|
Are sprinklers required beneath a McDonald's play structure?
On past projects I have designed roof-level sprinkler protection for the play area additions, but we are becoming involved in a government project where there is ceiling level protection and they are requiring protection beneath what are apparently several areas of the play structure that are greater than 4-feet in width. I guess I can't argue that it is not "fixed-in-place." I'm sure most of these planes are higher than 24-inches above the ground, so that exception doesn't apply. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
9 Comments
matt
3/18/2021 09:21:06 am
There is an IBC section that deals directly with children's play structures to avoid having them packed full of sprinklers (don't recall the section offhand)
Anonymous
3/18/2021 11:06:39 am
Thanks, Matt, I'm reading Section 424 now.,,
Mike
3/18/2021 09:50:29 am
Have they thought about a little sprinkler cage isn't going to stop a small child from curiously touching that shiny little glass bulb? The next call you'll get is to remove the sprinklers. lol
matt
3/18/2021 10:37:52 am
I mentioned balancing the risk of fire vs damaged sprinklers/ water discharge/ kids hitting their heads on sprinklers. However, the consulting engineer insisted on full NFPA 13 protection... so that is what they got.
Glenn Berger
3/18/2021 10:36:08 am
The closest that I have come to issue - is the structure that supports the play equipment. The kidde play stuff on grade - no protection to date in any of my projects.
CJ Bonczyk
3/18/2021 11:03:33 am
Many times we have followed the NFPA guidelines of obstructions that state "fixed in place". We usually have the discussion with the GC and owner regarding these items and notify them early on that the AHJ may require additional protection as they see fit. When submittal time comes around we submit to the AHJ/Underwriter with specific information on the drawings about the play structure and whether sprinkler protection has been provided or not and let the AHJ determine if that is acceptable during plan review phase.
Jay
3/18/2021 05:29:37 pm
This may not apply here as it's a "government" project, but in regards to comments about AHJ requirements.....keep in mind that you have the right to appeal decisions of the fire Marshal, building official, etc. The administrative chapter of the model code establishes limitations on authority and a board of appeals. Contrary to popular belief, the ahj cannot make you do something just because they say so. I understand the path of least resistance is to just do what they say, but if what they are requiring causes a substantial additional cost thats not required by the codes or standards or they are insisting that you provide a lower level of protection than what's required (insisting it be designed as a light hazard when its clearly required to be OH2-yes I've had this situation), then I would file an appeal with the board.
Greg
9/7/2022 06:47:01 pm
Section 424 of the IBC specifically answers any questions if the structure is under 300 sq. ft. Anything above that may require an FPR (Fire Protection Report) From the report, the local design review will decide if an AMMR (Alternative Means and Methods Report) is required. This report will determine what steps have to take place to allow the structure. You may find yourself dealing with ASTM1918, ASTM,1354, NFPA13, NFPA289, NFPA701, NFPA253, UL1975, In other words, this is a JTHR report (Jump thru Hoops Report) and a PAOMTEACR report (Pay A lot Of Money To Engineers And Consultants Report) Leave a Reply. |
ALL-ACCESS
SUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop November '24 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
January 2025
PE PREP SERIES |
RSS Feed
