|
Neuberger Hall 724 SW Harrison Street Building Code Appeals City of Portland This appeal record is copied from original appeal documents supplied to PSU by the City of Portland, Bureau of Buildings. PSU has attempted to copy these documents carefully, but notes that users of this information should verify the details with actual appeal records. The university has provided the records electronically to aid code officials, facilities planners, and consultants who work on the PSU campus, and does not verify accuracy or certify that all appeals are included. Contents: 1. Appeal of 5-14-59: Exit from basement classrooms and dead-end corridor at first floor business offices 2. Appeal of 7-16-59: Corridor partitions on third floor and dead-end corridor emergency exit on first floor 3. Appeal of 8-27-59: Outward swinging classroom doors 4. Appeal of 5-12-60: Doors in stair enclosures and basement sprinklering 5. Appeal of 6-9-60: Folding partitions and corridor walls on first floor 6. Appeal of 9-15-66: Width of 2nd floor balcony stairs, winding steel stairs, one-hour openings in corridors, and solid core doors 7. Appeal of 7-18-68: No intermediate handrail at entrance stairway 8. Appeal of 4-5-95: Lack of two exits from Audiology classroom in basement 9. Appeal of 7-16-97: Single exit door from new media computer lab in Room 251 10. Appeal of 10-1-97: Pressurization of elevators instead of elevator lobby 11. Appeal of 11-19-97: Reconsideration of 10-1-97 appeal regarding elevator pressurization Portland State College - Classroom Building. This appeal involves exit from basement classrooms and dead-end corridor on street floor in building on S.W. Park between S.W. Harrison and S.W. Hall. The letter of appeal and check sheet read as follows: We are the architects for the next projected classroom building at Portland State College and, due to the limited space available, propose locating classrooms in the basement of the building. Construction will be fireproofed steel framing with reinforced concrete floor, mechanical ventilation, artificial illumination, and corridor wall finishing, all in conformance with building code requirements. We ask exemption from provisions of Sec 7-3317 (f) requiring direct access from each classroom to the outside, since the building is built to all property lines. A floor plan dated May 2nd showing arrangement of the classrooms is enclosed. Also, in connection with development of the business office department on the street floor, we ask exemption from provisions of Section 7-3317 (e) relating to dead-end corridors. If exemption be granted, we propose to install a directional exit sign at the end of the corridor pointing to entrance door of an office on an outside wall, and to install an emergency panic-operation type door in that office directly to the outside. Location of the corridor and proposed doors is shown on the enclosed plan dated May 2nd. Occupancy of this area will be limited to business office executives, a few secretaries and assistants, and salesmen wishing to sell supplies to the college.
STEWART AND RICHARDSON **************************** Check Sheet, prepared by Mr. Clerc: Construction Type I, Land use Zone 2 & 3, Fire Dist 4, Occupancy Group C Preliminary plans submitted by the applicant show the following deviations from the Portland Building Code:
2. A dead end corridor is shown in the business office section of the first floor. An emergency exit is shown through an office to the street. Sec 7-3317 (e) and Sec 7-3304 (f) prohibit a dead-end corridor more than 12' in length.. 3. The stair at the north-west corner of the building terminates at the third floor level with an open balcony leading to a stair at the southwest corner. Sec 7-3308 (d) requires that stair enclosures be continuous to an exterior exit. **************************** Plans were spread before the members. Mr. Richardson indicated on a sketch the lay-out of the buildings already completed, those in the process of being erected, and this projected classroom building. He indicated on the plot plan the portion of the classroom building planned at this time, and a future addition. Mr. Newberry asked if there are basement classrooms in the present building. Mr. Richardson replied, yes, they have classrooms in the basement now; due to the slope of the ground it is not so evident; the slope is such that by the time they get to the other end of the building they are 10' in the ground, but they are using some of that for classrooms now. Mr. Newberry said the code doesn't distinguish between kindergarten, primary, high school age; he sees no objection for schools of this type to have classrooms in the basement than adults living in the basement of apartment houses; he can see where it is undesirable for young children to be in the basement. Mr. Mason said, so far as hazard is concerned there isn't much more than in the modern building where you have no access through the windows, particularly the therm-type pane, and you depend on mechanical ventilation; he does not see the difference whether the classroom is in the basement, they still have two means of egress, that is what you have on the 3rd floor - the difference is up or down. Chief Gilman said, I think the principle on which the code is based - generally your exits are up into the upper level of the building before you get out. In other words you are taking them up to the next level above before you get them out of the building. Mr. Mason said, which you do here - at both ends. Chief Gilman said, you have to go up to the first floor. Mr. Mason said, under the modern building you have to go down to get out and usually have no other means of getting outside unless there is a fire tower. Chief Gilman said, I don't see much objection to it in Type I building. Mr. Foster said, with artificial light and mechanical ventilation, your windows on any level are not necessarily providing light and air; you could eliminate as many windows as you want so far as ventilation and light are concerned. This (indicating) is the only mechanical space? Mr. Newberry said, they have a central heating plant. Mr. Richardson said, one of these classrooms (indicating) has to be taken over for mechanical space, because this (indicating) is not enough; we are in the process of getting plans developed first.Chief Gilman asked if the basement is to be sprinklered. Mr. Richardson said, if the code requires it, we will sprinkler it. Mr. Mason asked about the dead-end corridor noted on the check sheet. Mr. Richardson indicated on the plans the office portion on the street floor, the future set-up, and the proposed emergency exit. He explained this is the registrar's office and with the lay-out as shown, it gets the students off the street. Mr. Benard noted the emergency exit door; he asked if that will open over the street? Mr. Richardson replied, yes, but it will have a panic type hardware. Mr. Benard said the door should be recessed so that it doesn't swing over the street. Mr. Mason said he sees no objection to the swing of the door. Mr. Foster, (indicating) said, don't you run into the same situation in this area? Mr. Richardson replied, except this is not blocked in as a corridor, just for the offices and this is all open space. Mr. Foster noted the plans show the space is to be occupied by secretaries, files, waiting room - he said that will not be very open with all that in there. Mr. Mason: On the main floor of that type building I don't think it is serious provided the exit is installed as noted on the sketch providing emergency exit. I move
Mr. Foster seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried. Portland State College - Classroom Building. This appeal involves corridor partitions and exit from building to be constructed on SW Park between SW Harrison and SW Hall. The letter of appeal
and check sheet read as follows: Letter of Appeal - Portland State College
- Classroom Building - S.W. Park between S.W. Harrison and S.W. Hall -
corridors As architects for the Classroom Building South at Portland State College, we are requesting relief from the requirements of Section 7-3304 of the Building Code. This request for relief applies only to a portion of the third floor as shown on the attached print. It is the desire of the Owners to provide small offices for the individual instructors and professors within one large area as shown. The enclosing partitions for these offices would be 7' high and open to the ceiling which is 10'6" high. Corridors constructed in accordance with code requirements have been provided to care for all of the occupants of this floor, and permission is hereby requested to constrcut the small offices as shown. Reference is made to a previous appeal of May 14 regarding the emergence exit on the first floor. In further development of the plan it may become possible to have the emergency exit return to the interior of the building rather than through the exterior wall on Park Avenue. Will this meet the Appeal Board's approval?
STEWART AND RICHARDSON **************************** Check Sheet, prepared by Mr. Clerc: Construction Type I, Occupancy Group F-2 & C - Portland State College The appellant seeks relief from the requirements of Sec 7-3304 P.B.C. which calls for one-hour fire resistive corridors. As shown, the corridor partitions in a major share of the office occupancy, do not extend to the ceiling, thereby not providing the corridor protection required. Sec 7-3317 (a) requires corridors serving the school occupancy to be not less than 6' wide. As shown, one corridor scales about 4' in width. The appellant seeks further interpretation of the Appeal Board's decision of May 14, 1959 regarding an emergency exit from a dead-end corridor on the 1st floor. This checking sheet covers only the above points.
****************************
Plans were spread before the members. Mr. Allen indicated the proposed dwarf partitions separating the various offices to be used by the professors; he stated they would make the corridor shown as 4', the required 6' width. The offices will be about 10' x 10'. Mr. Newberry asked if these will be metal studs. Mr. Allen said, either metal studs or metal partitions. Mr. Mason said, in view of the adult occupancy, he can see no objection. Apparently this is the only point on the appeal, the other portion is asking for a modification of a former decision of the Board. He moved: That the appeal re corridor partitions be granted subject to the corridor referred to as 4' shall be widened to 6'. Mr. Foster seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried. There was then a discussion relative to modification of former decision of the Board with reference to emergency exit. Mr. Allen explained that the plans submitted at the former hearing showed a dead-end corridor in the business section and an emergency exit shown through an office to the street. They would like to revise that plan so that the emergency exit returns to the interior of the building rather than through the exterior wall on Park Avenue. Mr. Newberry asked if he intends to carry the corridor on through. Mr. Allen said, we would not continue the corridor itself, it would be a similar arrangment to go through a room. Mr. Foster said he would not favor such an arrangement, he does not think it makes a good condition, going through a number of intervening doors. Mr. Newberry agreed with Mr. Foster. It was unanimously agreed:
Portland State College - Classroom Building. This appeal involves in-swinging doors in certain seminar rooms in building to be erected on S.W. Park between S.W. Harrison and S.W. Hall. The letter of appeal and check sheet read as follows: In developing plans for the Classroom Building, South, to be erected at Portland State College, we find ourselves in need of an interpretation of Section 3317 (d) of the Building Code. This section requires that doors from "School rooms" swing in the direction of exit. In the building for which we are architects there are several seminar rooms and special service rooms which, according to the requirements of the building code, would have an occupant load of ten to fifteen. We hereby ask permission on rooms of 300 square feet, or less, which means an occupant load of 15 people, to swing the door into the room. The reason for doing this is to avoid a door swinging into a corridor as an obstruction. To build an adequate recess for the door is an expensive operation, both in money and floor space and does not seem to be as necessary for this small occupant load as it is for larger groups of people. Your consideration of this matter will be greatly appreciated.
STEWART AND RICHARDSON **************************** Check Sheet, prepared by Mr. Clerc: Construction Type I, Fire Dist 4, Occupancy Group C Preliminary plans show several small classrooms with doors which swing inward in violation of Sec 7-3317 (d) which requires that "exit doors in schoolrooms shall swing in the direction of egress". This checking sheet covers only the above points. Former Appeals: 5-14-59 - appeal granted as shown on plans for (1) basement classrooms shown exiting to a corridor which leads to stairs exiting to the street at the first floor level, and (2) a dead-end corridor shown in the business office section of the 1st floor, and an emergency exit shown through an office to the street. 7-16-59 - appeal involving corridor on 3rd floor formed by dwarf partitions and with a width of 4', was granted subject to the corridor being widened to 6'. **************************** Plans were spread before the members. Mr. Richardson indicated on the plans the various rooms involved and stated in all cases these are rooms normally having about 1/2 dozen people, they would like to put a table here (indicating) and people will be sitting around it for study sessions. Chief Gilman asked, these rooms aren't going to be anything but seminars, no chemistry rooms or anything like that? Mr. Richardson replied, that is right. Mr. Newberry said, the code was based on class rooms, we never had in mind these specialized rooms. Mr. Foster noted the largest room involved is 12' x 21'; he said, you are not going to have a concentration in that size room, it is a physical impossibility. Mr. Foster moved:
Portland State College. This appeal involves doors in stair enclosures and basement sprinklering in Classroom building - South, to be erected at 724 S.W. Harrison St. The letter of appeal and check sheet read as follows: Letter of Appeal - Portland State College
- Classroom Building - South - 724 S.W. Harrison St. As architects for Classroom Building-South at Portland State College, we are requesting relief from the requirements of Section 7-3308 and Section 7-3801 of the Building Code. Section 7-3308, under exit enclosures, requires that all openings into such enclosures be equipped with Class B fire doors. It is our intention to install metal doors with vision panels for safety's sake, to have the doors equipped with push-pull hardware and automatic closers. This is in line with previous installations in other buildings at the school. We, therefore, request relief from the requirements of this section. Section 7-3801 requires an automatic sprinkler system be installed in the entire basement of this building. The greater portion of the basement floor is devoted to ordinary classroom use without any undue fire hazard. We, therefore, request permission to install a sprinkler system only in the storage rooms and duplicating department and omit the sprinkler system from the classroom areas. Your consideration of these appeals will be appreciated.
STEWART AND RICHARDSON **************************** Check Sheet, prepared by Mr. Clerc: Construction Type I, Fire Dist 4, Occupancy Group C - Portland State College In the construction of this building the appellant seeks relief from the requirements of the following sections of the Portland Building Code:
2. Sec 7-3801 calls for automatic sprinklering of the basement area except for certain equipment rooms. It is requested that this requirement be waived except for storage and duplicating department rooms. **************************** Plans were spread before the members. Item 1 - doors in stair enclosures - was discussed. Mr. Newberry asked if they didn't come to some agreement with the State Fire Marshal regarding these doors? It is contrary to Underwriters regulations if they don't have latches, what is the use of putting in Class B doors? Chief Gilman said, I don't remember too clearly what has been done, but I think the Board should be consistent.. Mr. Clerc said, as I recall it, the other buildings in this group have been equipped with the equivalent of Class B doors in the stair enclosures without latch devices, the latching device was left off because of the amount of traffic and the fact doors of that nature in its occupancy so many times are left open. Mr. Foster asked if the glass panels are within the limitations of UL. Mr. Newberry, examining the plans, said this is way over the 100 sa. in. wire glass allowed. Chief Gilman asked Mr. Stewart if this is identical with what was in the other building? Mr. Stewart replied, that is right. This is wire plate glass. Mr. Foster asked Mr. Clerc if the Board has permitted wire glass of that size in the other buildings? Mr. Clerc replied, I would have to check for sure, I am not sure what the allowance was. Mr. Stewart said, I think this is in the principal buildings, we are following through on the same pattern that was established there. It was unanimously agreed that Item I be approved by elimination of the latches, and the wire glass vision panels approved provided they are not larger than those previously installed. Item 2 - exemption from sprinklering - was discussed. Mr. Stewart indicated on the plans the classroom area, the storage room, the store rooms, mechanical rooms and print shop; they propose to sprinkler this area (indicating) and this area, leaving the classrooms unsprinklered. Mr. Foster asked if this is all below grade? Mr. Stewart replied, yes, it is approximately 10' below grade. Mr. Foster said, with the heavy load down there, he feels the whole area should be sprinklered. The other members agreed. It was unanimously agreed to deny Item 2. Mr. Foster moved:
Item 1 - fire doors in stair enclosures - elimination of latches approved, and the wire glass vision panels approved provided they are not larger than those previously installed. Item 2 - exemption from sprinklering - denied. Mr. Bruun seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried. The $10 deposit fee is to be returned to appellant. Letter of Appeal - Portland State College
- 724 S.W. Harrison St. - Classroom Building - South - folding partition
& corridor. As architects for Classroom Building-South, Portland State College, we are requesting relief from the requirements of Table 17-A and Section 7-3304 (e) of the Building Code. Table 17-A requires that all permanent partitions in the building be of one-hour construction. Our clients desire to install a folding partition (Modern Fold) between two small places on the ground floor. We therefore request permission to install this folding partition in the interest of flexibility of use. Section 7-3304 (e) requires that all corridor walls be of one-hour construction. On the ground floor in the space designated as Main Floor Lobby we plan to install teller type cages to be used for registration and for financial transactions. These cages are detailed with aluminum sash and clear plate glass with laminated plastic wicket gates (formica over honey comb core). This space serves as a corridor for the occupants of the registrar and business office only as it is not involved in the stair access from the upper floors. Each of the registrar and business offices has corridor egress in addition to this means of exit. In the interest of practical use for the intended purpose we ask relief from the requirements of this section. Your consideration of these appeals will be appreciated.
STEWART AND RICHARDSON **************************** Check Sheet, prepared by Mr. Dunnigan: Dist 4, Zone A0D, Type I, Group C In checking the plans for the classroom building at Portland State College, the following violations are noted:
2. Ground floor corridor (around registration & cashier's area) not 1-hour construction as required by Sec 7-3309 (e). **************************** Note: Former Appeals: 5-14-59 - appeal granted as shown on plans for (1) basement classrooms shown exiting to a corridor which leads to stairs exiting to the street at 1st floor level, and (2) a dead-end corridor shown in the business office section of the 1st floor, and an emergency exit shown through an office to the street. 7-16-59 - appeal involving corridor on 3rd floor formed by dwarf partitions and with a width of 4', was granted subject to the corridor being widened to 6'. 8-27-59 - appeal involving swing of doors from several small classrooms - granted. 5-12-60 - appeal involving doors in stair enclosures and exemption from sprinklering in certain areas of basement was granted in part as follows: (1) doors permitted without latches and with vision panels; (2) exemption from sprinklering denied. **************************** Plans were spread before the members. Mr. Allen explained that the folding partition is in the registration area; when the registration load is heavy the space would be open, other times they would like to be able to close this off. Mr. Mason asked if there is an exit from both rooms? Mr. Allen replied, yes.
Mr. Mason asked, this is a question of corridor openings? Mr. Clerc replied, yes; since this corridor terminates here, we didn't have much of any way of classifying this except as a continuation of the corridor. Mr. Mason said he sees no objection; the other members agreed. Mr. Mason moved:
Mr. Foster seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried. The $10 deposit fee is to be returned to appellants. Portland State College. This appeal involves an addition to an existing school building at 1855 S.W. Broadway. The appeal reads as follows: Fire District 4, Zone A0, Type I, 5 story. 1. BUILDING CODE SECTION: 7-3317 (c) BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT:
BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT:
BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT:
BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT:
R.M. Haynes, Bureau of Buildings
(2) Circular stairs - Approved. (3) Corridor openings - Approved. (4) Corridor doors - Denied. The motion was unanimously carried. The $10.00 fee was turned over to the City Treasurer, Receipt No. 2568-B. 7. Appeal of 7-18-68
BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT:
R. M. Haynes, Bureau of Buildings That the appeal be granted. The motion was unanimously carried. The $10.00 fee was turned over to the City Treasurer, Receipt No. 24089-A. Appeal No. 9 Portland State University, Owner
95-01066 Re: Alteration of/addition to an Existing Structure Proposed Use: Audiology
Remodel 631 S.W Harrison Street 1. BUILDING CODE SECTION: 33A BUILDING REGULATION REQUIREMENT:
1. Exiting from classroom at Audiology Department: GRANTED as proposed. Appeal No. 6 Owner
Portland State University RE: Alteration of/addition to an existing structure Proposed Use: Existing classrooms and offices, no change of use 724 S.W. Harrison Street (Neuberger Hall) 1. BUILDING CODE SECTION: State of Oregon 1996 Edition Structural Specialty Code, Chapter 10, Table 10-A REQUIRES:
The existing classroom (251 NH) occupies 1,550 square feet of floor area on the second floor of Neuberger Hall. The occupant load for the room is 76 based on the occupant load factor required by Table 10-A and the resulting number of exits required by this occupant load is 2. The existing room includes 1 exit.
Existing Fire/Life Safety features of the building include: Type I, fire resistive, non-combustible construction; Manual fire pull stations and a Simplex Digital Fire Control System intertied with the mechanical HVAC system and central station monitoring, automatic fire sprinkler system covering the basement level and intertied with the monitoring system.
Appeal No. 9 Owner
PSU Facilities
97- RE: Alteration of/addition to an existing structure. Proposed Use: Classroom, higher education, above the 12th grade. 724 S.W. Harrison Street 1. BUILDING CODE SECTION: UBC 1005.10 REQUIRES:
Elevator hoistways shall be pressurized to maintain a minimum positive pressure of 0.04 inches of water column and a maximum positive pressure of 0.06 inches of water column with respect to adjacent occupied space on all floors. This pressure shall be measured at the middle of the height of the hoistway, with all doors closed except at the ground floor level where doors are to be open. The supply air intake shall be from an outside, uncontaminated source with a minimum distance of 20' from any air exhaust system or outlet. The duct and fan system, if located within the building, shall be protected with the same fire rated construction as required for the elevator shaft(s). The fan system shall be equipped with a smoke detector to shut down the fan on detection of smoke within the supply fan system. A separate fan system shall be used for each bank of elevators. The supply fan shall be of the adjustable type with a capacity of approximately 100 cfm per door. Appeal No. 14 Owner
PSU Facilities RE: Alteration of/addition to an existing structure Proposed Use: Classroom, higher education, above the 12th grade 724 S.W. Harrison Street Reconsideration of Appeal #9 of Oct. 1,
1997 November 12, 1997 Re: PSU Neuberger Hall, Elevator Pressurization Dear Members of Appeals Board and Katherine, Thank you for granting our elevator safety pressurization appeal for PSU Neuberger on October 1, 1997. Since receiving the appeal, an on-site visual survey revealed that pressurizing the existing shaft for elevator No. 1 would be difficult physically and economically. The pressurization of elevator No. 1 would require creating a shaft from the roof down through the fifth floor to the fourth floor ceiling and into the elevator shaft. The route crosses existing mechanical room access and is crossed by 4" electrical conduits. Asbestos abatement would also be required. Please reconsider our appeal to include pressurizing only existing elevator No. 2 and new elevator No. 3 at this time, with provision that existing elevator No. 1 be pressurized when it is modernized in the future. PSU has no schedule for when that may happen. It is PSU's intent that elevator No. 1 be used by the Art Department as a freight elevator and that the modernized elevators Nos. 2 and 2 act as a duplex to handle the majority of the passenger demands. The new emergency generator will be designed to handle proposed elevator pressurization fans for elevators Nos. 2 and 3 now and elevator No. 1 in the future. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, The Administrative Staff reviewed the appeal and the following decisions were reached:
|