• 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

Cooking appliances in healthcare facility

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,064
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
Fit-out for a cardiac rehab facility, off campus as an extension of the hospital.

Health care workers, under the Department of Health and most areas deemed patient care areas. Treadmills, exercise bikes, rehab machines, etc.

There will be a built in wall oven (domestic style) and an open 4 burner cooktop. This cooking equipment will be set up on a large bar for patients to watch and learn how to cook healthy then partake in the meals.

Now the good part.

The way I read it. Type 1 hood, IMC 2009 applies. Can't see it any other way. The submitted plans don't even address this issue at all, nothing.

Opinions bases on interpretation of the written, prescriptive code please. Sprinklered building.
 
Nope. Unless they fire up a deep fat fryer

Would treat it like home ec in high school

Might get a letter that they will not cook using grease or produce grease

Also what will the frequency be??? Once a week????

Maybe if they were cooking every day would consider it
 
Prescriptively it is required as I read the definitions and the additional section added for "domestic appliances" used in commercial applications. Don't see a way around it. I need to be objective, not subjective. Sounds like you are being subjective. Is that the case or is there a part of the IMC that I am not seeing? I personally think there should be some middle ground but the IMC appears to have taken a more aggressive stance on this.
 
I guess subjective

But if they are not using or producing grease maybe type II??
 
Type 1, no way out, unless you want to grant a variance to the code.

IMC 507.2.3 Domestic cooking appliances used for commercial

purposes. Domestic cooking appliances utilized for commercial

purposes shall be provided with Type I or Type II hoods as

required for the type of appliances and processes in accordance

with Sections 507.2, 507.2.1 and 507.2.2.

So either a Type I or II is required. Can't NOT have a hood of some sort.

507.2.1 Type I hoods. Type I hoods shall be installed where

cooking appliances produce grease or smoke. Type I hoods

shall be installed over medium-duty, heavy-duty and

extra-heavy-duty cooking appliances. Type I hoods shall be

installed over light-duty cooking appliances that produce

grease or smoke.

If the appliance is "medium duty", type I is required. No judgment allowed.

IMC Definitions: MEDIUM-DUTY COOKING APPLIANCE. Medium-duty

cooking appliances include electric discrete element ranges

(with or without oven), electric and gas hot-top ranges, electric

and gas griddles, electric and gas double-sided griddles, electric

and gas fryers (including open deep fat fryers, donut fryers,

kettle fryers and pressure fryers), electric and gas conveyor

pizza ovens, electric and gas tilting skillets (braising pans) and

electric and gas rotisseries.

An "open 4 burner cooktop" is a medium duty appliance.

Ergo and thusly - Type I required. This is new to 2009. 2006 allowed you say "no smoke or grease" and allow a type II.

Actually, the only potential out is to argue just what a "commercial purpose" is. One could say money has to change hands specifically for food - not for medical services where food is just a means to an end. However, this line of reasoning would also leave out the church cooking 300 bacon-y breakfasts. The other side would be that if the permit is not pulled from the "residential" window, it is "commercial".
 
Being in the year 2011 we have not caught up to 2009 yet, supposedly this year

But how about 507.2.2 2009 imc
 
Greetings,

I'm with the Dr. if your on the '09 IMC. ICC changed the verbage and I'm glad they did to clarify where a type I is required. I don't necessarily agree with the requirements though.

Byron
 
I'm dealing with a very similar issue. This facility is a place for homeless to come and hang out and learn how to cook a decent meal? weird, I know. Anyway, new stove. I say it needs type I. Of course the Bishop and my state rep are against it.

PS. my state rep is co-sponsoring the get rid of sprinklers in pa bill, the guy hates the codes because we made him install a fence around the pool he installed illegally, too close to the lot lines....
 
* * * *

"I'm dealing with a very similar issue. This facility is a place forhomeless to come and hang out and learn how to cook a decent meal?

weird, I know. Anyway, new stove. I say it needs type I. Of course the

Bishop and my state rep are against it.

PS. my state rep is co-sponsoring the get rid of sprinklers in pa bill, the

guy hates the codes because we made him install a fence around the

pool he installed illegally, too close to the lot lines.... "
Click to expand...
Well then, ...like a large number of us on this forum, ...keep on spreading your sunshine

to everyone and maybe one day, they will see the light! :lol:

By "Bishop", can we assume that you are referring to a spiritually guiding person,

...saaay, someone in a church position?.....If so, it sounds like they are more interested

in their Earthly, financial status and not the eternal ones of the users of the facility.

I'll climb back down in to my prairie dog hole now...

* * * *
 
But how about 507.2.2 2009 imc
Click to expand...
What about it?

"507.2.2 Type II hoods. Type II hoods shall be installed above

dishwashers and light-duty appliances that produce heat or

moisture and do not produce grease or smoke,...

The OP was about an open 4 burner cooktop, which is neither a dishwasher or a light duty appliance.
 
they are just melting cheese

so it sounds like there is no lee way

if there is a stove installed anywhere it is required a type I hood???
 
* * * *

So if they remove the 4 burner stove-top and have only a

2 burner type, ...then would a Type I or II be required?

We are still on the `06 codes, ...looking at possibly

adopting the `09's in the near future.

This is a VERY interesting topic & discussion! :eek:



* * * *
 
so...just as a point of reference..what is considered a "light duty appliance"

and please don't just say dishwasher they are already noted.
 
From Ch. 2 - Definitions, in the `06 IMC:

"Light Duty Cooking Appliances - Light-duty cooking appliances include gas and electric ovens

(including standard, bake, roasting, revolving, retherm, convection, combination

convection/steamer, conveyor, deck or deck-style pizza, and pastry), electric and gas

steam-jacketed kettles, electric and gas compartment steamers (both pressure and

atmospheric) and electric and gas cheese melters."

.
 
And Medium Duty........

MEDIUM-DUTYCOOKINGAPPLIANCE.





Medium-duty cooking appliances include electric discrete element ranges

​

(with or without oven), electric and gas hot-top ranges, electric




and gas griddles, electric and gas double-sided griddles, electric

and gas fryers (including open deep fat fryers, donut fryers,

kettle fryers and pressure fryers), electric and gas conveyor

pizza ovens, electric and gas tilting skillets (braising pans) and

​



electric and gas rotisseries.

​
 
"electric discrete element ranges" = hot plate

"electric and gas griddles" = George Foreman grille

"electric and gas double-sided griddles" = Belgian waffle maker

"where cooking appliances produce grease or smoke = toaster

Just sayin'

At least we don't have to make a judgement call anymore.
 
jar 456, I dealt with a similar issue a few months ago. I had a transitional living facility (maternity home) where there was an instructor teaching teenage girls how to cook for themselves. The only significant difference between our situation and yours was that the food they produced was not intended for consumption - -it was made for educational purposes ONLY. It was critical to the instruction that the setup look just like a residential kitchen, i.e. no commercial hood. The analogy I made to the fire, building and health departments was that it was like Julia Child's kitchen in the TV studio - -they didn't make Julia use a commercial hood!

They agreed that the kitchen was a "demonstration / training kitchen" and not a "commercial" kitchen. We did four things to sweeten the deal and give the AHJ's confidence as to the legitimacy of our request:

1. We had the owner write a letter for their files (and attached to the approved plans), explaining the intent of the kitchen, and promising it would be used only under the supervision of qualified teachers.

2. The cooking appliances were all electric, and we added a keyed power switch (key was kept by the instructor) so that no one could try and use the appliances unsupervised.

3. We added a "Stovetop Firestop" accessory to the residential hood over the stove.

4. We copied the AHJs with the as-built plans for the rest of the facility, which clearly identified the exisitng cafeteria, so they knew the users already had a legitimate commercial kitchen elsewhere onsite for meal preparation.
 
Yikes - sounds like a good collaboration with the AHJ.

What I am trying to do when I point out that code requires a Type I hood over a hot plate is to make Designers and AHJ's recognize that they have a legal obligation to formally address the language of the code. Just waving hands and "interpreting" the code to say something it doesn't is not helpful. Public safety and designer's liability are both protected with official variances, code amendments, letters in the file, etc.
 
Yikes said:
jar 456, I dealt with a similar issue a few months ago. I had a transitional living facility (maternity home) where there was an instructor teaching teenage girls how to cook for themselves. The only significant difference between our situation and yours was that the food they produced was not intended for consumption - -it was made for educational purposes ONLY. It was critical to the instruction that the setup look just like a residential kitchen, i.e. no commercial hood. The analogy I made to the fire, building and health departments was that it was like Julia Child's kitchen in the TV studio - -they didn't make Julia use a commercial hood!They agreed that the kitchen was a "demonstration / training kitchen" and not a "commercial" kitchen. We did four things to sweeten the deal and give the AHJ's confidence as to the legitimacy of our request:

1. We had the owner write a letter for their files (and attached to the approved plans), explaining the intent of the kitchen, and promising it would be used only under the supervision of qualified teachers.

2. The cooking appliances were all electric, and we added a keyed power switch (key was kept by the instructor) so that no one could try and use the appliances unsupervised.

3. We added a "Stovetop Firestop" accessory to the residential hood over the stove.

4. We copied the AHJs with the as-built plans for the rest of the facility, which clearly identified the exisitng cafeteria, so they knew the users already had a legitimate commercial kitchen elsewhere onsite for meal preparation.
Click to expand...
That is a great working relationship but around here the will have to apply to the appeals board, only they can make those decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top