Omit Drops to "Office Condos" Inside Warehouse?

9/19/2022

We have received a request from an owner of a small office/warehouse (Group S-1) which is approximately 2,000 sqft to omit sprinkler drops into the office buildout portion.

The office buildout portions is about 500 sqft of the total space.

There are existing sprinklers located at the ceiling level throughout the space and 1-hour partitions dividing the space from other owners.

The background: This individual office/warehouse is in an inline building that is separated into multiple office/warehouse spaces, all individually owned as "office condos". The overall building (approximately 14,000 sqft) was provided with a sprinkler system throughout as it was unknown how the building was going to be divided in the future for the individual spaces. The ownership closing documents and the "condo" association that controls the building have no comments or requirements for the individual owners regarding the installation of dropped sprinkler heads into built-out areas.

Since the individual office/warehouse space is per code (2015 IFC) too small to require a sprinkler system and the existing sprinkler overhead system is already in place providing protection for the space, is it OK for the owner to omit the drops into the small office area if not required by code?

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

15 Comments

Pete H

9/19/2022 07:36:13 am

Seems like it should be. An area not required to be protected by a sprinkler system is not required to be protected by a sprinkler system. But ultimately, if any AHJ is reviewing or overseeing this, it's their call.

Marc V

9/21/2022 04:05:56 pm

WRONG.

A building that requires automatic fire suppression under the IBC requires it throughout the building, unless it's a different fire area, separated with fire area separation walls. Which this definitely does not as it is entirely within the warehouse.

Jesse

9/19/2022 08:07:39 am

It is not ok.

Effectively, the office buildout is creating a contiguous obstruction to ceiling level sprinklers. A fire in the office area will spread laterally unchecked until it auto-ventilates the office area into the greater building. The likelihood of it then overwhelming the existing system is very high.

There is nothing in NFPA 13 that would allow you omit protection in the office.

Ralph Giro

9/19/2022 08:09:09 am

Codes are minimum requirements. My opinion. If no ceiling or obstructions in the office area, then no. If drop ceilings or obstructions, then heads are required below like if it was a cloud.

Alex

9/19/2022 08:12:19 am

I personally would need more information before making that call. In MA, with exceptions, buildings over 7,500 sq.ft. require sprinklers. Is that fire wall constructed as to make separate buildings OR constructed for mixed use? You will need to review the original drawings.

In the end, if there is a sprinkler system there, modify and use it! Everyone knows that they save lives and protect property.

Alex

schulman

9/19/2022 08:21:09 am

unless these condos are open to above with no ceilings ... no.

Franck

9/19/2022 08:24:29 am

There are several reasons asking to provide sprinklers inside.

First, the obstruction issue. Any obstruction larger than 4 ft should be protected underneath. Unless your offices are less than 4 ft large, it should be protected.

Second: the end result. Normally a sprinkler system is aimed to control a fire, under the postulate that the fire starts at an original point and spread in all directions based on the expected combustible load. In normal conditions, you start opening one sprinkler, then 2, 3, 4... while the fire is spreading, and expecting to control the fire on a limited surface (at wordt, the design area...).
Now, if the fire starts in the offices, it can spread over 500 sq ft without fire control, which roughly corresponds to the coverage from at least 5 sprinklers at the ceiling level in the warehouse. When the fire breaks out of the office, you will involve immediately more that 5 sprinklers at the ceiling level (the ones above the offices and the peripherial ones). You can soon overtax your sprinkler protection if storage is present close to the offices area.

We had a very simple rule of thumb in my previous Insurance company. If the office was less than 100 sq ft (footprint of one sprinkler), then sprinkler protection inside could be omtted if the combustible load was negligible. In all other cases, sprinklers were recommended.

One practical comment: if the sprinkler protection is a dry system (not so uncommon for warehouses), don't forget that you are not allowed to provide pendent sprinklers in the offices!

Another practical comment for offices that may move frequently inside the building: provide a sectional valve (supervised) for the office protection. When you need to move the offices (and then remove temporary the sprinklers), you can isolate the valve for the office, without impairing the entire warehouse protection.

Glenn Berger

9/19/2022 08:42:03 am

Sprinklers are required in the office spaces below the roof level.

Dan Wilder

9/19/2022 08:42:57 am

If the building was provided sprinklers when built (under the assumption it is considered "Fully Sprinklered"), any modifications need to continue with that "Fully Sprinklered" requirement.

Even if the CC&R's did have a mention of not requiring sprinkler protection, it would be unenforceable due to the IBC/IFC being the primary enforceable laws of that jurisdiction. If the CC&R's were more restrictive, they allow that, but those cannot be less restrictive. If these are written in a HOA by-laws, they carry even less enforceable weight.

I'm not fully versed on the IBC side of things, but I thought ancillary use areas were limited to 10% of the area (Section 509)? Even with that, the requirements for ancillary spaces would probably be more expensive than just putting in sprinklers.

Todd E Wyatt

9/19/2022 08:58:05 am

The scoping Code that requires an automatic sprinkler system (ASPS) in a building is the adopted Building Code, typically the IBC. The referenced standard (e.g. NFPA 13) identifies the design, installation, inspection and maintenance requirements for the ASPS, where required by the scoping Code (IBC), but the standard does not determine WHERE an ASPS is required, the IBC does that.

The project described is an Alteration to an Existing Building so the International Existing Building Code (IEBC) shall also be required to be reviewed.

The IBC requires ASPS based on the Occupancy Classifications (OC) of the Project. Group B Business is not required by IBC 903.2 to be protected by a ASPS. The initial design of the building may have included an ASPS to meet other Code requirements (e.g. increased allowable area, increased travel distances) so revising the building from a fully protected building by a compliant ASPS to a building that is partially protected may not be permittable.

Casey Milhorn

9/19/2022 10:16:13 am

I think Dan and Todd pretty much nailed it. If the building was originally required to have a sprinkler system then it needs to remain and modified to fit all modifications (architect may have taken some trade offs with including the sprinkler system). Unless you have the original code review/life safety drawing and analysis, it's hard to say what the architect has done for trade offs or if the system was optional. It's safe to say the system was probably required originally, and not provided as an optional system. For the building to be considered fully sprinklered it must meet NFPA 13 requirements.

Gregg Peterson

9/19/2022 10:46:21 am

Thank you to everyone for all of the thoughtful insight. Your contributions are what makes this the "go-to" fire code resource for us. I agree with the majority of the commentators that since the building was originally provided with a sprinkler system, it needs to remain and be modified as needed for any additional hazards or build-outs. All of the other office/warehouse spaces have complied and have provided the additional drops into the built-out spaces. We were just getting push-back from this one owner with this interesting request. They provided no other documentation to prove why they thought they could avoid the install other than it being a budget issue.

Eric R

9/19/2022 12:50:42 pm

Late to the party today, but wanted to add that another facet of this issue worth mentioning isn't a code or engineering one, but a legal one with regard to condo associations and their bylaws.

Sprinkler systems are generally considered "limited common building elements". Where the owner is required to pay to upkeep the portion of the element in their unit, but the overall ownership of the element belongs to the association. If this is a newer building then I'd imagine the bylaws follow a relatively modern template which should spell out that any modifications to limited common elements need to be done to code/approved by the condo board. So even if the AHJ did allow it for some reason the unit owner likely doesn't even have the legal authority to ask for such a variance.

Doesn't really effect the answers already given, but food for thought as in some niche circumstances contractors can get themselves in hot water for performing work on a system without proper authorization.

Dwight H Havens

9/20/2022 12:12:14 pm

I'm not sure how they get to the statement that automatic fire sprinklers are not required in small office buildouts. Can someone walk through the code path that might even allow it.

G Peterson

9/22/2022 10:21:57 am

Dwight,
I think they were going down the path of just considering their "space" in the overall strip center. As it is under the square footage requirements for a sprinkler system, I think they just got tunnel vision by focusing on their space alone and were not thinking of the overall building protection already provided by the overhead sprinklers. It was an interesting argument, but as the other commentators have shown, holds "no water" (pun intended)!

Omit Drops to "Office Condos" Inside Warehouse?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES