• 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

Help wanted re: Fire protection system removal

FM William Burns

FM William Burns

Moderator
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,901
Location
The Mitten State
Existing Telecommunications/Office/Storage Building

Don't know the age built or year (or permits) to date

Building has a Halon fire protection system and limited area detection and alarm. The owners want to remove the Halon and want to know if they need to replace protection or just upgrade detection and alarm.

Searching through the building code with the 901 stuff and IEBC Chapter 4-6 now with alterations like Level 1. The newer codes give a free pass to telecommunications areas in omitting sprinklers if detection and separation exist, so the alternatives would not be in play today either.

Q1: Were these types of buildings required to have protection back in the day under legacy codes?

Q2: If not a requirement historically then I guess they don't need any protection unless their Insurance company requires it huh?

I would appreciate your thoughts :)
 
I think your answer is Q2,

how many sq feet??? that seems to be the only thing that would kick in the sprinklers or something else
 
In NY, a nonrequired system may be removed, per FCNYS 903.2. Telecom buildings must however have a fire alarm system, and areas or spaces in the building for "other uses" must have rated fire separations.
 
Thanks guys...believe I found what was needed.

Since the owners desire to "remove" existing protection and thus meets current code provisions with the new 2009 free pass to telecommunication buildings provided separation and detection is in place; the criteria for windowless/openless 2nd floors remains in play so sprinklers would still be required. Since this would be the case, I interpret that the owners could use the alternative fire extinguishing section and replace the Halon with a new alternative. The consultants really don't want to go into having to meet the energy stuff if making modifications so I think we are now on the same page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top