# Outdoor sprinklers



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 8, 2011)

903.2.1.2 The open roof deck with dining and a bar is considered a 2nd floor but not a fire area by definition, it does the building need to be sprinklered?

Seems odd to me that there can be a first floor and a basement each with a level of discharge totaling 4,850 sf with a roof deck area of approximate 2300 sf and not require a sprinkler.


----------



## cda (Mar 8, 2011)

What code and edition??

What is the occupancy type of the basement and 1st floor


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 9, 2011)

Currently 2006 IBC; A2 restaurant - not a night club. Existing 3B construction change of occupancy.

Sorry, I left that information out when I edited my original post.  I found the answer in the definition of fire area is not the same as aggregate floor area.  This should explain why the my title does not fit the subject.


----------



## cda (Mar 9, 2011)

Sounds like the area should be included

What is the total occupant load for the entire building????


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

903.2.1.2 required where the fire area is located on a floor other than exit discharge.....???  I say yes... I see what you mean about the definition....but...an open parking garage may not have "walls"....does that mean it does not have a fire area?


----------



## permitguy (Mar 9, 2011)

It sounds like the building (basement and first floor) would require sprinklers based on occupant load (given the size, occ load for an A-2 will be >100).  The roof deck would not be considered a fire area since it is not enclosed and bounded, and would not require sprinklers.  All other code requirements would apply to the roof deck, including means of egress and fire alarm notification on water flow.


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

I've got occ load of 300 or more kicks it in for A-2.....still not comfortable with "enclosed and bounded" ....if you can't walk off the roof......what are you...?  Good debate!


----------



## cda (Mar 9, 2011)

What is the normal ruling, if you have a patio attached to a first floor restaurant, where the patio has to exit back into the building??

The occupant load is figured in, along with the added exiting factor

But you would not figure the sq ft of the patio in regards to sprinkler requirements???


----------



## FM William Burns (Mar 9, 2011)

canopy = sprinkle

open air = no sprinkle

OL = >100 sprinkle entire A2 (factoring above)

I'm with permit on this one!


----------



## TJacobs (Mar 9, 2011)

FM William Burns said:
			
		

> canopy = sprinkleopen air = no sprinkle
> 
> OL = >100 sprinkle entire A2 (factoring above)
> 
> I'm with permit on this one!


I agree with this analysis!


----------



## permitguy (Mar 9, 2011)

> still not comfortable with "enclosed and bounded" ....if you can't walk off the roof......what are you...?


In regards to fire area (Ch. 9), it is a matter of fire progression in a compartment and the products of combustion remaining trapped in that compartment.  The ability of the occupants to egress is a separate matter covered by Ch. 10.

Given your parking garage example, it is the difference between "open" and "enclosed" that drives the requirement for sprinklers (903.2.10).  It's the same logic - fire progression in an enclosed garage is much different in terms of trapping products of combustion and initiating the operation of sprinklers.


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

FMWB....where does the 100 OL come from? My CT code 2003 IBC based w/ 05 & 09 amendments says 300...

If it is not a fire area above the level of exit dicharge, it is also not a fire area with 300 or more people.....

903.2.1.2 Group A-2. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies where

one of the following conditions exists:

1. The fire area exceeds 5,000 square feet (464.5 m2).

2. The fire area has an occupant load of 300 or more.

3. The fire area is located on a floor other than the level of exit discharge.

Sooooooo......I could have a 1000 occupant load roof egressing through a 299 occ load restaraunt w/ no sprinklers?  Or am I missing something? I haven't spent a ton of time on this...just thinkin worst case scenario and kinda spitballing...


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

Thanks PG!  I kinda figure something like that, but I don't have a history on the fire side...still sort of strange...but...How many tables with umbrellas equal a canopy?


----------



## permitguy (Mar 9, 2011)

The '06 lowered the number to 100, where it remains today.  This was largely a result of the Station Night Club fire.  CT probably didn't include that in their amendments.  If the roof occupants are forced to egress through the 1st floor fire area, you could make the case that their numbers should be included towards the sprinkler requirement.

Regarding the tables/umbrellas:  while they may contribute to the fuel package, they don't create an effective compartment to contribute to fire growth beyond their own combustion.  They also won't create an effective ceiling to cause sprinkler activation.  They just aren't a like comparison to a permanently constructed canopy.  As stated before, I'd be paying careful attention to the layout in accordance with Ch. 10, both on initial inspection and subsequent fire inspections.


----------



## FM William Burns (Mar 9, 2011)

SR,



> FMWB....where does the 100 OL come from? My CT code 2003 IBC based w/ 05 & 09 amendments says 300...


OP'er said 06 IBC A-2 so......

903.2.1.2 Group A-2. [F]

An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies where one of the following conditions exists:

1. The fire area exceeds 5,000 square feet (465 m2);

2. The fire area has an occupant load of *100* or more; or......

Also same in NFPA 1/101 and "Permit" is correct it's due to reactions from the RI event.


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

FV...hope you got your answer....

Everyone else....thank you for the discussion....and food for thought...

PG...I would certainly try to argue the occupant load issue, but is there any real code path that addresses the 1000 people on the roof egressing through the 99 (in states other than ct) person space? If the roof does not fall under the definition of a fire area?   And does anyone see that as a problem, or is the likelyhood that low?

Thanks!


----------



## permitguy (Mar 9, 2011)

Maybe this (I can see where it could cause debate):

1004.1 Design occupant load. In determining means of egress requirements, the number of occupants for whom means of egress facilities shall be provided shall be determined in accordance with this section. *Where occupants from accessory areas egress through a primary space, the calculated occupant load for the primary space shall include the total occupant load of the primary space plus the number of occupants egressing through it from the accessory area.*


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 9, 2011)

Permitguy touch on the interpretation of my concern; what is the fire area?

2006; Fire Area. The aggregate floor area enclosed and bounded by fire walls, fire barriers, exterior walls or fire-resistance-rated horizontal assemblies of a building.

2009; Fire Area. The aggregate floor area enclosed and bounded by fire walls, fire barriers, exterior walls or horizontal assemblies of a building. Areas of the building not provided with surrounding walls shall be included in the fire area if such area are included within the horizontal projection of the roof or floor next above.

If the roof floor (a story above) is not enclosed within the building exterior walls or separated by fire barriers or rated horizontal projection above or below then is not a fire area? The key is whether it's enclosed, not within boundary of the building perimeter?

If they put bathrooms up there then the sprinkler requirement kicks in because they’re enclosed within exterior walls. But they can put a combustible roof or canopy overhead; or a tent; no sprinkler required. 

What if the bathrooms where enclosed in glass, are they walls or complete openings?

http://www.snopes.com/photos/arts/toilet.asp


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

FV.....seems that if you just put "partitions" up there, and not exterior walls.....you are good.....


----------



## permitguy (Mar 9, 2011)

Just because the canopy doesn't contribute to the fire area doesn't mean you don't have to sprinkler it.  Section 903.2.1 says "An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings and portions thereof used as Group A occupancies as provided in this section."  When you exceed the allowable fire area/occ load/exit discharge requirement for A-2, you must sprinkler throughout in accordance with NFPA 13.  That will require you to sprinkler the roof canopy - you can't get away with omitting the roof canopy because it didn't contribute to "fire area."

Tents?  Those are heavily regulated by other sections of the code.  You'd have a very difficult time finding a way to justify one on the roof from a code perspective in this example.

Glass?  It's still an exterior wall by definition, no?


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 9, 2011)

Okay I see where I'm wrong about the canopy and roof, it doesn't matter if it's rated, same as the ceiling assembly over the first floor.

The roof deck is an aggregate floor area, and therefor makes it a floor level above the exit level of discharge. But floor as a fire area doesn't seem to fit by definition being bounded by rated assemblies or exterior walls as for fire area separations.

Then my question is how can you sprinkler an open roof deck?

This was my original question before I change my mind and deleted it.

steveray thanks for pointing that out, you're better than me  

permitguy I'm familiar as glass being a noncombustible wall coverring or filling an opening in the wall, but not a wall.


----------



## cda (Mar 9, 2011)

You do not have to sprinkle the patio unless an overhang or something else that would require sprinklers

But you would sprinkle the rest of the building!!!!!!!!


----------



## FM William Burns (Mar 9, 2011)

Deleted...re-read.

The open roof would not be required provided the path of egress interior serving the OL of the roof (added to the total OL...BTW) was sprinkled in addition of the remainder of the A-2 with an OL >100 combined.

And what Cda said


----------



## steveray (Mar 9, 2011)

Exterior wall by definition acts as enclosure....so...no roof...no enclosure...no fire area.......here is your 1000 seat restaurant on the roof of an unsprinklered pizza shop!....and it can't be an exterior wall if it doesn't meet the IECC right?


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 9, 2011)

So now the restaurant is sprinklered except the open roof, do they get sprinklered reduction on the roof for the exit access per 1015.2.1?

Not that it makes any difference but this building has fire lane access on two sides allowing it unlimited openings. Crazy!

steveray I think you're technically correct as far as IECC, but the thermal envelope doesn't necessarily have to be at the exterior boundaries. In both cases the definition is not perfect.


----------



## permitguy (Mar 10, 2011)

> So now the restaurant is sprinklered except the open roof, do they get sprinklered reduction on the roof for the exit access per 1015.2.1?


I don't think this situation falls within the intent of that section.



> permitguy I'm familiar as glass being a noncombustible wall coverring or filling an opening in the wall, but not a wall.


Many office buildings utilize glass as an exterior curtain wall, attaching them to the structural frame with brackets and concealing gaps with trim pieces.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 10, 2011)

Since the open roof deck is not sprinklered, (though not impossible); the roof assemble has to be 2 hr. rated per 706.3.9 to separate the fire areas?

This may be where I missed connecting the dots? I appreciate this very much helping me (us!) make sense of all these unique situations.


----------



## cda (Mar 10, 2011)

A building is considered fully sprinkled if the system meets nfpa 13, with sprinklers excluded as per 13

Which would in your case not require sprinkler protection for the patio, unless there is some feature, such as a canopy, covered bar, that might kick in sprinkler protection


----------



## steveray (Mar 10, 2011)

FV...if it is not a fire area by definition....it does not need to be separated....and if we are saying that only a roof can make something "enclosed" and a fire area.....build all of the "partitions" you want....

EXTERIOR WALL. A wall, bearing or nonbearing, that is used as an enclosing wall for a building, other than a fire wall, and that has a slope of 60 degrees (1.05 rad) or greater with the horizontal plane.


----------



## permitguy (Mar 10, 2011)

> Since the open roof deck is not sprinklered, (though not impossible); the roof assemble has to be 2 hr. rated per 706.3.9 to separate the fire areas?


The roof is not a fire area, so there is no need to separate it.

You create separate fire areas to eliminate the requirement for sprinklers.  For instance, a 20,000 square foot S-1 building would require sprinklers if it is all one fire area (903.2.9).  Throw a fire barrier down the middle, and you've created two fire areas, 10,000 square feet each, and no sprinklers are required.


----------



## FM William Burns (Mar 10, 2011)

Hey, we could always recommend outdoor showers..........please make my reservations for 3  

Francis, glad you got what you needed now go visit some of those great wineries in the area I like Black Dog  

BTW............



> Throw a fire barrier down the middle, and you've created two fire areas


I hate when they do that!


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 10, 2011)

Thank you FMWB, 



It’s been a long week, and I’m leaving early today, think I hear Horton calling me, Horton winery J


----------



## cda (Mar 10, 2011)

Yea make code decisions while you are drinking!!!!!


----------



## FM William Burns (Mar 10, 2011)

Often I'll sit back and notice that some of my best work is done while enjoying the fine.........oh sorry wrong forum


----------

