1980's Office Building - why are existing corridor/tenant doors 1 hr?

[KenH]

Hi folks, Happy New Year!

I'm confused by the fire ratings of the corridor/tenant doors in a 1980's office building in Virginia. Type III-B construction. Footprint is around 13,000 SF, 3 stories, partially sprinklered (only in the main lobby and 1st floor corridor). I'm sifting through drawings to update tenant fit-outs that have been drawn up by various architects over the years, and they are all calling out for 1-hour rated doors and corridor walls. I agree that the corridor ratings are 1-hr but why aren't the tenant/corridor doors allowed to be 20-minutes per IBC 2012 (VUSBC 2012) Table 716.5? Did BOCA not allow reduced ratings at fire-protected openings as the IBC now does? Were the recent architects just being conservative and went with the existing fire protection rating of the other tenant doors that were initially installed?

All of the tenant/corridor doors are 1-hr, except for the restroom doors, which appear to be newer and probably installed when ADA upgrades were made. We're planning to replace some existing 1-hr doors tenant/corridor doors that are dinged/scratched/damaged and I can't find a reason why they can't be 20-minutes...
We'd prefer to go with 20-minute doors because of the significant reduction in cost and lead time. Any thoughts would be appreciated!

-Ken

 

[cda]

Architect did not understand the code?

Seems like if present code allows twenty minute, write it up like that and submit it , and see if it flys…


It should, unless local amendment.

 

[cda]

are the one hour doors on the upper two floors also?

 

[tmurray]

I'd submit the proposed 20 minute door cut sheets to the building official and see if they catch something I didn't.

 

[KenH]

Yeah, the existing tenant doors are typical on all 3 levels at 1-hour... Maybe the original builder had extra 1-hr doors and chose to use them instead of a lesser fire-rated door that met code? Maybe subsequent architects just followed what was existing at the to the other tenants' offices?

Yeah, I'm tempted to go with the 20-minute doors but even if the plans are approved in the permit, the county doesn't have any accountability for approving a deficient design that an inspector might catch and take issue with. It'd be quite an ordeal to have to upgrade a bunch of doors from 20-mins to 1-hour.

 

[tmurray]

Yeah, I'm tempted to go with the 20-minute doors but even if the plans are approved in the permit, the county doesn't have any accountability for approving a deficient design that an inspector might catch and take issue with. It'd be quite an ordeal to have to upgrade a bunch of doors from 20-mins to 1-hour.

Yikes. That is illegal here in Canada. It violates a fundamental law principle for AHJs called procedural fairness. In your situation, if you gave me cut sheets for 20 minute doors and I approved them, upgrading them to 1 hour doors later on due to a mistake on my part would be at the municipality's cost. Alternatively, we can allow the deficient construction to remain based on a liability assessment, but we buy all the liability.

 

[cda]

Yikes. That is illegal here in Canada. It violates a fundamental law principle for AHJs called procedural fairness. In your situation, if you gave me cut sheets for 20 minute doors and I approved them, upgrading them to 1 hour doors later on due to a mistake on my part would be at the municipality's cost. Alternatively, we can allow the deficient construction to remain based on a liability assessment, but we buy all the liability.

Hummmm

Interesting

Do cities buy much???

And why is the cost not split with the designer??

 

[tmurray]

Hummmm

Interesting

Do cities buy much???

And why is the cost not split with the designer??

It's relatively rare to miss something on a spec review and catch it in the field.

The designer is not bound by the same principles as AHJs. To be clear, we can miss something on a plan review, but if someone comes in and asks me if the product is acceptable and I say yes, then I am held accountable for my error. As I tell the people I teach; education is expensive. You either pay for it upfront with courses, or you pay for it later with mistakes.

 

[SCBO1]

Were the actual door fire rating tags marked (1-hr rated) or are you looking at the plans only. Are the frames marked as well?

Could the building have been built under the UBC?
1997UBC Type III buildings, 604.1 One-hour buildings shall be one-hour fire-resistive construction throughout.

 

[KenH]

Pcinspector1:Yeah, the doors and frames are both marked/labeled. I wish I had access to the original plans but apparently they got lost by the original builder. Maybe I can see if the County has a record set, but that seems unlikely after 35ish years.

I'll take a look and see if I can find any references to the UBC but I haven't run into that so far.

This is looking like more of a Frankenstein building with every door that I open. I just noticed that one of the egress stairs has a 60-min door and a 90-minute frame. Also a 20-min bathroom door in a 45-min frame.

Thanks again for everyone's input. Much appreciated!

 

[Paul Sweet]

What county in Virginia?

Virginia adopted BOCA in 1973, and as far as I can remember it has always required 1 hour walls with 20 minute doors.

I suspect that either the original architect or plans reviewer didn't understand the difference between fire partitions and fire barriers, and following architects copied what was there.

 

[KenH]

Paul,
Thanks for the reply with the info on the BOCA adoption. The building is in Fairfax County.
I agree that something seems wrong if the original architect called out for 1-hr doors. It's possible the original contractor was able to source 1-hr doors more easily/quickly and just went with that. From there, my best bet is that the other architects just matched what was already existing in adjacent tenant spaces. I haven't had much luck digging up old BOCA codes but would be curious if anyone can confirm that the 1973 version had the 1-hr corridor walls with the 20 minute rated doors. The earliest I've been able to confirm is the 1993 version had it.

 

[Paul Sweet]

Ken,

The oldest BOCA code we have is 1975. It required 3/4 hour fire doors, 1 3/4" solid core wood doors, or approved equivalent in 1-hour rated corridors.

The 1978 BOCA code required 20 minute doors. Probably somebody did some burn tests on 1 3/4" solid core wood doors and discovered they were only good for 20 minutes.

Another possibility is the architect just designed to the toughest requirement of Virginia, Maryland, or DC, no matter what jurisdiction he was working in.

 

[steveray]

This should get you there:

701.2 Conformance. An existing building or portion thereof
shall not be altered such that the building becomes less safe
than its existing condition.
Exception: Where the current level of safety or sanitation
is proposed to be reduced, the portion altered shall conform
to the requirements of the International Building
Code.

Other than that a meeting with or formal interpretation from the BO or FM?

 

[KenH]

This should get you there:

701.2 Conformance. An existing building or portion thereof
shall not be altered such that the building becomes less safe
than its existing condition.
Exception: Where the current level of safety or sanitation
is proposed to be reduced, the portion altered shall conform
to the requirements of the International Building
Code.

Other than that a meeting with or formal interpretation from the BO or FM?

Steve - I was completely overlooking the Virginia Rehabilitation Code, which contains the language that you quoted. We're in between the 2012 and 2015 codes, and the 2012 Virginia Construction Code that I was primarily reading through eliminates Chapter 34 "Existing Building and Structures" entirely. It should have occurred to me to trace where they shifted the material from that Chapter...
I'll see if the owners are more comfortable replacing the 1-hr doors with equivalents, or pursuing my interpretation that the current IBC only requires 20-minute doors. They may go with the higher fire rating to avoid any possible liability down the road or for insurance reasons. This makes me much more comfortable discussing with the owner and the AHJ now that I have this important piece of the puzzle. Many Thanks!

 

[JBI]

Maybe the original designer/owner wanted the durability provided by the 1 hour doors?
As far as work on an existing building, has the AHJ adopted the IEBC?
There may (or may not) be options for reducing ratings depending on the compliance path chosen by the applicant.