Any (still-safe) work arounds for Sprinklers triggered at change of use

[witt13]

Background: I'm the owner of a 95 year old downtown commercial building. We have 2009 IBC. I've read all the posts in the forum about sprinklers.

Request: Some posts fall into the format of : 'here's the situation / now what's required?' but I'd like to ask for more problem solving on this one (as also happens in this forum). How can I solve this problem, given the reality of constraints of time, money and the code?

PROBLEM: The building is 5,000SF but the rear 2,140SF (on alley) is not desirable for commercial use. Too deep for retailers, and office market is weak. Residential is very strong. I'd like to consider converting the back to two residential units. I am building rear as offices but in a flexible way in case I can convert their use. They are separated by 1 hour fire wall from the front. My architect cited 903.2.8 requiring sprinklers for the whole building if any R use. The quote (from a reputable company) for sprinkling the whole building is $55,000, or $25 per square foot for the triggered portion. That doesn't make financial sense; it would work for a much larger building, but small building - no. 1/2 of the cost is to trench and install a new water line down the alley to a nearby street. Then there are risers, cabinets, heat/cool, etc. at the back of the building. A residential fire sprinkler would make financial sense.

I really appreciate all of you experts that have so capably answered many of the other posts and look forward to your inputs!

 

[witt13]

PS they are tearing up the entire front street / sidewalks in two months and to get a fire tap there would be much cheaper but then I'd have to put a riser and fire cabinet at the front of the retailers which would go over like a lead balloon with them (although perhaps I could still do it anyway). So the alternative is to run a large line through the building and still have the riser at the back but the sprinkler co. says that's even more expensive. In any case, even having a riser at the front and a free tap at the front would still cost $25k, so $12 per square foot for the triggered portion. Still might not make financial sense but getting close.

 

[cda]

1. what state are you in?

2. get about three quotes for sprinklers. There is more than one way to layout a sprinkler system and supply to it

3. once you sprinkle you do not need "fire cabinets" normally, plus they are kind of a thing of the past

4. Yes normally once you stick a "R" in you shall sprinkle the entire building

5. BEST ADVICE, hire a fire protection engineer or a very good code consultant to look at the entire project and advise you. That is what they get paid for, and more than likely in the long run you will save money and also be able to do marvelous things that you never dreamed of with the building.

 

[witt13]

1. what state are you in? ** TEXASI appreciate your advice and will probably look for a code expert /fire protection engineer. However, I wonder if I can create separate buildings via fire walls and build the back two units under IRC? Other ideas? Thanks, W

 

[cda]

1. what state are you in? ** TEXASI appreciate your advice and will probably look for a code expert /fire protection engineer. However, I wonder if I can create separate buildings via fire walls and build the back two units under IRC? Other ideas? Thanks, W

So are I

Do not have enough smarts to answer your question. Wait a few days and you should get some replies

This building is in an incorporated city??? And not in the county ??

 

[jar546]

The IRC does not apply at all in this situation.

You are being told the facts, but it is not what you want to hear. Therefore, as expected, you are attempting to verify the information and get a second opinion. In my opinion, you would need to sprinkler the building because of the choice that you are making to put R units in a commercial building. There is no "work around" for R units. It's a fire, life safety thing. You have to decide what is the lesser of 2 evils, keeping it non-residential or not.

 

[peach]

A fire wall could split the R occupancy into a separate building and maybe you could sprinkle that portion only.. the commercial portion would need smoke detectors tied into the fire alarm system. There are provisions for that in the Code; whether or not it's a good option is up to a good code consultant.

 

[fatboy]

I agree with the lovely PEach........

 

[witt13]

This building is in an incorporated city???

I'm in a city. To reply to another point raised herein, the problem isn't how to get around sprinkling. The problem is how to make a safe building for occupants, while meeting the code, while making sense financially. $55k for 2100 square feet (the triggering area) does not make sense financially. That is 1/3 of the cost per square foot of a fully-built apartment complex, ground up (in this area). I will get some other quotes, but still appreciate prior and future additional opinions. Another option is asking the city if they can pitch in (because they want residential downtown), but even for them, it would make sense to subsidize sprinklers where it could be less per square foot.

 

[cda]

5. BEST ADVICE, hire a fire protection engineer or a very good code consultant to look at the entire project and advise you. That is what they get paid for, and more than likely in the long run you will save money and also be able to do marvelous things that you never dreamed of with the building.

Yes the city might help in someway with the underground

Also have seen cities give no interest loans

 

[JBI]

Methodolgy can make a difference... are you using the Existing Building Code? Chapter 34? or both?

 

[Mac]

I just went through a similar exercise - and found the EBC NYS 912.2.1 worked in this instance (caution - this section has been modified by New York State):

"Where a change in occupancy classification occurs that requires an automatic fire sprinkler system to be provided based on the new occupancy in accordance with Chapter 9 of the Building Code of New York State, such system shall be provided throughout the area where the change of occupancy occurs."

 

[mtlogcabin]

I agree with JBI you should be looking at the IEBC not the IBC. It will allow you to install a fire separation wall per code and then sprinkle the "R" portion only.

You do not need a fire protection engineer at this point. You need a design professional who is very familiar with and has experience using the IEBC.

The 2009 IBC Section 3401.4 authorizes the use of the IEBC as an alternative to IBC Chapter 34 so the local jurisdiction does not have to specifically adopt the IEBC in order for it to be used as long as the IBC has been adopted

 

[witt13]

The 2009 IBC Section 3401.4 authorizes the use of the IEBC as an alternative to IBC Chapter 34 so the local jurisdiction does not have to specifically adopt the IEBC in order for it to be used as long as the IBC has been adopted

This could be a critical pivot. Really appreciate that information! I will explore all the suggestions here. Thanks so very much again. Feel free to contact me later to follow up.

 

[AegisFPE]

A fire wall is probably not a viable option. It would likely be challenging (+costly) to structurally isolate the building areas as prescribed by code, and some jurisdictions do not recognize a fire wall as reducing the building area with regard to required sprinkler protection.

There may be alternative solutions that could be explored with in accordance with Chapter 34 of the IBC.

An experienced Fire Protection Engineer (FPE) would be an appropriate consultant to add to your project team.