|
Our jurisdiction has received plans for an addition/remodel of two different occupancy types.
The larger I-1 Condition 2 occupancy will not be undergoing remodeling and currently has a full NFPA 13 system; however, the R-4 occupancy will undergo a complete overhaul. The R-4 will also be added to accommodate a new activities room and additional sleeping units; it will remain an R-4 based on the number of occupants. The design team has drawn an independent 2-hour fire barrier between the two occupancies in the corridor connecting the two buildings. My question is, does the entire building (I-1 and R-4) now have to be served by an NFPA 13 system since they are connected regardless of the fire wall, or would they be allowed to install an NFPA 13R system in the R-4 occupancy? Also, does this now make the entire building an I-Occupancy regardless of the fire wall/barrier? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
11 Comments
Rick
6/9/2026 08:17:45 am
To answer that, we need to know if the governing jurisdiction (state or local) has adopted a version of the Existing Building Code and if so what edits were done to that code when adopted. There are too many variables without that baseline.
Reply
OP
6/9/2026 12:56:49 pm
We are under the 2018 ICC codes with no amendments.
Reply
anthony
6/9/2026 08:33:19 am
I think you're in Section 420 as 508 directs the user there per ICC 2024. That is where I'd start. there are too many specific use cases listed in 420 to say which applies to this specific case.
Reply
Todd E Wyatt
6/9/2026 08:40:28 am
I agree with Rick regarding the adopted IEBC & IBC editions. The Level of Alteration (Level 1, 2, or 3) per the IEBC will need to be reviewed as well to determine which portions shall meet IEBC vs IBC. The “addition” is considered a New Building and will be required to meet the IBC.
Reply
Todd E Wyatt
6/9/2026 08:40:56 am
REFERENCE
Reply
henry
6/9/2026 08:42:14 am
If the buildings are separated by a TRUE fire wall then I would accept the change in systems per the IBC a true fire wall creates separate buildings.
Reply
Robert
6/9/2026 08:58:01 am
If the fire barrier goes to deck or fire wall passes the roof this would be considered two separate fire areas and each occupant classification type can be designed with the appropriate fire sprinkler design for each per IFC 2018 sec 903
Reply
Glenn Berger
6/9/2026 08:59:18 am
Need to know the applicable codes / jurisdiction. Need to have a better understanding of the existing conditions. Need to see a code analysis of the before and proposed after conditions. Need to know if the you have a fire barrier / fire partition / or a fire wall.
Reply
Brett
6/9/2026 09:15:53 am
I don't have much to add to the other comments. I think it's worth pointing out that OP has used "fire barrier" and "fire wall" interchangeably. They are two different things in the building code.
Reply
OP
6/9/2026 01:02:46 pm
At first our office was even unsure, now they have redrawn the wall as a Fire Wall. They also extended the fire rated wood into the decking, fascia, and soffits around the wall
Reply
Jack G
6/9/2026 08:54:07 pm
13 r is not permitted if there were area increases.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
ALL-ACCESSSUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop June '26 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
July 2026
PE PREP SERIES |
RSS Feed
