Fire Rating in Existing Historic Building (Level 2 alteration)

[rosegamble]

Hey everyone.

We have a Level 2 alteration (Sections 7 and 8 of the Existing Building Code). It's an existing retail space with other retail spaces to the sides and a hotel above.

The code official is saying no rating is required at the existing ceilings/walls separating the space in question from the other spaces/occupancies.

There is no change of occupancy as part of our scope, hence his reasoning. He said if we are changing occupancy it's another story.

I am not seeing in Section 7 and 8 anything that is different from his interpretation, but wanted to get another opinion. It seems odd that the existing flimsy ceiling can be the rating between our space and the old hotel above.

Section 10 (change of occupancy) would be a whole different situation.

Thanks!

 

[RLGA]

A couple of questions:

1. What code edition are you working under?
2. Is the building sprinklered throughout, or will it be sprinklered throughout as part of the alteration?

 

[rosegamble]

A couple of questions:

1. What code edition are you working under?
2. Is the building sprinklered throughout, or will it be sprinklered throughout as part of the alteration?

Hello! This is the 2021 Existing Building Code (and 2021 IBC as needed). The building is currently sprinklered everywhere, prior to my scope of work being performed (which is a Level 2 alteration of an existing retail space in a much larger building). The only reference to fire-ratings I see in a Level 2 alteration is Existing Building Code 802.6, which is a confusing code excerpt and not the info I'm looking for (?).

 

[RLGA]

I agree that Section 802.6 is confusing. It states you get to comply with the current code if you sprinkler the building throughout (oh, goody!), and establishes no requirements if you are not sprinklered throughout.

I do not see anything that would contradict your code official. Any new construction would need to comply with fire-resistance requirements of the new code when applicable, but existing construction that is not altered would not need to be upgraded to comply with current separation requirements.

 

[rosegamble]

I agree that Section 802.6 is confusing. It states you get to comply with the current code if you sprinkler the building throughout (oh, goody!), and establishes no requirements if you are not sprinklered throughout.

I do not see anything that would contradict your code official. Any new construction would need to comply with fire-resistance requirements of the new code when applicable, but existing construction that is not altered would not need to be upgraded to comply with current separation requirements.

Yeah. That's why 802.6 confuses me. Is it stating that if you sprinkler the building that you must apply fire-rated assemblies per IBC? I don't think so. It seems to be presenting it as an option, not a requirement. If it's a choice, why would you chose do that...? And what if's it's already sprinklered?

But yes, I think a Level 2 implies there is usually some interior wall reconfiguration. That means in my understanding of the code new walls must meet the reqs of IBC 601 for typical assemblies, but if existing demising walls/horizontal assemblies are not changing then no fire-resistance rating is required... unless you want to per 802.6 and are adding a sprinkler? Haha!