Town House Smoke Detector Circuit

[jar546]

That may be true but each building would need it's own disconnect and all disconnects for that structure must be grouped. Now if you install a switch at every building for the smoke circuit it may be allowed per code but then I doubt you can install a smoke detector circuit on a switch other than the overcurrent protective device.

Each unit does, of course have it's own sub feed coming from the grouped disconnects. The grouped disconnects are for feeders since there is already a service disconnect.

Still trying to see with this setup exactly where this is not allowed.

 

[JBI]

Perhaps the term 'townhouse' is applied differently in different States? As mtlogcabin and I pointed out, in our respective locations there are property lines between the units. Lacking the property lines they are attached dwellings and outside the scope of the ResCode.

 

[jar546]

Perhaps the term 'townhouse' is applied differently in different States? As mtlogcabin and I pointed out, in our respective locations there are property lines between the units. Lacking the property lines they are attached dwellings and outside the scope of the ResCode.

Townhouses are specifically listed in the IRC.

 

[JBI]

I am aware Jeff. But by description they are on separate lots. The issue is traversing through neighboring properties with utilities, which is generally frowned on in some places.

 

[cda]

Townhouses are specifically listed in the IRC.

I guess what is the purpose of this exercise???

It does not sound like a good set up, which normally means it does not meet code

Is someone trying to do this????

 

[jar546]

I guess what is the purpose of this exercise???It does not sound like a good set up, which normally means it does not meet code

Is someone trying to do this????

Yes, someone is trying to do this. They want to build town homes (with sprinkler system of course) for a housing authority but this is what is planned. We have asked them to re-evaluate their design from a practical and safety standpoint but still cannot find a code that applies prohibiting this.

 

[Fort]

No, townhouses are not on separate lots by definition. They can be on the same lot per IRC. No need to keep fighting that fact.

 

[Fort]

I don't see a code justification for rejecting it. But I also don't see why the applicant doesn't just do the smart and simple change and connect to circuit in the unit specific panel...

 

[cda]

So if I live in one of these and find out the house is paying for my smoke alarm power

I hook a few electric outlets into that circuit and power my appliances off the smoke alarm circuit

And save a little electric power money!!!!!

NOW. , I like the set up

 

[Dennis]

Each unit does, of course have it's own sub feed coming from the grouped disconnects. The grouped disconnects are for feeders since there is already a service disconnect.Still trying to see with this setup exactly where this is not allowed.

art. 225.30 allows only one feeder or branch circuit to the building

 

[Dennis]

Here is the article-- you need a lot of convincing... I admit that it is convoluted but IMO it is a violation

225.30 Number of Supplies. A building or other structurethat is served by a branch circuit or feeder on the load side

of a service disconnecting means shall be supplied by only

one feeder or branch circuit unless permitted in 225.30(A)

through (E). For the purpose of this section, a multiwire

branch circuit shall be considered a single circuit.

Where a branch circuit or feeder originates in these additional

buildings or other structures, only one feeder or

branch circuit shall be permitted to supply power back to

the original building or structure, unless permitted in

225.30(A) through (E).

(A) Special Conditions. Additional feeders or branch circuits

shall be permitted to supply the following:

(1) Fire pumps

(2) Emergency systems

(3) Legally required standby systems

(4) Optional standby systems

(5) Parallel power production systems

(6) Systems designed for connection to multiple sources of

supply for the purpose of enhanced reliability

(B) Special Occupancies. By special permission, additional

feeders or branch circuits shall be permitted for either

of the following:

(1) Multiple-occupancy buildings where there is no space

available for supply equipment accessible to all occupants

(2) A single building or other structure sufficiently large to

make two or more supplies necessary

© Capacity Requirements. Additional feeders or branch

circuits shall be permitted where the capacity requirements

are in excess of 2000 amperes at a supply voltage of 1000

volts or less.

(D) Different Characteristics. Additional feeders or

branch circuits shall be permitted for different voltages,

frequencies, or phases or for different uses, such as control

of outside lighting from multiple locations.

(E) Documented Switching Procedures. Additional feeders

or branch circuits shall be permitted to supply installations

under single management where documented safe

switching procedures are established and maintained for

disconnection.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Cabo required a property line between townhouse units. The IRC does not.

Planning decided not to change there definition of a townhouse and the requirement of a property line between units.

I am glad they stuck to the original definition

 

[JBI]

Fort, please read what I wrote not what you want it to say... I did not say by 'definition', I said by 'description'. Big difference. One gives you an answer, the other requires critical reading. I understand that different jurisdictions apply the Codes differently. In NYS Townhouses as regulated by the RCNYS are on separate lots. In any case, they are necessarily separate buildings. If designed as one building with more than 2 dwelling units it would again be outside the scope of the ResCode.

 

[JBI]

Excerpts are from the 2010 RCNYS. I believe but could be mistaken that the IRC is essentially the same. It's describing a party wall.

TOWNHOUSE. A single-family dwelling unit constructed in a group of three or more attached units in which each unit extends from foundation to roof and with open space on at least two sides.

R317.2 Townhouses. Each townhouse shall be considered a separate building and shall be separated by fire-resistance-rated wall assemblies meeting the requirements of Section R302 for exterior walls.

Exception: A common 2-hour fire-resistance-rated wall is permitted for townhouses if such walls do not contain plumbing or mechanical equipment, ducts or vents in the cavity of the common wall. Electrical installations shall be installed in accordance with :Next('./st_ny_st_b400v10_33_par001.htm')'>Chapters 33 through :Next('./st_ny_st_b400v10_42_par001.htm')'>42. Penetrations of electrical outlet boxes shall be in accordance with Section R317.3.

R317.2.1 Continuity. The fire-resistance-rated wall or assembly separating townhouses shall be continuous from the foundation to the underside of the roof sheathing, deck or slab. The fire-resistance rating shall extend the full length of the wall or assembly, including wall extensions through and separating attached enclosed accessory structures.

R317.2.2 Parapets. Parapets constructed in accordance with Section R317.2.3 shall be constructed for townhouses as an extension of exterior walls or common walls in accordance with the following:1. Where roof surfaces adjacent to the wall or walls are at the same elevation, the parapet shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) above the roof surfaces.2. Where roof surfaces adjacent to the wall or walls are at different elevations and the higher roof is not more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the lower roof, the parapet shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) above the lower roof surface.

Exception: A parapet is not required in the two cases above when the roof is covered with a minimum class C roof covering, and the roof decking or sheathing is of noncombustible materials or approved fire-retardant-treated wood for a distance of 4 feet (1219 mm) on each side of the wall or walls, or one layer of 5/8-inch (15.9 mm) Type X gypsum board is installed directly beneath the roof decking or sheathing, supported by a minimum of nominal 2-inch (51 mm) ledgers attached to the sides of the roof framing members, for a minimum distance of 4 feet (1220 mm) on each side of the wall or walls.3. A parapet is not required where roof surfaces adjacent to the wall or walls are at different elevations and the higher roof is more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the lower roof. The common wall construction from the lower roof to the underside of the higher roof deck shall have not less than a 1-hour fire-resistence rating. The wall shall be rated for exposure from both sides.

R317.2.3 Parapet construction. Parapets shall have the same fire-resistance rating as that required for the supporting wall or walls. On any side adjacent to a roof surface, the parapet shall have noncombustible faces for the uppermost 18 inches (457 mm), to include counterflashing and coping materials. Where the roof slopes toward a parapet at slopes greater than two units vertical in 12 units horizontal (16.7-percent slope), the parapet shall extend to the same height as any portion of the roof within a distance of 3 feet (914 mm), but in no case shall the height be less than 30 inches (762 mm).

R317.2.4 Structural independence. Each individual townhouse shall be structurally independent.

Exceptions:1. Foundations supporting exterior walls or common walls.2. Structural roof and wall sheathing from each unit may fasten to the common wall framing.3. Nonstructural wall coverings.4. Flashing at termination of roof covering over common wall.5. Townhouses separated by a common 2-hour fire-resistance-rated wall as provided in Section R317.2.

 

[Dennis]

So with all this info are there still members who believe the install is compliant. I got lost in all the building code stuff. It just doesn't seem safe to install it as stated.

 

[cda]

So with all this info are there still members who believe the install is compliant. I got lost in all the building code stuff. It just doesn't seem safe to install it as stated.

I like it, if it was set up in my unit, I would tap in some electric outlets and run as many appliances off it as I could

Let my neighbors pay the electric bill

 

[Dennis]

I like it, if it was set up in my unit, I would tap in some electric outlets and run as many appliances off it as I could Let my neighbors pay the electric bill

My sister in law owns an older condo and I noticed that when we turned all the power off there was one receptacle that was hot. Apparently that got the wire on the wrong side of the party wall. The owner would not let me in to fix it so I told her I would run a cord and let her pay for the refrigerator usage. She got the management to deal with it. They had reversed the outlets for those condo. She could have done the same on her side....Been there 40 years

 

[Paul Sweet]

As several posts have pointed out, you can have rental townhouses without property lines between them, or condominium townhouses where site lighting may be from a common panel, in addition to individually owned townhouses on separate lots. The definition of townhouses doesn't say anything about property lines, unless your jurisdiction has very restrictive zoning laws.

Since each townhouse is considered as a separate building, and Dennis showed that a building can't be served by more than one feeder, running a feeder plus an additional circuit from the house panel violates the NEC.