Date |
Text |
2014-03-25 07:36:43 | BUILDING PLAN REVIEW |
| PERMIT: 14020917 |
| ADD: 1645 PALM BEACH LAKES #1000 & 1010 |
| CONT: FISHER CONTRACTING |
| TEL: (561)691-4716 |
| |
| 1ST REVIEW |
| DATE: TUESDAY MARCH 25/ 2014 |
| YEAR BUILT 1981 |
| ACTION: DENIED |
| |
| 2010 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE W |
| * 2010 WEST PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA |
| BUILDING CODE, CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION, 2010 EDITION |
| 2012 FBC SUPPLEMENTS ADOPTED APRIL 25/2013. |
| |
| 2010 EXISTING BUILDING CODE LEVEL II 701.3 |
| COMPLIANCE. ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS, COMPONENTS, |
| SYSTEMS, AND SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS |
| OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, BUILDING. |
| |
| 1) THE TENANTS CAN NOT GET TO ANY OF THE VERTICAL EXITS |
| WIWTHOUT HAVEING TO GO THROUGH THE COORIDOR THAT TIES |
| WITH THE ELEVATOR SHAFT ENCLOSURES, NO ELEVATOR LOBBIES |
| ARE NOTED ON THE PLANS. |
| WILL NEED TO CCOMPLY WITH: |
| |
| 2010 FL EXISTING BUILDING CODE 703.2 VERTICAL OPENINGS. |
| EXISTING VERTICAL OPENINGS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE |
| PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 703.2.1, 703.2.2, AND 703.2.3. |
| |
| 703.2.2 SUPPLEMENTAL SHAFT AND FLOOR OPENING ENCLOSURE |
| REQUIREMENTS. |
| WHERE THE WORK AREA ON ANY FLOOR EXCEEDS 50 PERCENT OF |
| THAT FLOOR AREA, THE ENCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION |
| 703.2 SHALL APPLY TO VERTICAL OPENINGS OTHER THAN |
| STAIRWAYS THROUGHOUT THE FLOOR. |
| |
| 708.14.1 ELEVATOR LOBBY. |
| AN ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBY SHALL BE PROVIDED AT EACH |
| FLOOR WHERE AN ELEVATOR SHAFT ENCLOSURE CONNECTS MORE |
| THAN THREE STORIES. THE LOBBY ENCLOSURE SHALL SEPARATE |
| THE ELEVATOR SHAFT ENCLOSURE DOORS FROM EACH FLOOR BY |
| FIRE PARTITIONS. IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN |
| SECTION 709 FOR FIRE PARTITIONS, DOORS PROTECTING |
| OPENINGS IN THE ELEVATOR LOBBY ENCLOSURE WALLS SHALL |
| ALSO COMPLY WITH SECTION 715.4.3 AS REQUIRED FOR |
| CORRIDOR WALLS AND PENETRATIONS OF THE ELEVATOR LOBBY |
| ENCLOSURE BY DUCTS AND AIR TRANSFER OPENINGS SHALL BE |
| PROTECTED AS REQUIRED FOR CORRIDORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| SECTION 716.5.4.1. ELEVATOR LOBBIES SHALL HAVE AT LEAST |
| ONE MEANS OF EGRESS COMPLYING WITH CHAPTER 10 AND OTHER |
| PROVISIONS WITHIN THIS CODE. |
| |
| EXCEPTIONS: |
| 1. ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBIES ARE NOT REQUIRED AT THE |
| STREET FLOOR, PROVIDED THE ENTIRE STREET FLOOR IS |
| EQUIPPED WITH AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN |
| ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 903.3.1.1. |
| 2. ELEVATORS NOT REQUIRED TO BE LOCATED IN A SHAFT IN |
| ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 708.2 ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE |
| ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBIES. |
| 3. ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBIES ARE NOT REQUIRED WHERE |
| ADDITIONAL DOORS ARE PROVIDED AT THE HOISTWAY OPENING |
| IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3002.6. SUCH DOORS SHALL BE |
| TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UL 1784 WITHOUT AN ARTIFICIAL |
| BOTTOM SEAL. |
| 4. ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBIES ARE NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE |
| BUILDING IS PROTECTED BY AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM |
| INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 903.3.1.1 OR |
| 903.3.1.2. THIS EXCEPTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE |
| FOLLOWING: |
| 4.1. GROUP I-2 OCCUPANCIES; |
| 4.2. GROUP I-3 OCCUPANCIES; AND |
| 4.3. HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS. |
| 5. SMOKE PARTITIONS SHALL BE PERMITTED IN LIEU OF FIRE |
| PARTITIONS TO SEPARATE THE ELEVATOR LOBBY AT EACH FLOOR |
| WHERE THE BUILDING IS EQUIPPED THROUGHOUT WITH AN |
| AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| SECTION 903.3.1.1 OR 903.3.1.2. IN ADDITION TO THE |
| REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 711 FOR SMOKE PARTITIONS, DOORS |
| PROTECTING OPENINGS IN THE SMOKE PARTITIONS SHALL ALSO |
| COMPLY WITH SECTIONS 711.5.2, 711.5.3, AND 715.4.8 AND |
| DUCT PENETRATIONS OF THE SMOKE PARTITIONS SHALL BE |
| PROTECTED AS REQUIRED FOR CORRIDORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| SECTION 716.5.4.1. |
| 6. ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBIES ARE NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE |
| ELEVATOR HOISTWAY IS PRESSURIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| SECTION 708.14.2. |
| 7. ENCLOSED ELEVATOR LOBBIES ARE NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE |
| ELEVATOR SERVES ONLY OPEN PARKING GARAGES IN ACCORDANCE |
| WITH SECTION 406.3. |
| |
| ELEVATOR LOBBY MEMORANDUM |
| |
| TO: ALL INTERESTED PERSONS |
| |
| FROM: DOUG WISE, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DIRECTOR, |
| BUILDING OFFICIAL |
| MIKE CARSILLO, BATTALION CHIEF FIRE RESCUE, FIRE |
| MARSHAL |
| |
| RE: ELEVATOR LOBBIES IN EXISTING HIGH RISE |
| CONSTRUCTION |
| |
| DATE: JANUARY 3, 2011 |
| |
| IT HAS RECENTLY BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT MANY |
| EXISTING HIGH RISE STRUCTURES IN OUR COMMUNITY WERE |
| INITIALLY CONSTRUCTED OR HAVE BEEN SUBSEQUENTLY |
| MODIFIED SO AS TO BE WITHOUT"ELEVATOR LOBBIES". |
| ELEVATOR LOBBIES ARE FIRE RATED ENCLOSURES, ENCLOSING |
| THE ELEVATOR SHAFT ITSELF WITH EACH FLOOR ABOVE THE |
| FIRST FLOOR. THE LACK OF AN ELEVATOR LOBBY CAN, UNDER |
| CERTAIN CONDITIONS, CONSTITUTE A SERIOUS CONCERN BY |
| CREATING INCREASED POTENTIAL FOR SPREAD OF SMOKE OR |
| FIRE THOUGH AN EXISTING HIGH RISE STRUCTURE DURING A |
| FIRE EVENT. |
| RESEARCH BY CITY STAFF INDICATES THE REQUIREMENT FOR |
| RATING OF ELEVATOR SHAFT ENCLOSURES WAS CLEARLY |
| IDENTIFIED IN THE 1929 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH BUILDING |
| CODE IN SECTIONS 1807 AND 1907 RESPECTIVELY, FOR TYPE I |
| AND TYPE II STRUCTURES OVER THREE (3) STORIES, AS TWO |
| (2) HOURS MINIMUM, AND ONE (1) HOUR FOR TYPE III |
| STRUCTURES (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT 1). BY 1965 THE |
| SOUTHERN STANDARD BUILDING CODE IN EFFECT IN THE CITY |
| REQUIRED ELEVATOR ENCLOSURES WHICH ENCLOSED NOT MORE |
| THAN THREE (3) ELEVATORS TO BE ENCLOSED IN TWO (2) HOUR |
| RATED ENCLOSURES IN A SINGLE SECTION WHICH WAS SECTION |
| 701.3 (SEE EXHIBIT 2). INTERESTINGLY, THE TERM |
| ?ELEVATOR LOBBY? ITSELF DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE BUILDING |
| CODE ITSELF UNTIL SOMETIME BETWEEN THE 1973 AND 1978 |
| EDITIONS. HOWEVER, AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, THE |
| REQUIREMENT FOR FIRE RATING ELEVATOR SHAFT ENCLOSURES |
| AND ALL OPENINGS THERETO DATES AS FAR BACK AS 1929. THE |
| 1965 CODE ALSO REQUIRED THAT, ?THE PATH OF TRAVEL FROM |
| ONE FLIGHT OF STAIRS TO THE NEXT SHALL NOT PASS |
| DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ELEVATOR DOORS.? THIS CRITERIA IS |
| CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDES |
| THAT ONLY ONE OF THE TWO REQUIRED STAIRS MAY OPEN INTO |
| THE ELEVATOR LOBBY AND THAT EACH TENANCY IN A MULTIPLE |
| TENANT CONDITION SHALL HAVE ACCESS TO BOTH STAIRS, AT |
| LEAST ONE OF WHICH MAY BE ACCESSED WITHOUT PASSING |
| THROUGH THE ELEVATOR LOBBY. |
| TO SUMMARIZE CITY STAFF'S RESEARCH, THE REQUIREMENT FOR |
| FIRE RATING OF AN ELEVATOR SHAFT ENCLOSURE HAS BEEN |
| IDENTIFIED TO EXIST IN EVERY BUILDING CODE ADOPTED IN |
| THIS CITY FROM THE 1930?S TO THE PRESENT DAY WITH ONLY |
| ONE NOTABLE EXCEPTION. ON OCTOBER 1, 2005 WITH THE |
| ENACTMENT OF THE 2004 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, THE |
| REQUIREMENT WAS AMENDED TO ALLOW THE ELIMINATION OF THE |
| FIRE RATED ENCLOSURE IF THE CORRIDOR INTO WHICH THE |
| ELEVATOR OPENED WAS NOT REQUIRED ITSELF TO BE RATED |
| (SEE EXHIBIT 3). THIS REQUIREMENT WAS AMENDED AGAIN ON |
| DECEMBER 8, 2006 WITH THE FIRST ?BLUE PAGE? AMENDMENTS |
| TO THE 2004 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE (SEE EXHIBIT 4) WHICH |
| RE-INSTITUTED THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE RATED ELEVATOR |
| LOBBY WITH THE SPECIFIC LIMITED EXCEPTIONS THAT EXIST |
| TODAY (SEE EXHIBIT 5). THIS MEANS THAT BUILDINGS WHICH |
| DO NOT MEET THE CURRENT (OR 1929) CODE MAY BE DEEMED |
| "LEGALLY-EXISTING NON-CONFORMING" IF A PERMIT WHICH |
| DEMONSTRATES THE ELIMINATION OF SUCH A LOBBY CAN BE |
| EVIDENCED WHICH WAS ISSUED ONLY DURING THE |
| ABOVE-REFERENCED NARROW "WINDOW" OF TIME BETWEEN |
| OCTOBER 1, 2005 AND DECEMBER 8, 2006. HOWEVER, EVEN |
| LEGALLY-EXISTING NON-CONFORMITIES MUST ALSO BE |
| ADDRESSED AS RENOVATIONS OCCUR IN ACCORDANCE THE TERMS |
| THAT FOLLOW. |
| TO BETTER PREPARE BUILDING OWNERS, MANGERS, OPERATORS, |
| AND DESIGN PROFESSIONALS TO ANTICIPATE AND ADDRESS |
| THESE SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS, THE CONSTRUCTION |
| SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND FIRE PREVENTION DEPARTMENT |
| PROPOSE TO ADDRESS THE ABSENCE OF AN ELEVATOR LOBBY |
| (WHEN REQUIRED) AS FOLLOWS: |
| |
| 1. IF A TENANT IMPROVEMENT IS SUBMITTED WHICH PROPOSES |
| TO RECONFIGURE THE ENTIRE EXISTING BUILDING FLOOR, AN |
| ELEVATOR LOBBY, OR COMPLIANCE WITH ONE OF THE SIX (6) |
| EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER THE PRESENT CODE WILL BE |
| REQUIRED. THIS IS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE |
| ABSENCE OF AN ELEVATOR LOBBY CAN BE DEMONSTRATED WITH A |
| VALID PERMIT ISSUED BETWEEN OCTOBER 1, 2005 AND |
| DECEMBER 8, 2006. |
| 2. IF A TENANT IMPROVEMENT IS SUBMITTED WHICH PROPOSES |
| TO RECONFIGURE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING FLOOR |
| AREA, WITH NO WORK BEING PROPOSED IN THE AREA OF THE |
| ELEVATOR LOBBY, AND NO ELEVATOR LOBBY IS FOUND TO EXIST |
| ON THE FLOOR, AND A VALID PERMIT CAN BE EVIDENCED WHICH |
| WAS ISSUED BETWEEN OCTOBER 1, 2005 AND DECEMBER 8, |
| 2006, THE TENANT IMPROVEMENT PERMIT MAY BE APPROVED AND |
| THE BUILDING SHALL REMAIN AS LAWFULLY CONFIGURED UNTIL |
| THE MAJORITY OF THE EXISTING FLOOR PLAN, OR THE |
| ELEVATOR LOBBY AREA ITSELF UNDERGOES RENOVATION. |
| 3. IF A TENANT IMPROVEMENT IS SUBMITTED WHICH PROPOSES |
| TO RECONFIGURE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING FLOOR |
| AREA, WITH NO WORK BEING PROPOSED IN THE AREA OF THE |
| ELEVATOR LOBBY, AND NO ELEVATOR LOBBY IS FOUND TO EXIST |
| ON THE FLOOR, AND NO VALID PERMIT CAN BE EVIDENCED |
| WHICH WAS ISSUED BETWEEN OCTOBER 1, 2005 AND DECEMBER |
| 8, 2006, THE TENANT IMPROVEMENT PERMIT MAY BE APPROVED. |
| THE BUILDING OWNER WILL BE NOTIFIED OF AN UNSAFE |
| CONDITION ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE BY THE CITY FIRE |
| MARSHAL?S OFFICE AND ASKED TO UNDERTAKE APPROPRIATE |
| ACTIONS TO CORRECT THE SITUATION. |
| 4. IF ANY RECONFIGURATION IS PROPOSED WHICH AFFECTS THE |
| ELEVATOR LOBBY AREA ITSELF, AN ELEVATOR LOBBY, OR |
| COMPLIANCE WITH ONE OF THE SIX (6) EXCEPTIONS LISTED IN |
| THE CODE SHALL BE REQUIRED. |
| |
| IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT CITY STAFF REMAINS COMMITTED TO |
| ASSISTING BUILDING OWNERS, MANAGERS, AND DESIGN |
| PROFESSIONALS IN SUCCEEDING IN CREATING AND MAINTAINING |
| SAFE PLACES TO LIVE AND WORK IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE ARE |
| READY AND WILLING TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN |
| UNDERSTANDING THE OFTEN COMPLEX CRITERIA THAT AFFECT |
| EXISTING AND NEW HIGH RISE BUILDINGS. IT MUST BE STATED |
| THAT THE SIMPLE INSTALLATION OF A HOIST-WAY |
| PRESSURIZATION SYSTEM MAY BE ONE POTENTIAL METHOD TO |
| ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR AN ELEVATOR LOBBY THROUGHOUT AN |
| ENTIRE BUILDING. ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE IS TO INSTALL FIRE |
| SHUTTERS AT THE ELEVATOR DOOR OPENINGS. THESE |
| METHODOLOGIES MAY OFFER THE ADDED POTENTIAL TO INCREASE |
| THE LEASABLE FLOOR AREA WITHIN THESE BUILDINGS. |
| |
| PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US DIRECTLY IF WE CAN |
| ASSIST YOU FURTHER IN UNDERSTANDING THESE CRITERIA AND |
| HELP YOU TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF YOUR RESIDENTS, |
| TENANTS, AND PROPERTY. |
| |
| DOUG WISE 805-6650 [email protected] |
| MIKE CARSILLO 804-4709 [email protected] |
| |
| JAMES A. WITMER CBO |
| SENIOR COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| TEL: 561-805-6715 |
| FAX: 561-805-6676 |
| E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| |
| DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HOME PAGE |
| HTTP://WWW.CITYOFWPB.COM/CONSTRUCTION/INDEX.PHP |
| |
| PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD PUBLIC RECORDS |
| LAW. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM LOCAL OFFICIALS |
| REGARDING CITY BUSINESS ARE PUBLIC RECORD, AVAILABLE TO |
| THE PUBLIC UPON REQUEST. YOUR E-MAIL COMMUNICATIONS ARE |
| THEREFORE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. |
| |
| MEMBER OF BOAF: BUILDING OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION OF |
| FLORIDA SAVING LIVES AND PROPERTY SINCE 1953 |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |