. But the openings along that wall are not rated - there are two - a bedroom window and entry into the sprinkler room.

Reason for alternative

An additional sprinkler head could be placed above the door and window at grade level, along the north side adjacent to the egress court.

Appeal item 5

Code Section

1011

Requires

commercial stair requirements

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

To allow the existing residential stair to remain as is.

Proposed Design

There is what appears to be a very sound, secure, code compliant residential stair serving apartment #4. But - it is in a common area - so it is a commercial stair by code - but used just by one apartment.

The rise is 7.5", treads are 10.5", min. ceiling height is 7'-4".

Reason for alternative

It's existing, appears code compliant to the residential code and will be serving just one unit.

Appeal item 6

Code Section

1208.2

Requires

habitable spaces require 7'-6" ceiling height

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

The third floor has 7'-4" ceiling height.

Proposed Design

It was built with 7'-4" ceiling height. Low ceilings but lots of windows front and back.

Reason for alternative

No way to change this.

Appeal Decision

"Item 1: Alternate one hour fire rated exterior wall assembly: Granted as proposed.
Item 2: Omission of parapet requirements on North and South walls: Granted as proposed.
Item 3: Two layers of 5/8"" Type X at underside of stair in lieu of tested listed horizontal assembly: Granted as proposed.
Item 4: Appeal not required. Egress court does not serve more than 10 occupants. OSSC 1029.3 Exception 1.
Item 5: Appeal not required. OSSC 3405.6.3
Item 6: Reduction of allowed ceiling height to 7'-4"": Granted as proposed."

"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.