It's certain that the NFPA 13D TC does not think it should be applied
by just looking at the scope. The ICC is the one that expanded it
application. The amusing part is that it is not restricted to "small"
group homes. There are no restrictions at all so for type II
construction, it can be 4 stories and 19,000 sf per floor. Ain't that
a kick in the head.
It wasn't until the 2012 edition of the IBC that it's required to have
a hydraulic design sign on the riser, electrical supervision, and ITM
as if it were a 13R system.
Roland
On May 9, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Ron Greenman wrote:
If you look at the title of the document it says one and two family
dwellings. That I believe is presuming one or two nuclear families
under
one roof. A group home does not really fit that definition and
should be at
least a 13R. That said many jurisdictions allow 13D for small group
home
type occupancies. If that's the case I would presume they allow the
office
to also fall under 13D as just another occupied space as the elusive
IPA
suggested. Not being on the committee I certainly can't speak to
intent but
nothing about 13D suggests to me that it was ever intended to be
used for
group homes despite it happening.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20120509/1b9869bd/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
