equipment canopy versus building

[Hyrax4978]

We are looking at providing an equipment canopy for a client who will have process equipment that will move soil from one area to another. We are looking at providing a canopy for the equipment. Is there something in the code that allows an equipment canopy to be considered something different than a building without walls? could it have a different classification that would allow other leniencies that a building might have since for the most part, aside from repair, is an unoccupied long equipment canopy structure.

 

[cda]

I take it it will not be attached to another building in any way???

How about a "U"???


Some call it weather protection and let it go at that.

 

[steveray]

Sounds almost like a U.....Or if you could call it part of the equipment, even better....

 

[Hyrax4978]

I looked at U, but i don't see it being similar to any of the items under the 312.1. Barns, carports, sheds, retaining walls etc etc.

It is definitely just weather protection, nothing else. But its definitely not part of the equipment. I just don't want to get to the end of this and have the town say that because it starts at the face of the building and extends away that we need to call it part of the building. That would be problematic.

 

[Hyrax4978]

Its not going to attach, but it will butt up against it.

 

[steveray]

It's an equipmentport.....

 

[Hyrax4978]

I like that! Can you get that in the next adoption put into Chapter 2....

 

[Tim Mailloux]

seems like a big car port to me

 

[Tim Mailloux]

I like that! Can you get that in the next adoption put into Chapter 2....

OSBI will be accepting code change proposals for the next code cycle very soon, get this written up

 

[cda]

Its not going to attach, but it will butt up against it.

Does the building have a fire sprinkler system??????


When you Butt, to me that is attached, and in some case, if the main building is sprinkled, you shall sprinkle the overhang/ canopy/ equipmentport

 

[Tim Mailloux]

Does the building have a fire sprinkler system??????


When you Butt, to me that is attached, and in some case, if the main building is sprinkled, you shall sprinkle the overhang/ canopy/ equipmentport

if the canopy structure is non-combustable or limited combustable construction than NFPA has an exception to to not provide sprinklers under it. However NFPA has its own definitions and testing requirments as to what meets non-combustible or limited combustible construction.

 

[steveray]

And that may depend on the "use" under the canopy....The overhangs at home depot are sprinklered for a reason.

 

[Teeshot]

Sounds like a "U" to me as well. Remember that the definition states, "...shall include, but not limited to, the following..." when it describes the types, which does include Carport.

 

[cda]

Without seeing a site / floor plan

1. Butt against a building kind of makes it part of the building

2. Question if main building has a sprinkler system?

3. Are there any openings into the building ,,, from under the canopy??

 

[mtlogcabin]

I looked at U, but i don't see it being similar to any of the items under the 312.1. Barns, carports, sheds, retaining walls etc etc.

SECTION 312
UTILITY AND MISCELLANEOUS GROUP U

312.1 General.
Buildings and structures of an accessory character and miscellaneous structures not classified in any specific occupancy shall be constructed, equipped and maintained to conform to the requirements of this code commensurate with the fire and life hazard incidental to their occupancy. Group U shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

 

[Hyrax4978]

Main building does not have sprinklers.
Half of the new canopy is open the the existing building as that portion of the existing building is also a canopy. the other half is up against the exterior wall.

 

[cda]

Main building does not have sprinklers.
Half of the new canopy is open the the existing building as that portion of the existing building is also a canopy. the other half is up against the exterior wall.

Ok at this point sounds like you need a set down with local ahj

To me it could be U or same occupancy type as main building

But I think you are adding to the building foot print

 

[Hyrax4978]

Im working on setting that up. problem is, in some really small towns, i get the old, just tell me what you want and i will most likely go with it. LOL

 

[cda]

Im working on setting that up. problem is, in some really small towns, i get the old, just tell me what you want and i will most likely go with it. LOL

Well that sounds easy!!!

Just stay close to code

 

[steveray]

Im working on setting that up. problem is, in some really small towns, i get the old, just tell me what you want and i will most likely go with it. LOL

Yep...some guys will accept anything with a stamp on it......

 

[cda]

Yep...some guys will accept anything with a stamp on it......

Even a napkin with lines

 

[ChrisCampbell]

There are canopy requirements in IBC Chapter 31 that you should review, mainly related to the structure itself. Is the question whether you have to sprinkler the canopy? If so, NFPA 13 gives requirements based on what is located/stored below.