• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

906.1, Removal

Re: 906.1, Removal

kil- don't start. you know the pipes above the ceiling were components of the sprinkler system.
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

What puzzles me about this thread is why a building that was once protected, now is without protection? What is the size of the building that was altered? What is the occupancy placed on the new use?

Seems like this is going backwards!
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

Hey permitguy, six years ago when you were on this side of the counter, what code section would you have used?

kil- don't start. you know the pipes above the ceiling were components of the sprinkler system.
Click to expand...
JD, key wording is were; no longer. ;)

RJJ and cda, good questions, the I code gives away a lot but something appears to be missing here.
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

"""A industrial building"""

""a clubhouse for mentally challenged people"""

adult day care???

trainging facility????

occupancy type????

two inspectors doing annual inspection???? sounds like some regulated facility to me
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

The "system" includes all the piping, wherever it may be. It all needs to be removed like the state fire guy sez.

What's the problem?
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

I agree totally, FMWB - I would always prefer to have a working sprinkler system.

The state inspector has spoken!
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

kil - six years ago when I was on that side of the counter it would have been outside my scope of authority. I wouldn't have been involved in the discussion except to forward the inquiry to the FD.

The proper reference has been made time and again here. No need to repeat it.
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

Apparently Oregon has a statute of limitations for Code violations... NYS does not.
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

Apparently Oregon has a statute of limitations for Code violations... NYS does not.
Click to expand...
No JD, no statute of limitations for code violations, but unlike NYS and other states, we do require that if you write it you cite it, keeps the incorrect rouge code enforcement way down. :D
 
Re: 906.1, Removal

"Write it & cite it" is good advice anywhere. Personally, I find it's easy - just cut & paste, point & click.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top