Appeal 35010

Table 506.2 & Sect 506.2.1

The Allowable Area Table for a single-story, E occupancy building cannot exceed 38,000 sf if sprinkled. Section 506.2.1 provides the equation and methods in which the allowable area can be increased based on the building's frontage and distances to public right-of-way or other structures on the site. This maximum area determines if a new structure on the site can be considered a part of the existing building's square footage or if it would need to be considered a separate building with imaginary property lines and required setbacks from each side of this to each structure.

The intent of this appeal is to adjust the formerly intended setback of the existing school from the 1965 code to which it was designed, requiring the school to have 60' of open space from other structures, which is unfeasible for our proposed PEMB; instead, we request to comply with current code setback standards.

The proposed building is a non-combustible PEMB covered play structure. It is open on all sides consisting of steel columns and a standing seam metal roof. The school is over 30' away on all sides from the PEMB's proposed location. The distance of the PEMB complies with Table 705.5 with an imaginary property line between the two buildings. Had the school been considered existing non-conforming, this distance is deemed acceptable and safe in the eyes of the code today.

The existing school exceeds the maximum allowable area defined by OSSC Table 506.2. There are some firewalls throughout, separating the more recent additions. This helps provide smaller fire areas; but some of the specifics are unknown. Even if frontage from Section 506.2.1 were considered, the building would not comply with allowable areas. In most cases, existing structure's area would not be considered if there was no work proposed within the building. If it were not in compliance to current code, the existing building would be considered 'existing non-conforming'. The focus of a FLS review would then be on the new structure complying with current code, which this PEMB does. However, since the existing school is beyond code maximums, we understand that there are additional concerns with the distance from other structures. We have been informed by City staff, who are familiar with the school's history, that it was built under the intent of a section of building code from 1965. The school was intended to be 60' away from any new structure to contend with its size. The proposed PEMB could not comply with this intent, nor is a 60' setback feasible for the way they'd like to utilize this space. Lastly, to note – the District built another PEMB under permit number 24-046394-000-00 which was approved under the same, current building code. This PEMB is situated in a similar way to the existing building as our project. The setbacks of this PEMB are also less than the distances proposed here.

Due to its non-combustibility, low fire load and the open nature of the play structure, we feel this alternative makes the project code equivalent. Therefore, for all reasons stated, we do not feel the proposed project will impede nor jeopardize the fire life safety of the occupants.