• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Canopy sprinklers?

steveray

steveray

SAWHORSE
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
13,773
Location
West of the river CT
How does everyone feel about making Chick Fil A sprinkler their canopies? They are about the size of the building....They are "sheltering a use" sorta or they wouldn't be there...

1681760707972.png

[A] BUILDING. Any structure utilized or intended for supporting or sheltering any occupancy.

❖ The code uses this term to identify those structures that provide shelter for a function or activity

I'm not sure what I would call them for a use, but I know this is one of those weird not really addressed code areas, so I figured I would start some discussion....
 
Thanks MT....Value your opinion.....The struggle is, (one of)....Is it an addition to an A3? Is it "just a canopy"? Is it two (or 3) building on the same lot? The common sense in me wants to do nothing, the building official in me says we need to figure out how to address these at some point....Maybe the FD will kick it out for not being able to drive all the way around it like they like to do....
 
It is not attached therefore it is not an addition.
It is an accessory structure to the main structure on the property and I would Classify it as a use group "U" canopy
Sprinklers are not required, and the FD does not need to be able to drive around a building/structure to fight a fire. Fire men are AKA hose draggers. :D;)
 
I don't know about them once in your area of the ones around here leave plenty of space to drive around the building outside of them. They only go down half of one side and a back corner of the building for 2 lanes. As mentioned by mtl, they are not attached to the building and certainly don't fulfill my definition of a building in any way. They are nothing but a canopy for weather protection more like a picnic shelter than anything else. Also at least the ones around here are all metal construction, nothing flammable at all except for some incidental wiring.
 
That is all they are. Sometimes attached to the building sometimes free standing.
chick-fil-a-drive-thru.jpg
 
steveray said:
I don't know....I don't even know if it is an A2 or what the OL is at this time....Just wanted to stir the pot of discussion...
Click to expand...
if the original structure is sprinklered than sprinklers would need to extend under the new canopy unless the canopy is constructed of non-combustible or limited combustible material per NPFA 13, section 8.15.7.2. Definitations for non-combustible and limited combustible materials are found in NFPA 220, sections 4.1.5.1 & 4.1.6
 
Tim Mailloux said:
if the original structure is sprinklered than sprinklers would need to extend under the new canopy unless the canopy is constructed of non-combustible or limited combustible material per NPFA 13, section 8.15.7.2. Definitations for non-combustible and limited combustible materials are found in NFPA 220, sections 4.1.5.1 & 4.1.6
Click to expand...
where are you coming up with that? They are not attached to the building in any way, are freestanding and are just a roof. Of course in addition they are constructed of nonflammable materials but even if they weren't sure if they were to be sprinkled or not.
 
Msradell said:
where are you coming up with that? They are not attached to the building in any way, are freestanding and are just a roof. Of course in addition they are constructed of nonflammable materials but even if they weren't sure if they were to be sprinkled or not.
Click to expand...
We are guessing at this point whether or not it is connected.....And if canopies are treated differently than "buildings" does it matter?
 
steveray said:
We are guessing at this point whether or not it is connected.....And if canopies are treated differently than "buildings" does it matter?
Click to expand...
Would be a continuation of the same occupancy; if the client wants to treat it as a separate building, then spatial separation calculations would likely cause some cogitation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top