* * * *
Jobsaver,
You are correct about performing a "cost / benefit" analysis of every situation.
But, let's look at the bigger picture here. Besides the occupants [ of the
structure in the OP ], the AHJ also has a risk to its fire fighting personnel
and equipment in these types of applications. Is the "cost" of not installing
gyp. board on the ceiling of this garage, worth the "risk" of possibly placing
[ the AHJ ] human resources in a life threatening situation? Equipment can
be replaced readily. It takes years to have a firefighter [ effectively ]
trained.
Realistically, in a fire, if fire fighters have to go upstairs to check for
occupants, how long do they have before the floor collapses? Either them,
or them and the occupants?
Would you as a fire official; who is ACTUALLY responding on the scene,
ask / require your personnel to go in to a developed fire event, ...knowing
that this condition exists? Forget the BO & the Bldg. Inspectors in this
application. They [ typically ] do not respond to fires or go in to fires to
perform rescues. Does the cost of that firefighters life [ and permanently
lost resources to his family ] match the cost of a "new" gyp. board ceiling?
Or, are the firefighters just supposed to be the "sacrificial lambs" because
of insufficient codes, ...or insufficiently worded codes, ...where [ if ] the
fire official knows about Section R102.7, this scenario can be avoided.
IMO, the Building Code officials and the Fire Code officials have failed
to work together as a team in helping to create a safer living / built
environment. I include myself in this "failure!" I am from the building
code side of this equation. I would not want to go into a "light framed"
built anything fire event, nor would I want my family to have such risk
/ exposure. Why then; as active code officials who are supposed to
be on the same team, ...with the same goal, not working together to this
end?
Current rant paused...
* * * *