# fire code vrs historic district



## BSSTG (Sep 23, 2010)

Greetings all,

I am catching some grief for requiring exit signs to be installed in some of the older stores in the historic district when there is a change of occupancy. I'm not referring to a change in occupancy classification neccessarily but it can be that, or, just a change from Group M to a new business which may be another Group M.

Of course the guy arguing is an ex state senator, attorney and has way too much time on his hands. Imagine that.

I typically confide in a bud who is a MCP and agrees with me that egress components are not something that are grandfathered. I'm not asking anybody to rip the building down and start over. That said, this attorney may have a bit of an argument after I read 102.5 of the '06 IFC which deals with historic buildings and which we have adopted. The issue I see would be if the fire code was negated in the historic district to any degree it would have to be across the board which in my mind could be a danged disaster. And if you don't adhere to it, how do you regulate what goes on?

102.5 last sentence says "Fire protection in designated historic buildings and structures shall be provided in accordance with an approved fire protection plan" So what the heck does that mean?

Of course of all the occupancy inspections I've done in the historic district nobody has ever balked at putting up exit lights until I ran into this guy. That includes another attorney I might add.

Our city attorney told me awhile back when I talked to him about this case said "expletive him. He's never beat me in court anyway"

Every day is a new day!

thanks

Byron


----------



## brudgers (Sep 23, 2010)

I'd say an approved fire protection plan would something that the fire marshal approves.

And I'd say a licensed fire protection engineer would be the person to prepare it.

And since I'm all about presenting options, that's the one I would present to the attorney.


----------



## cda (Sep 24, 2010)

I guess what does fire protection have to do with an exit sign, would require the sign if needed per code


----------



## Mac (Sep 24, 2010)

Is it really a change of use or occupancy for another "M" tenant to move in?

I'd stick to business with this guy. First, offer assistance to get an approvable fire protection plan in place. During the course of developing the FP plan, the owner & tenant will learn a few things and maybe come around to 'voluntary compliance'.  Then you have a success that can be used the next time - you can say 'Mr Bigshot's building complies, and so can yours.'

Or turn it over to the legal dept, stand back & watch the fun!


----------



## BSSTG (Sep 24, 2010)

Good Morning all,

Bear in mind with this case. I am the only inspector licensed for fire inspections. We have no full time fire marshall. Also, If I'm not mistaken chapters 9 and 10 in the IBC are also copied in the IFC verbatim. Therefore, with the adoption of the fire code both the fire and building guys overlap. The only difference with egress is how the 2 codes are handled adminstratively in this regard IMHO.  In the locales where I've worked, egress components and such are normally inspected by the fire inspector. But then again, I am both building and fire inspector as well as several other hats too.

Byron


----------



## Frank (Sep 24, 2010)

A few questions--

Are these stores small enough that they could be single exist spaces?--roughly 1500 sq ft sales area IF so exit signs not required

Are the exit(s) obviously and clearly identifiable as exits without signs? see 2009 IFC 1011.1 exception 2


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 24, 2010)

102.5 Historic buildings.

The provisions of this code relating to the construction, alteration, repair, enlargement, restoration, relocation or moving of buildings or structures shall not be mandatory for existing buildings or structures identified and classified by the state or local jurisdiction as historic buildings when such buildings or structures do not constitute a distinct hazard to life or property. Fire protection in designated historic buildings and structures shall be provided in accordance with an approved fire protection plan.

102.5 has nothing to do with the placement of exit signs and a fire protection plan would include items found in a fire protection system not exit signs. You should be looking at Section 1027 for your exit requirements in an existing building


----------



## brudgers (Sep 24, 2010)

BSSTG said:
			
		

> Good Morning all,Bear in mind with this case. I am the only inspector licensed for fire inspections. We have no full time fire marshall. Also, If I'm not mistaken chapters 9 and 10 in the IBC are also copied in the IFC verbatim. Therefore, with the adoption of the fire code both the fire and building guys overlap. The only difference with egress is how the 2 codes are handled adminstratively in this regard IMHO.  In the locales where I've worked, egress components and such are normally inspected by the fire inspector. But then again, I am both building and fire inspector as well as several other hats too.
> 
> Byron


Give them options, comply with the code or provide an alternative which provides equal or greater life safety.

Standard fire safety engineering will be fine.

Let them know that all you really need is the calculations showing that what they are proposing provides equivalent or greater life safety.

Pretend this sort of thing happens all the time.


----------



## Mac (Sep 24, 2010)

Maybe all you need to use is 1028 - Means of Egress for Existing Buildings.


----------



## BSSTG (Sep 24, 2010)

thanks! I realize that 1027 of the fire code is applicable now. I did know that particular section was in there and deals specifically with existing buildings although I should have!

You know it's really great to be able to get different perspectives via the internet from folks all over. Here where I'm at I have no resourses available within our organization to discuss building code and fire code issues. It makes for some real challenges on a daily basis.

Hence my motto "too many codes, too few brain cells"

thanks

Byron


----------



## BSSTG (Oct 4, 2010)

Greetings

Well we had round 1 in court the other day. The attorney/retired politician has decided he wants to go to city council and go for a variance. I'm glad actually. We shall see how the powers that be want to attempt to protect their valued historic district's tenants and customers. The city attorney has filled me in on what I need to get for him in the way of code references and such. I've also got the local fire chief on board for backup. He's pretty concerned about this too since their worst case nightmare is in the historic district. I don't normally relish going to city council meetings but I'm looking forward to this.

Will post updates as they happen.

Byron


----------



## mtlogcabin (Oct 4, 2010)

Don't forget to have this in your back pocket when he starts talking about the cost to hardwire all the signs and how it will affect the historic appearance of the building.

http://www.theexitstore.com/self-illuminating-exit-signs.html

Good luck


----------



## FM William Burns (Oct 4, 2010)

Also an alternative method acceptable and used in many applications such as exampled: (near and dear to my heart)

http://www.theexitstore.com/photoluminescent-exit-signs.html

http://www.clarionsafety.com/exit-signs/


----------



## JBI (Oct 4, 2010)

Existing lighting could be modified to work as emergency lighting, and could easily provide the required minimum illumination of a non-wired style-appropriate sign above the door(s).


----------

