Fire Wall or Fire Barrier to Avoid Spr. Retrofit?

I have a project under the 2015 International Codes that is building onto an existing fitness center/gym. The existing building has an A-3 occupancy under 12,000 SF, but an occupant load over 300 people. The total fire area of this existing building is 22,300 SF. Also, the building is not sprinklered.

There is a new building going directly next to the existing building that will connect the two (they share a wall).

The new building is an aquatic center (pool and splashpad) with an A-3 occupancy under 12,000 SF, but an occupant load over 300 people. The total fire area of this new building is 13,000 SF.

The architect was originally trying to see if sprinklers could be removed from the scope (since there are none in the existing building), but based on the occupancy and square footage of the new building, sprinklers will be required (IBC 903.2.1.3). Since sprinklers are required in the new building, the architect is trying to determine what type of separation is required at the two buildings (fire partition, fire barrier, or fire wall) to avoid requiring retrofitting sprinklers in the existing building.

My take on it was to provide a "Fire Wall" to completely separate the buildings and not calling the existing plus new spaces a "single building" which could push us into requiring sprinklers throughout the existing building.

In addition, IBC 903.2.1 indicates that sprinklers "shall be provided throughout buildings and portions thereof used as Group A occupancies provided in this section" and sprinklers "shall be provided throughout the story where the fire area containing Group A-1, A-2, A-3, or A-4 is located and throughout all stories from the Group A occupancy to, and including, the levels of exit discharge serving the Group A occupancy." I then looked at the commentary on Group A-3 occupancies (903.2.1.3) which stated "an automatic sprinkler system is required throughout the fire area containing the Group A-3 occupancy, including the entire story where the Group A-3 occupancy is located..."

Based on 903.2.1 and the commentary on 903.2.1.3 it sounds like anything less than a "fire wall" used to completely separate the buildings, we would need to sprinkler the entire floor that the A-3 occupancy exists including the adjacent building since the are connected and share a wall. The architect's code consultant said I was wrong and that sprinklers are only required within the "fire area" and a "fire barrier" is sufficient.

In addition, IBC 903.1.1 indicates that if the code requires a building to be sprinklered then they are to be provided throughout. NFPA 13 (2019) also indicates that if a building is protected by a sprinkler system, then sprinklers are to be provided in all areas except for omissions indicated in the standard. I brought up this NFPA requirement and the code consultant said I was also wrong with this and that sprinklers are only limited to fire areas and aren't required to be installed throughout the building.

​I would appreciate any thoughts on this, thank you.

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