porte-cochère

[cda]

2010 edition of NFPA 13

anyone still sprinkling non com porte-cochère, with no storage under them??????

 

[pwood]

trick question? no? not the last one.

 

[Big Mac]

Unless they meet the requirements of 8.15.7.2, 8.15.7.3 or 8.15.7.4 it looks like they are required to be sprinkled. The appendix basically reiterates the same language.

 

[High Desert]

Noncombustible porte-cocheres w/o storage not required to be sprinklered per NFPA 8.15.7.2 and 8.15.7.5.

 

[FM William Burns]

I still can't stand that term and just want to sprinkle it because the codes adopted the term! The one I like is the storage facilities with the large "canopy" and the unloading zones

 

[cda]

Does. Someone know which edition the current language of nfpa 13 added 8.15.7.2, 8.15.7.3 8.15.7.4. With the Porte Corchere ????

I have 2002 and 2010

Never mind have the 07 also, and saw the change there

 

[Builder Bob]

Not sure about other editions, but the Handbook of 1999 had language similar - (just doesn't say Porte Cochere ) 5-13.8.2 and A-5-13.8.2

Short-term transient storage, such as that for delivered packages and the presence of planters, newspaper machines and so-forth, should not be considered storage or the handling of combustibles.

The handbook description specifically states Porte Cocheres at hotels and motels, and drive in windows at banks.

 

[RBK]

I still can't stand that term and just want to sprinkle it because the codes adopted the term!

California doesn't like the term either. They ammended those sections to remove Porte Cochere.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

California doesn't like the term either. They ammended those sections to remove Porte Cochere.

I would think as a matter of design principle, porte cocheres, or carriage porches, should cost more than covered drives, car ports and canopies on name alone, and historically will have expensive sounding occupied spaces above like a patio, terrace or veranda.