Notwithstanding the subject "6 Story Hotel" reference ???
Table 508 of the 2012 IBC addresses separation of occupancies for both sprinklered and non sprinklered buildings. It is correct that this table only recognizes sprinkler systems pursuant to IBC 903.3.1.1 (NFPA-13) for the purposes of reducing the passive fire separation from 2 hours to 1 Hour. However when addressing Pedestal Buildings, IBC 510 (Special Provisions) applies not 508; IBC 510.1 General. The provisions in Sections 510.2 through 510.9 shall permit the use of special conditions that are exempt from, or modify, the specific requirements of this chapter regarding the allowable building heights and areas of buildings based on the occupancy classification and type of construction, provided the special condition complies with the provisions specified in this section for such condition and other applicable requirements of this code. The provisions of Sections 510.2 through 510.8 are to be considered independent and separate from each other. 510.2 Horizontal building separation allowance. A building shall be considered as separate and distinct buildings for the purpose of determining area limitations, continuity of fire walls, limitation of number of stories and type of construction where all of the following conditions are met: 1. The buildings are separated with a horizontal assembly having a fire-resistance rating of not less than 3 hours. (Theres six more and an exception with three.) So in summary, and again speaking only of the pedestal and not fire separation distances, height, area, standpipes, allowable opening..... Pedestal, Type I construction, NFPA13 under the pedestal, Building on the Pedestal any allowable type of construction (yes wood), NFPA-13R system above the pedestal. Last but not least, and don't forget.... Number of Stories=measured from the pedestal, Height = measured from average grade. Roland, I have a nice powerpoint on this that I am willing to share with AFSA...... one more thing, we have to wait on the adoptions of the 2015 IBC. John John Drucker, CET Assistant Construction Official Fire Protection Subcode Official Building/Fire/Electrical Inspector Borough of Red Bank Red Bank, New Jersey Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Cell/Text: 732-904-6823 -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Friday, August 1, 2014 1:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 6 Story Hotel IT has been awhile since I looked at this but I think you are reading that section out of context. I think there are 2 trade-offs including the reduction of the passive rating that is restricted to the presence of a full 13 system throughout BUT the IBC considers a building protected throughout even when a 13R system is installed. Awaiting input from our code boys and gals. Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives Dallas, TX http://www.firesprinkler.org On Jul 28, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Steele, Andrew <[email protected]> wrote: > There are some other building code (and possibly even insurance risk assessment) issues that are likely to arise when using a NFPA #13R system; a 13R system IS NOT a fully protected building. For example, ICC Table 508 "required separation of occupancies" does not recognize 13R systems, so if the building has or gets multiple uses, it's a "non-sprinkled" building, typically doubling the required separation . > > A. Steele _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
