I'm unsure of how to approach this project. Tenant is a hand cart manufacturer. They want to do some work in their warehouse which includes adding a new Modela unit (vertical storage lift) and move around some of their racking (high piled storage). Inside the warehouse they store a decent number of rubber tires on pallets or racking (un boxed), which are 12" in diameter (high hazard commodity). The addition of the vertical storage lift requires modifications to the sprinkler system. The building is of Type II construction and is fully sprinklered. They have no specs for the sprinkler system, and I doubt it was designed for storage of high hazard commodities, but they are unaware of when it was installed and under what code. What is an architect's responsibility when it comes to verifying the sprinkler system and what level commodity protection it provides? Liability is compounded by the fact that I am an employee of the contractor that is doing the work so I can't simply write on the drawings that the contractor is responsible for sprinkler system requirements.
-
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
high hazard commodities in an existing warehouse space
- Thread starter nicbro
- Start date
RLGA
SAWHORSE
Hire a fire protection engineer. They can do one of two things:
- Determine the feasibility of adding to the existing system and provide you with design criteria to put in your construction documents for the contractor to provide delegated design services under the construction contract to modify the existing system. The contractor's sprinkler subcontractor would then be required to submit the revised sprinkler design for review and permit.
- Determine the feasibility of adding to the existing system and provide a full design that is incorporated into your construction documents, which the contractor must follow. The sprinkler subcontractor must pay for the permit and install the system according to your FP engineer's design.
Yankee Chronicler
Registered User
What is your role? Are you the architect-of-record for the project? If you are an employee of the contractor, how does that square with your state's licensing laws?
Are you (as part of your contractor employer) preparing the construction documents for permits? If so, it is your legal responsibility to show that all aspects of the work will comply with codes and other laws. According to UpCodes, Maryland has adopted the 2021 Existing Building Code, so that should be where you begin.
Sprinkler systems are designed for the hazard being protected. If anything in the interior changes, it doesn't matter whether or not the system was properly designed for what was there before, because it has to be updated/upgraded to protect against the current contents and hazard. If your employer has contracted to provide the design as well as the construction, then your employer has to hire a fire protection engineer to design and specify revisions and upgrades to the sprinkler system to suit the proposed conditions. Unless you are also licensed as a fire protection engineer or a sprinkler layout technician, YOU 9personally) should not touch it.
Are you (as part of your contractor employer) preparing the construction documents for permits? If so, it is your legal responsibility to show that all aspects of the work will comply with codes and other laws. According to UpCodes, Maryland has adopted the 2021 Existing Building Code, so that should be where you begin.
Sprinkler systems are designed for the hazard being protected. If anything in the interior changes, it doesn't matter whether or not the system was properly designed for what was there before, because it has to be updated/upgraded to protect against the current contents and hazard. If your employer has contracted to provide the design as well as the construction, then your employer has to hire a fire protection engineer to design and specify revisions and upgrades to the sprinkler system to suit the proposed conditions. Unless you are also licensed as a fire protection engineer or a sprinkler layout technician, YOU 9personally) should not touch it.
Yes, I would be the architect of record. I told the contractor that we needed to get a fire protection engineer involved and when I emailed the FPE, with the contractor copied, the contractor replied with "we'll just go in for permit and see what the AHJ says" to which I replied, "no, i will not be signing these drawings without the engineer involved" to which the contractor promptly decided that he'd have the building owner hire an outside architect directly.
Yankee Chronicler
Registered User
It seems to me that this is a commission you are better off not being involved in. It appears that the contractor doesn't understand that (as our state building inspector often said in live classes pre-COVID) "A violation is always a violation." The fact that an AHJ doesn't pick up on something doesn't make it okay. If the contractor's agreement with the owner assigns to the contractor the responsibility for ensuring code compliance, then hoping the AHJ will let something slide is a foolish approach.
We currently have an example of that in our town. In reviewing plans to alter two office condo units into a single office suite, we discovered that the two exit stairs don't meet code. They don't meet the current IBC, they don't meet the IEBC, and they didn't meet the BOCA code under which the building was designed and constructed 40+ years ago. When informed that they have a problem that needs to be addressed, of course the condo association's first reaction was, "But it's been that way for forty years -- why is it a problem now?"
And the answer is, unfortunately, "You have owned a problem for forty years. Your lucky nobody was injured or killed as a result. Now that we -- and you -- know about it, it has to be corrected."
We currently have an example of that in our town. In reviewing plans to alter two office condo units into a single office suite, we discovered that the two exit stairs don't meet code. They don't meet the current IBC, they don't meet the IEBC, and they didn't meet the BOCA code under which the building was designed and constructed 40+ years ago. When informed that they have a problem that needs to be addressed, of course the condo association's first reaction was, "But it's been that way for forty years -- why is it a problem now?"
And the answer is, unfortunately, "You have owned a problem for forty years. Your lucky nobody was injured or killed as a result. Now that we -- and you -- know about it, it has to be corrected."