Appeal 34972

Appeal Summary

Status: Decision Rendered

Appeal ID: 34972

Submission Date: 9/15/25 12:48 PM

Hearing Date: 9/24/25

Case #: B-1

Appeal Type: Building

Project Type: commercial

Building/Business Name: McGuirl Designs & Architecture

Appeal Involves: Alteration of an existing structure

Proposed use: Daycare

Project Address: 8010 N Charleston

Appellant Name: James Casey McGuirl

LUR or Permit Application #: Permit 25-056461-CO

Stories: 2 Occupancy: A-3, B, E, S-1 Construction Type: V-B

Fire Sprinklers: No

Plans Examiner/Inspector: Chanel Horn

Plan Submitted Option: pdf   [File 1]

Payment Option: electronic

Appeal Information Sheet

Appeal item 1

Code Section

1020.3

Requires

Group E occupancy with an occupant load of 100 or more requires a 72-inch corridor width

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

Reduction in corridor width for a small portion of the corridor.

Proposed Design

• Our existing corridors exceed 72 inches, except for a specific section where an existing staircase descends into the basement and an existing brick flue reduces the width.
• As part of the overall design, we are adding two additional exits by providing direct exit access from two of the four designated daycare rooms. The proposed design will result in a total of five exits from this story.
• The area where the corridor width is less than 72" provides circulation to one daycare room.

Reason for alternative

• Due to financial constraints, we propose to leave the existing stairs and flue in place. These stairs are critical for staff use and impact the day-to-day health and safety operations of the daycare.
• During an event requiring egress, occupants have other exit options that do not necessitate circulation through this reduced-width section.
• The daycare room near this reduced area may egress using the one exit in direct sight of the room or the operable windows within the room, without passing through the reduced space prior to utilizing any of the other exits if needed.
• There are no proposed lockers or boundary attractions in this area that would create an edge effect, limiting this section of the corridor to circulation only.
• The majority of occupants are under the age of five, and their smaller size should not pose an issue for the reduced width.

Appeal item 2

Code Section

903.2

Requires

Group A-3 and Group E occupancies require a sprinkler system when the fire area is located on a floor other than a level of exit discharge serving such occupancies.

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

Request to not install a sprinkler system.

Proposed Design

The existing structure has a basement level and a first floor level. As per permit #234466 and actual field conditions, the first floor is located approximately 5'0" above grade plane, and the basement is located approximately 5'6" below the grade plane. The proposed design for the first floor level is to utilize the existing three exits and add two additional exits, all of which use exterior stairs and/or an exterior ramp to access the public right-of-way. The proposed exit design for the basement level will not change from the previously approved permit #456377, with 2 exits on this level that use exterior stairs to access the public right-of-way.

Reason for alternative

• We believe that both the basement and the first floor serve as levels of exit discharge.
• Both levels utilize their own independent exits and exit discharge paths.
• Occupants of each level are not required to access any other level to gain access to the exit discharge.
• The OSSC does not explicitly state that a building is limited to only one level of exit discharge.

Appeal item 3

Code Section

903.2.3

Requires

An automatic sprinkler system is required when a fire area is located on a floor other than a level of exit discharge.

Code Modification or Alternate Requested

Request to not install a sprinkler system.

Proposed Design

A proposed mezzanine that conforms with 505.2 is located within one of the classrooms.

Reason for alternative

Per 505.2, a mezzanine is not considered an additional story and is considered a portion of the story below. According to the IBC code commentary, these types of mezzanines do not contribute significantly to a building's inherent fire hazard, which is why they are considered part of the story below. As it relates to 903.2.3, the mezzanine should contribute to the overall maximum square footage of the fire area and maximum occupant load, but should be considered as part of the first floor as defined under 505.2

Appeal Decision

Item 1. Allow a corridor width less than the required 72": Granted as proposed.
Item 2. Determination of two levels of exit discharge: Granted as proposed.
Item 3. Allow 210 sf mezzanine without the installation of a fire sprinkler system: 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.