Excellent point. The State who owned this particular home were going to file a permit to change use from I to R. I must have gone blue in the face trying to stress that we had to follow the code and standard in place at the time of construction because that's how the place was built. This was a replacement and not new construction. They had transferred all wheelchair bound clients to a new complex/neighborhood designed for them and if the construction met current codes for a day care center to meet R3 under this permit they couldn't legally allow them back. At least that was my understanding of things. TD
It is generally prudent to start with the official occupancy classification(s) indicated by the Architect and agreed upon by the Building Official... when determining whether anything less than an NFPA 13 system is allowed. This is because even if the building is within the scope of NFPA 13R, an NFPA 13 system may be required by a building's design due to the Architect designing the building to take credit for IBC exceptions for which only an NFPA 13 system is allowed. There is a very good table in the 2006 IBC Commentary version illustrating "Examples of Requirements Modified Through Use of Automatic Sprinkler Systems" [Figure 903.3.1.1(2)]. It compared NFPA 13/13R/13D and illustrated the differences such as with IBC 506.3 [area increase] which only an NFPA 13 system could give you. It showed other similar "NFPA 13 only" situations for qualification for Rating Reductions such as found in 508.3.3, Table 601, and 708.3. Respectfully, David W. S. Blackwell, II, PE, CFPE, CFI _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
