| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
Variance Details |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Code Name: |
|
Other Code (Not in the list provided) |
|
|
|
|
|
2014 IBC 704.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Conditions: |
|
The fire resistance rating for structural elements for the existing and new (as modified in the renovation)in the type Type II-A building construction will be permitted to be of unprotected steel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
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: |
|
During the original construction of the building variance B96-8-10a was approved to table 17- A of the 1993 Indiana Building Code (Information Attached) to permit the building structural elements (structural frame, roof, floors) to be of unprotected steel.
The equivalencies offered in the variance were compliance with the allowable area in NFPA 101 and increased sprinkler design density, Light hazard areas would have a design density of 0.16 gpm/s.f, a 60% increase, and ordinary hazard areas would have a design density increase to 0.25 gpm/s.f, a 64% increase. These conditions where complied with and will continue to be in effect for the renovations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Y |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: |
|
Providing a rating on the limited areas of the building effected by the new construction is not feasible given the supporting structural elements are not protected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|