Appeal 33731
Appeal Summary
Status: Decision Rendered - Granted as proposed.
Appeal ID: 33731
Submission Date: 3/17/25 5:16 PM
Hearing Date: 3/26/25
Case #: B-003
Appeal Type: Building
Project Type: commercial
Building/Business Name: Port of Portland Terminal 6 Administration building
Appeal Involves: Correction of a violation
Proposed use: office
Project Address: 7201 N Marine Dr
Appellant Name: Ralph Turnbaugh
LUR or Permit Application #: Permit 25-013757-CO, 25-013797-CO, 25-013799-CO
Stories: 2 Occupancy: B Construction Type: V
Fire Sprinklers: Yes - Interior
Plans Examiner/Inspector: Lisa Minakami
Plan Submitted Option: pdf [File 1] [File 2]
Payment Option: electronic
Appeal Information Sheet
Appeal item 1
| Code Section | ASCE 7-16, Section 13.4 |
|---|---|
| Requires | Nonstructural components and their supports shall be attached (or anchored) to the structure in accordance with the requirements of this section, and the attachment shall satisfy the requirements for parent material as set forth elsewhere in this standard. |
| Code Modification or Alternate Requested | The proposed alternate is a ballasted guard rail system proposed in lieu of a physically attached system. |
| Proposed Design | The proposed design utilizes a ballasted post base system with galvanized steel rails with a maximum span of 10'. All rail runs terminate with a minimum 5' return rail for stability. The railing is 42" tall with mid-rail to meet the requirements of OSSC Section 1015.6 and 1015.7. Equivalent protection is provided by the ballasted rail system through calculations and manufacturer field testing for personal safety per OSSC 1607.9.1 and OSHA Standard 1926.502 (see attached reports). |
| Reason for alternative | The Admin building is a two story structure with a combination of flat and sloped roofs. The ballasted rail is being installed on the flat roof areas to provide limited access by maintenance staff to service two existing antennae and the roof drains. The ballasted rail system is preferred to avoid creating leaks due to multiple penetrations and disruption to the antennae if re-roofed. Per testing and analysis, the ballasted system provides equivalent protection for loads in excess of Code required minimum 200 lb. rail force without permanent deflection or deformation. |
Appeal Decision
Allow ballasted guardrail connection instead of positively fastened guardrail: 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.