Any Dallas code amendment experts out there?

[JPohling]

Looking for some people more knowledgeable than myself on old Dallas amendments to the building code. Little background. This is a high rise building constructed in 1969 and is fully fire sprinkled. Dallas Building Code based upon the IBC.

I have a national client that will be doing a remodel to a full floor. As part of that we noted some unusual conditions. The building was “remodeled” in 2022. There is a common corridor connecting the two stairs and there is no elevator lobby. The corridor is clearly non-rated with non-rated glass doors and sidelights being used. There is no hoist way opening protection.

I was successful in finding some very old Dallas amendments that eliminate the one hour corridor requirements for a single tenant floor. PERFECT.

I was also successful in finding a Dallas amendment that allows an exception to having hoist way opening protection if the corridor is not required to be rated. PERFECT.

What I cannot find is any amendment to allow the elimination of an enclosed elevator lobby. That is what I am looking for confirmation on. It seems highly unusual to me to have a high rise building that has 5 elevator hoist ways open to the exit corridor providing access to the two exit stairs without any hoist way opening protection. I am used to seeing at a minimum an enclosed elevator lobby that would contain smoke from the hoist way openings.

No hoist way pressurization in place. Sprinkler system still 1969 vintage.

Any Dallas specialists that can confirm that this is acceptable in Dallas? And bonus points for link to amendment allowing such a thing?

Thank you.

 

[Jay Smith]

The oldest Dallas amendment I have is 2006. See the relevant page attached. It was this way under UBC, as far back as I remember. I started in 1990 and I’m pretty sure that’s how it was at that time.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Looking for some people more knowledgeable than myself on old Dallas amendments to the building code. Little background. This is a high rise building constructed in 1969 and is fully fire sprinkled. Dallas Building Code based upon the IBC.

I haven't lived in Texas for a good many years, but I can tell you that there was never a 1969 Dallas building code based on the IBC, because the first edition of the IBC was 2000. Back in 1969 some parts of Texas used BOCA, some used the UBC, and some used the SSBC. I don't recall which one Dallas used.

 

[JPohling]

The oldest Dallas amendment I have is 2006. See the relevant page attached. It was this way under UBC, as far back as I remember. I started in 1990 and I’m pretty sure that’s how it was at that time.

Thanks Jay! My opinion on that would be that in no way does this vintage sprinkler system comply with the 903 sections referenced. I guess that is how you end up with high rise buildings without elevator lobbies, hoist way opening protection, and rated corridors with a sprinkler system from 1969.

Funny thing is the exception for the rated corridors along with hoist way protection goes away on any floor that is not a full floor tenant. The amount of full floor tenants that have downsized to multi tenant floors is staggering. And at that point the corridors would then need to be one hour and hoist way opening protection would be required. Current exceptions allowing non rated corridors should be allowed only upon the fire sprinkler system being upgraded to at least the level required by NFPA 13 in the year the exception went into play.

 

[Jay Smith]

Thanks Jay! My opinion on that would be that in no way does this vintage sprinkler system comply with the 903 sections referenced. I guess that is how you end up with high rise buildings without elevator lobbies, hoist way opening protection, and rated corridors with a sprinkler system from 1969.

Funny thing is the exception for the rated corridors along with hoist way protection goes away on any floor that is not a full floor tenant. The amount of full floor tenants that have downsized to multi tenant floors is staggering. And at that point the corridors would then need to be one hour and hoist way opening protection would be required. Current exceptions allowing non rated corridors should be allowed only upon the fire sprinkler system being upgraded to at least the level required by NFPA 13 in the year the exception went into play.

In my early years I would occasionally hear mention of “the Schirmer report” which somehow determined that sprinkler protection was effective enough to warrant deleting these requirements. I don’t think Dallas required rated corridors in Group B with sprinklers during that era. Looking back through my old copies of UBC, the elevator lobby requirement seems to be new in 1979.