# Do commercial kitchens require smoke detectors?



## Yikes

Dumb Architect question:

In a commercial kitchen, cooking appliances hare equipped with hoods with extinguishing systems (Ansul, etc.), interconnected to the fire alarm system per NFPA 96.

But does NFPA 72 also require additional smoke detectors in the kitchen itself, just like any other space?

I tried to read NFPA 72 for guidance, but all I could find was reference to residential kitchens, where a minimum distance from cooking appliances is recommended to avoid nuisance alarms.

Is there any specific exceptions for commercial kitchens?


----------



## Gregg Harris

Take a look at NFPA 101 for heat detection in lieu of smoke in kitchens


----------



## Yikes

Gregg, what is happening is that the fire inspector is asking for detection devices, but the fire dept. plan checker is saying they aren't required.  I'm trying to get a sense of what the code says so that I can talk to the inspector without trying to pit the field staff against the office staff.


----------



## cda

should not be required

what building and fire code is this designed to?? including addition

you start with the building/ fire code to see when and where they are required.

NFPA 72 tells you how to install them


----------



## JBI

Yikes, Have the Fire Inspector quote the Code section that requires them and go from there.

Office staff should make sure required items are shown on the plans, field staff should insure that what is on the plans gets installed properly.

Perhaps your field inspector wants a desk job?


----------



## cda

JBI said:
			
		

> Yikes, Have the Fire Inspector quote the Code section that requires them and go from there. Office staff should make sure required items are shown on the plans, field staff should insure that what is on the plans gets installed properly.
> 
> Perhaps your field inspector wants a desk job?


Agree, behind, plan checker may miss something or things might change in the field


----------



## Yikes

One of the frustrating things - - and I may start a separate thread on this - - is that during the Fire Dept. annual inspection, the Fire Dept. field inspector simply take the new fire code, uses general references (not chapter 11), and cites it on buildings regardless of their age. The burden of proof of compliance then shifts back to the Owner, to prove why the 2013 code shouldn't apply ex post facto.

One example is that they required a second exit to be added to a 1970's era room, based on the occupant load exceeding 50.  However, in the 1970 code, second exits were only required when occupant load exceeded 100.

My opinion is: If the building went through plan check, permit, and C of O in 1970, then the only fire code citations should either be the current chapter 11 ("Existing Structures" int he California Fire Code), OR the inspector does their homework and cites the correct code from 1970 if they think something was missed back then.


----------



## cda

O



			
				Yikes said:
			
		

> One of the frustrating things - - and I may start a separate thread on this - - is that during the Fire Dept. annual inspection, the Fire Dept. field inspector simply take the new fire code, uses general references (not chapter 11), and cites it on buildings regardless of their age. The burden of proof of compliance then shifts back to the Owner, to prove why the 2013 code shouldn't apply ex post factne example is that they required a second exit to be added to a 1970's era room, based on the occupant load exceeding 50.  However, in the 1970 code, second exits were only required when occupant load exceeded 100.
> 
> My opinion is: If the building went through plan check, permit, and C of O in 1970, then the only fire code citations should either be the current chapter 11 ("Existing Structures" int he California Fire Code), OR the inspector does their homework and cites the correct code from 1970 if they think something was missed back then.


Agree with most of your points

If the city can articulate there is a "distinct fire hazard" which is undefined, retro requirements can be applied.

Is the inspector the only one in his office?? Or does he have a boss

Sounds like if it was me I would be starting up the chain till I get to someone that has sense


----------

