Retractable Canopy Create A Fire Area?

[Papio Bldg Dept]

The problem is that it needs some resolution. In some parts of the country, it's probably not a big deal. But with the mild climate around here, half the restaurants, and many of the retail have huge "roofed" outdoor areas. It is difficult to get your hands around from a building code perspective, and when the FD gets involved, well, you can guess...

I guess I would be less concerned with the restaurants as long as MOE is addressed (i.e. emergency lighting, signage, clear widths of aisles/accessways, travel distances, etc.) and does not go back through the building. Chapter 31 requires the construction to provide fire-resistance and I am not sure what additional benefit considering an exterior canopied dining space as a fire area would provide. I look forward to hearing from RLGA, mark handler, brudgers and other RDPs on this topic as well (hopefully we don't fall into the sprinklered tents discussion again).

Fenced in Mercantile and Storage occupancies might require additional considerations. Could Gas Station Canopies be considered as part of the fire area as well?

 

[gbhammer]

Not much chance or under many circumstances that a sprinkler head will be affective under an outdoor canopy or awning.

 

[RLGA]

First, read the definitions of awning and canopy carefully. Roofs over stadiums do not come close to being considered either of those two; so there should be no confusion.

As for outdoor eating areas or any other areas (except storage), canopies and awings do not present the same risk that a building roof or floor structure presents. Fire area includes the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above. For floors, a fire underneath the projection presents a hazard to the occupants on the floor above. For projecting roofs, the structural system is probably tied back to a point in the building, provides structural support for portions of the roof that are over enclosed areas of the building, or provides a path for fire and smoke to travel from outside to inside. Thus, a fire on the outside underneath the projecting roof creates a hazard for occupants inside.

Canopies and awnings have none of those hazards, beyond the immediate hazard to occupants directly under the canopy or awning. Therefore, I do not consider them part of the fire area.

However, if attached to the building, NFPA 13 (2010 edition) requires that canopies and similar projections be sprinklered if they exceed 4 ft. (Section 8.15.7). There are exceptions, such as being constructed of noncombustible materials, limited-combustible materials (a NFPA-specific term), or fire-retardant-treated wood. Sprinklers are required in canopies and other projections that are greater than 2 ft. and are over stored materials--no exceptions are given.

 

[texasbo]

First, read the definitions of awning and canopy carefully. Roofs over stadiums do not come close to being considered either of those two; so there should be no confusion.As for outdoor eating areas or any other areas (except storage), canopies and awings do not present the same risk that a building roof or floor structure presents. Fire area includes the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above. For floors, a fire underneath the projection presents a hazard to the occupants on the floor above. For projecting roofs, the structural system is probably tied back to a point in the building, provides structural support for portions of the roof that are over enclosed areas of the building, or provides a path for fire and smoke to travel from outside to inside. Thus, a fire on the outside underneath the projecting roof creates a hazard for occupants inside.

Canopies and awnings have none of those hazards, beyond the immediate hazard to occupants directly under the canopy or awning. Therefore, I do not consider them part of the fire area.

However, if attached to the building, NFPA 13 (2010 edition) requires that canopies and similar projections be sprinklered if they exceed 4 ft. (Section 8.15.7). There are exceptions, such as being constructed of noncombustible materials, limited-combustible materials (a NFPA-specific term), or fire-retardant-treated wood. Sprinklers are required in canopies and other projections that are greater than 2 ft. and are over stored materials--no exceptions are given.

I agree with all of the above. However, when is the structure under consideration a canopy, and when is it a roof? I think it's easy to distinguish when we're talking about a fire retardant fabric over a frame. However, when the covered area is constructed out of steel channels with a metal deck, is it fair to call that a canopy, just because it isn't constructed exactly the same as the roof of the rest of the building? We have seen the code change, and the reason for the change posted by Francis, so we know the INTENT of the change was to consider these areas as part of the building fire area. That's what I'm struggling with.

 

[FM William Burns]

Canopies and awnings have none of those hazards, beyond the immediate hazard to occupants directly under the canopy or awning. Therefore, I do not consider them part of the fire area.However, if attached to the building, NFPA 13 (2010 edition) requires that canopies and similar projections be sprinklered if they exceed 4 ft. (Section 8.15.7). There are exceptions, such as being constructed of noncombustible materials, limited-combustible materials (a NFPA-specific term), or fire-retardant-treated wood. Sprinklers are required in canopies and other projections that are greater than 2 ft. and are over stored materials--no exceptions are given.

Been waiting for that......thanks!

 

[Francis Vineyard]

The roof of an occupancy regardless of construction material as long as it complies with the construction type permitted is included as a fire area.

http://www2.iccsafe.org/cs/committeeArea/pdf_file/BU_03_104_05.pdf

Thanks,

Francis

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

The roof of an occupancy regardless of construction material as long as it complies with the construction type permitted is included as a fire area. http://www2.iccsafe.org/cs/committeeArea/pdf_file/BU_03_104_05.pdf

Thanks,

Francis

That is based upon 2003 definitions is it not? Haven't those definitions changed substantially in the last 6-7 years (and I would assume the interpretations/justifications as well)?

 

[Francis Vineyard]

That is based upon 2003 definitions is it not? Haven't those definitions changed substantially in the last 6-7 years (and I would assume the interpretations/justifications as well)?

Definitions and code sections have been added and change for clarity; other than exceptions for sprinklers when it applies and applicable sections in chapter 4 for instance; is there anything to the contrary to the 2003 interpretation in the code?

Francis

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Definitions and code sections have been added and change for clarity; other than exceptions for sprinklers when it applies and applicable sections in chapter 4 for instance; is there anything to the contrary to the 2003 interpretation in the code?Francis

Per the discussion, I did not know if the 2012 or 2015 proposals would vary, or offer anything contrary, as we do not have 2012 books.

I am in the 2006, and don't believe the definitions are contrary to those offered in the opinion, but I was unable to reach your conclusion of

"the roof of an occupancy regardless of construction material as long as it complies with the construction type permitted is included as a fire area. " based upon the opinion referenced.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Papio I researched as time permitted in the 2012 Free Codes and search state interpretations such as NY and NC among others and it baffled me to see pictures of what appeared to be light transmitting plastic wall panels that is prohibited in restaurant "fire areas" in their bulletins; but that of course is their prerogative and it added to my confusion finding stuff like that online.

For those of us inexperience and with very small staffs it is to our advantage to post here for any help with these interpretations.

Francis

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Papio I researched as time permitted in the 2012 Free Codes and search state interpretations such as NY and NC among others and it baffled me to see pictures of what appeared to be light transmitting plastic wall panels that is prohibited in restaurant "fire areas" in their bulletins; but that of course is their prerogative and it added to my confusion finding stuff like that online. For those of us inexperience and with very small staffs it is to our advantage to post here for any help with these interpretations.

Francis

I completely agree. I was confused/curious as to whether the 2003 opinions were consistent with the 2012 code language, and how that interpretation yields a 'regardless of construction' conclusion. Regardless of mental shortcomings today, as always, thank you for posting. I have always found your posts helpful and informative.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Regardless of (my) mental shortcomings today, as always, thank you for posting.

Editing posts is one of the perks for donations correct?