My company just completed design/build construction of a canopy structure over a courtyard between two restaurant buildings located on the east & west sides.

We assigned an Occupancy Classification of A-5. The structure is all steel, other than the roof construction is comprised of the following layers: 22 gauge steel B deck, 7/16 inch OSB, 24 gauge metal standing seam. The standing seam contractor asked for a solid substrate, instead of metal to metal (Standing Seam attached to the B Deck.

We agreed to add the OSB. We examined the 2018 IBC and assessed that we could use the OSB. Our assessment concluded that the entire structure could be built with wood framing without sprinklers (A-5, no enclosures, height 37ft, 6,090 sf, Type V(A) Construction).

The AHJ shut us down and told us we needed to remove the OSB (combustible material).

What we didn't know was that the City and developer executed a Covenant Agreement that stipulated the Canopy was an A-3 Assembly occupancy. This was arranged because the developer didn't want the exterior restaurant walls to be fire-rated because of the ease of movement from the restaurant to the courtyard.

As a result, the OSB needs to be changed to fire-retardant-treated plywood.

Was the original classification of A-5 occupancy (which could have been wood) canopy assembly an acceptable approach?

Picture below, showing the galvanized steel deck.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Subject: Two story convenience opening separation from corridors.

NFPA 101 (2021 edition) Section 8.6.9.1 permits convenience openings for two adjacent stories. But, these convenience openings shall be separated from corridors (requirement #3) and further states that separation should be by a smoke partition (requirement #5).

How do you define a corridor versus an open floor area or lobby per NFPA 101, since no definitions are given within the code?

Jurisdiction is required to follow NFPA 1 and NFPA 101.

For example, a building has a large assembly space on the second floor. All doors from the assembly space lead to a ~40'-0" wide circulation space (+200'-0" long in the other direction). To reach the building exit stair, occupants from the assembly room must traverse the 40'-0" wide circulation space. Within this circulation space is a ~20'-0" x 40'-0" vertical opening that connects the 1st and 2nd floor.

Should this circulation space be considered a corridor, and should the vertical opening be prohibited from being classified as a convenience opening without a smoke partition separating from the corridor?

Or is the 2nd floor space to be considered an open floor area, with exits immediately accessible in different directions (NFPA 101 7.5.1.1.1) and not consider it a corridor?

​The width of the circulation space seems too wide to be defined as a corridor but NFPA only provides minimum width requirements for corridors, and no maximum width for a space to be considered a corridor as far as I can determine.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

NFPA references are based on current editions. While NFPA 101, Section 30.3.1.1.4 (New Apartments) allows vertical penetrations to be protected with a 1-hour rating when sprinklered, NFPA 101, Section 30.5.2 requires HVAC equipment to comply with NFPA 90A.

According to NFPA 90A, Sections 9.1.3 and 6.8.3, a higher level of protection is required for shafts that penetrate more than four floors (2-hr fire rated and fire dampers).

Does the exception provided in NFPA 101 permit reducing the required fire rating to 1-hour for duct shafts, or does NFPA 90A take precedence?

I'm curious to hear different perspectives on this.

I can understand both sides of the issue but find it challenging to justify allowing a 1-hour fire rating for a vertical exit within a New Apartment while requiring a 2-hour fire rating for the duct shafts.

Thanks in advance.
​
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Imagine you have a 6-unit, true townhouse-construction building covered by the 2018 IRC under construction. It has an NFPA 13D sprinkler and a one-hour separation between units, but​ there is one common closet for the sprinkler riser and domestic water main. This closet is accessed only through a door on the exterior and is under the control of the landlord, not the tenant.

What is the code path to require any fire separation between that closet and the dwelling units?

There is no dog house off the side. The IRC only seems to call out separation between units, and even if you go into the IBC, it is not apparent.

Thanks in advance.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I purchased a commercial condo recently. It’s been vacant and unfinished since 2013. It’s a shell, picture is below. It has 5 residential condos on top and 5 commercial condos on first floor, in a 3 story building. All residential units were sold and have been occupied since. One commercial unit was also built and has been occupied as a salon with a U & O.

There are no sprinklers, no fire room. They were going off of 2006 IBC code.

My architect prepared stamped plans with no sprinklers using the separated building scenario. It has a 2-hour horizontal separation, 3-5 hour vertical, no access to second floors. The plan was denied for sprinklers to be installed.

Now, I certainly understand safety, but it’s almost impossible to install now after 12 years.

Can you help me decipher mixed use B (1st floor) and R-3 (2nd and 3rd one unit)?

Is this approach allowed by code, or is the code official correct?

Is a self-contained fire area allowed to be its own building?

Please help, thanks.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a storage building that is non-sprinklered, it only has fire alarm. The ceiling height in some areas of the building with storage of tires is up to 10-ft in height, and others up to 15-ft in height.

How many tires can be stored?

Is there a limit to the amount of storage?

Does storing on tread or on side matter?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I have a project in the Miami area where there are some exterior glass panels that need to be 1-hour fire rated.

I specified the glass to be fire rated type, but it prices are coming back too high. The contractor is looking into an alternative of providing fire sprinkler protection on the inside face of the glass.

Is this a feasible idea?

The wall that the glass is part of requires the rating due to its being within 10' of some adjacent exterior glass.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I’m wondering if you can help me on this one.

​I have a project with the detail below referencing the use of the U419 listed assembly, but with the drywall only on one side of the assembly. 

I asked for verification that the U419 assembly would permit this and he provided me with the attachment referencing section 5A. I don’t believe that was the intent for section 5A of the listing, but I can’t figure out what the actual intent is.

Is drywall on only one side of the assembly here correct?

Is it allowed anywhere?

It is something that has come up since there is a V497 listed assembly that puts both layers of drywall on one side of the wall, but my understanding has always been that it was used only on the interior side of exterior walls required only to be rated from the inside (IBC Section 705.5).

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. I appreciate your help.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I am working on a project that has Fire-Retardant-Treated (FRT) wood that is over 50-years old.

The wood is installed in a conditioned space (not subjected to sunlight or rain, heated and cooled with moisture levels maintained like any building). The wood had different manufacturers with varying labels, but two did list the chemical used as PROTEXOL.

I'm struggling to find information for the efficacy of the FRT wood after so many years.

Do you have any information or recommendations for recertifying FRT wood with lab testing for the presence of the correct chemicals or subjecting samples to ASTM/UL/NFPA?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

NFPA 13 in talking about concealed spaces uses the language "Concealed spaces of exposed combustible construction shall be protected by sprinklers."

What does the term "exposed" construction mean?

We have a wood deck structure with a steel frame and a un-heated attic; so trying to figure out how to solve this without a dry system (historic building so spray foam on the interior is economical).

It would be nice to put an ignition barrier/thermal barrier on the wood deck and then not provide a sprinkler system. (concrete deck of the attic).

Thanks in advance for your take.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a rehab of a two story with a walk out basement where they are going to expand the basement level and make it mercantile with the two upper floors being R-2.

This is Type V-B construction and they are proposing to 1-hour horizontal to separate the mercantile from the R use. They are wanting to use the standpipes as their sprinkler risers.

My question is three-fold:
1. Can they sprinkler the entire building with 13R, or
2. Can they omit sprinklers completely in the mercantile if they separate from the R use by 1-hour (the mercantile by itself would not require sprinkler protection,
3. Can they sprinkler the mercantile with 13 and the R use 13R without a rated separation?

I am an AHJ and only wanting to require what the Code requires. I am having trouble deciphering the requirements.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Architect here with a fire code question. We have a fully sprinklered building (ESFR), of Type II-B, tilt concrete construction.

The fire pump room is located on an exterior wall, and the only door into the pump room is from the exterior. We have 1-hr rated construction separating the fire pump room from the rest of the building.

The fire marshal is telling us that the exterior wall and door also have to be rated. I responded by pointing out the fire pump is required to be protected from the surrounding building, and that it does not need to be protected from the exterior, so exterior wall and door should not have to be rated.

Fire marshal disagrees and pointed to NFPA 20 4.14.1.1.2. That section does not specifically state that separation is required from the rest of the building, although Section 4.14.1.1.1 right before it does make that distinction, just like IBC/IFC do.

We have solid concrete walls that are inherently fire rated construction, so typically I would just say ok and label them rated. The issue is we are required to have ventilation in the pump room per NFPA 20, so we have a makeup air louver in the exterior wall. If we rate the wall, then my understanding is we will have to put a fire/smoke damper on that louver, which is added cost and unnecessary in my opinion.

Is your understanding that all walls have to be rated as the fire marshal is saying, or just the walls between pump room and rest of building?

I've done many buildings of this type in multiple states and this is the first time I've been told this. I'd appreciate your insight, thanks.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Four-story office building wants to shut down five large air handlers nightly. Purpose is to lower energy costs when building is unoccupied. This will cause all fire/smoke dampers (FSDs) to close (the smoke detectors in return ducts need minimum operational air velocity).

The FSDs are mostly original from 1985-1988. Only UL tested for 5000 cycles and no dynamic.

I cannot find a code reference to prohibit this and believe that the FSDs are already near the end of their functional lifespan. Many have been replaced due to bad actuators, binding jack shafts and missing blades.

Anyone know of a code reference to prohibit this use or when a FSD must be replaced?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe