This project specifically references our Building Code and not Residential Code.

The garage is a shared garage and is spelled out as a P-2 classification.

I believe I've got this figured out. I'll post all my code references on Monday.



⁣John Irwin 
DynaFire Inc. 
Tampa Fire Sprinkler Division 
727-282-9243 

This email was sent from a mobile device. Please forgive brevity, typographical 
errors, and grammatical gaffes.​

On Feb 9, 2018, 8:22 PM, at 8:22 PM, Steve Leyton <st...@protectiondesign.com> 
wrote:
>Your code classifies duplexes as multi-family and the attached garages
>as parking structures?  Methinks you’re applying the building code to a
>building that’s governed by the Residential Code.   Or does Florida
>amend the IBC in that regard?    Private garages that are accessible
>from the dwelling unit are considered part of the dwelling unit in both
>the IBC and IRC, in both single and multi-family housing formats.   The
>IRC and NFPA 13D except the garage from fire sprinkler protection, but
>neither excludes closets, especially if they contain heat-producing
>equipment.   The standard doesn’t speak to WHERE the closets are,
>except for exterior closets that are excepted because they aren’t
>conditioned and are subject to freezing.
>
>For whatever it’s worth, the requirement to sprinkler garages isn’t
>enforced by “some AHJ’s”; it’s in our amended code and is mandatory
>statewide.   This was a favorable trade we made with homebuilding
>industry stakeholders – in exchange, you don’t have to use more
>expensive Type X drywall unless there’s living space above, and then
>it’s the lid only.   Also, the door between the house and garage
>doesn’t have to be fire rated, so the overall cost savings in building
>materials pays for the added sprinklers in the typical 2-car garage.
>
>[Steve Signature (3)]
>
>From: Sprinklerforum
>[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
>John Irwin
>Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 1:23 PM
>To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>Subject: Re: Abuse of 13D?
>
>More information :
>Code analysis says the residential area are R-2 and the Parking level
>is S-2. The Florida Building Code seems to indicate S-2 as a public
>parking garage and when enclosed (which this is) requires protection.
>Additionally S occupencies located below any other type of occupied
>space seem to require sprinkler protection.
>I do believe that the Florida Building Code does allow for the living
>floors to be protected per NFPA 13D though.
>So if this is the case, the sprinkler system in the garage would over
>ride some 13D omissions like monitoring and an FDC.
>Agreed?
>John Irwin
>DynaFire Inc.
>Tampa Fire Sprinkler Division
>727-282-9243
>This email was sent from a mobile device. Please forgive brevity,
>typographical errors, and grammatical gaffes.
>On Feb 9, 2018, at 3:13 PM, Parsley Consulting
><parsleyconsult...@cox.net<mailto:parsleyconsult...@cox.net>> wrote:
>I'm not sure the reference to 8.3.8 would apply.
>
>First, John mentioned he was working with the 2010 edition of 13D. That
>edition doesn't contain this language.
>
>Second, if John were working with the '16 edition then 8.3.8 would not
>apply in my opinion as the "storage areas" are not exterior, and are
>only accessed from inside a portion of the dwelling unit.
>
>just my thoughts,
>Ken Wagoner, SET
>Parsley Consulting
>350 West 9th Avenue, Suite 206
>Escondido, California 92025
>Phone 760-745-6181
>Visit the website<http://www.parsleyconsulting.com/>
>On 02/09/2018 11:56 AM, Fire Design wrote:
>If it's a 13D system then:
>13D 8.3.8    Sprinklers shall not be required in closets in garages and
>exterior closets (regardless of size) located on exterior balconies,
>exterior breezeways/corridors, or accessed from outdoors where the
>closet does not have doors or unprotected penetrations directly
>into the dwelling unit.
>
>Is the building classified as an R-3 occupancy? The '13' reference on
>the code analysis page might be a mistake if it is but you can always
>give the architect a call to see if that's the case. Otherwise I agree
>- this layout looks a little odd for a 13D but it is what it is unless
>the local ammendments have anything to add to the situation.
>
>
>
>
>[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
>
>Virus-free.
>www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
>On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Paul Cetani
><pa...@norcalfire.com<mailto:pa...@norcalfire.com>> wrote:
>This is pretty cut and dry here in Nor Cal. We have to sprinkler
>garages for most of our homes due to local AHJ requirements. 😊
>Even if you sprinkler the garage, still seems like 13D to me.
>
>Paul B. Cetani
>Exec. Vice President
>
>Nor Cal Fire, Inc.
>16840 Joleen Way, Bldg A
>Morgan Hill, CA 95037
>T 408-776-1580<tel:%28408%29%20776-1580>
>F 408-776-1590<tel:%28408%29%20776-1590>
>pa...@norcalfire.com<mailto:pa...@norcalfire.com>
>www.norcalfire.com<http://www.norcalfire.com/>
>
>From: Sprinklerforum
>[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>]
>On Behalf Of John Irwin
>Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 11:08 AM
>To:
>sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
>Subject: Abuse of 13D?
>
>Ok someone help me make an argument that this is not a 13D
>installation. This is the garage level of a two family home. However,
>the units are stacked on top of each other. Both units share a single
>lead-in (also shared with domestic). 13D 2010 is pretty clear that
>garages are not sprinklered. Code analysis page references NFPA 13 and
>not 13D. Sprinkler “engineered” page calls for 13D and shows no floor
>control on the garage level. (I think at a minimum the storage rooms
>need sprinklers as the garage exception is just for the garage)
>
>What say you smart people?
>
>
>[cid:part12.AED85448.D0B709A1@cox.net]
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
>http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>
>Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
>
>http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
>
>________________________________
>
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
>http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to