February 24, 2016
We are remodeling an existing building. The ground floor has a restaurant (2,700 sf) with two small dwelling units above (1,200 sf). The OL of the restaurant is increasing to 75, moving the use from B to A2. This triggers Sub Alt requirements. The building type is 5a. The most restrictive allowable area and height for R-3 and A2 is for the A2 use. We are treating this as a non-separated design. Seattle code has an exception for small A2 buildings that allows them not to be sprinkled;
SBC 903.2.1.2 Group A-2. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for fire areas containing Group A-2 occupancies and intervening floors of the building where one of the following exists:
- The fire area exceeds 5,000 square feet
- The fire area has an occupant load of 100 or more
- The fire area is located on a floor other than a level of exit discharge serving such occupancies
Exception: Item 3 does not apply to fire areas that include space located one floor above the level of exit discharge if the occupant load of the upper floor is less than 50.
The reviewer is citing SBC 903.2.8 and saying we need to sprinkle the building. This section of the code says that R-3 units shall be sprinkled. My question is this; In a Non-separated building does the most restrictive use govern which section of chapter 9 decides if you sprinkler or not? Or does each use, based on the type of occupant use determine how chapter 9 is applied? Can we use the code section above to avoid sprinklers?
Most Recent Topics
- Rebar Support
- 2015 Commercial Mechanical Inspector Exam Prep
- Exit Signage
- Toilet facilities for workers
- wood iconostasis in type II-B building
- Historic Building R-2 Apartment Building
- Is a chase different from a wall cavity?
- No applicable codes to apply to certain buildings?
- General Requirements Exam!!!
- Desuperheater Water Heater (Energy Saving Equipment)