| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
Variance Details |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Code Name: |
|
Other Code (Not in the list provided) |
|
|
|
|
|
2014 IBC 703.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Conditions: |
|
The fire-resistance rating of the structural steel components or assemblies are not in accordance with the test procedures set forth in ASTM E 119 or UL 263. The alternative methods and materials section of the IBC 104.11 will be used as mixed methods of protection are being applies to the members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEMONSTRATION THAT PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE ARE PROTECTED: |
|
|
|
|
1=Non-compliance with the rule will not be adverse to the public health, safety or w |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2= Applicant will undertake alternative actions in lieu of compliance with the rule to ensure that granting of the variance will not be adverse to public health, safety, or welfare. Explain why alternative actions would be adequate (be specific).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facts: |
|
The steel structure supporting the two hour occupancy separation in the type V-A building is required required two be two hour fire rated per section 704.2 and 704.3. As installed it does not meet this requirement. The architect and engineering team has reviewed and proposed modifications to the existing assemblies which can be completed without disassembling the building. Using the analytical methods set forth in the third edition of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers Fire Protection Engineering Handbook and published test standards for the fire resistance of steel and timber members.
These modifications have been reviewed in the field with the local authority having jurisdiction and per their request construction modifications will be certified in the field by a licenced fire protection engineer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEMONSTRATION OF UNDUE HARDSHIP OR HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Imposition of the rule would result in an undue hardship (unusual difficulty) because of physical limitations of the construction site or its utility services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Imposition of the rule would result in an undue hardship (unusual difficulty) because of major operational problems in the use of the building or structure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y |
|
Imposition of the rule would result in an undue hardship (unusual difficulty) because of excessive costs of additional or altered construction elements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Imposition of the rule would prevent the preservation of an architecturally or a historically significant part of the building or structure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facts: |
|
The proposed modifications meet or exceed the required specified fire protection ratings in he building code. To properly apply the spray fire proofing at this time the buildings exterior walls and construction above the first floor would be required to be removed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|