I have a question pertaining to fire sprinklers.

Current code says all new buildings used as a restaurant that seats more than 100 persons is required to have a sprinkler system.

I am looking at a space in a strip center that has been a restaurant, but is not sprinkled. City says it must have sprinklers now. Some of what I have read online says that since the use has not changed, not having sprinklers is OK.

Anybody know how this works?

What is your usage going to be, and how many occupants? There are usage classes that will call for certain things.

The IRC/IBC has standardized a lot, but local zoning and other ordinaces can drive requirements like sprinklers.

Most any city/town also gives the building dept. broad discretion on what it can require in a given building. Fighting them on it may be more trouble than its worth.

The IBC is going to want to know usage, capacity, and whether it is open to the public. Then we can look up what is called for.

It was a restaurant that has been vacant for several years. Remaining as a restaurant. Strip center is not that old, but wasn't required to have sprinklers when built. Since the restaurant didn't have them, I'm assuming they weren't required when it was built out either.

Section 903 covers sprinklers, but 903.2 "Where Required" refers to "new buildings and structures".

903.2.1.2 requires them when the occupant load is 100 or more. Anything with 1,300 square feet or more of dining space qualifies.

But are they only talking about new? Because I ran across this:

https://nfsa.org/wp-content/up...C-IBC-IEBC-Guide.pdf

Where it is said:

quote:

The 2018 International Fire Code (IFC) has
a new retrofit requirement for fire sprinklers
in A-2 (bars, nightclubs, restaurants, halls,
etc.) that serve alcohol. This move stems from the
2003 Station Nightclub fire that claimed 100 lives
and injured over 187, that prompted changes in
building and fire codes to lower their fire sprinkler
threshold trigger to 100 occupants for new A-2
occupancies starting in the 2006 International Building Code
(IBC) and IFC. Existing A-2 occupancies can operate as status
quo, unsprinklered, with no requirements in the IFC to trigger
sprinklers until the 2018 edition.

Do you plan on serving alcohol?

quote:

Do you plan on serving alcohol?

Likely beer and wine. Family friendly, no hard alcohol or bar.

As currently set up, they had a floor plan that showed seating for 120 which included a bar. The plan was to retain the basic layout with minimal changes.

In general, local governing authority trumps any written code. Most use national standardized codes but many add their own unique requirements.
Especially if these seem to be in the area of greater public safety i.e. sprinklers where none were before.
Sometimes it is a pain to jump thru all the hoops to get a certificate of occupancy. You need to talk to the inspector as to what was there vs. what you will need to do now.

quote:

Originally posted by sig operator:
In general, local governing authority trumps any written code. Most use national standardized codes but many add their own unique requirements.
Especially if these seem to be in the area of greater public safety i.e. sprinklers where none were before.
Sometimes it is a pain to jump thru all the hoops to get a certificate of occupancy. You need to talk to the inspector as to what was there vs. what you will need to do now.

This would be my assumption.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

Do you plan on serving alcohol?

Likely beer and wine. Family friendly, no hard alcohol or bar.

As currently set up, they had a floor plan that showed seating for 120 which included a bar. The plan was to retain the basic layout with minimal changes.

With the alcohol and 120 capacity, I'd say you're screwed. Since its not an existing business.

quote:

With the alcohol and 120 capacity, I'd say you're screwed. Since its not an existing business.

It would seem that it's the local community that's screwed if they do things in such a way to prohibit business.

But that is why I asked if anybody had any experience. Searching around on the internet would indicate that since the occupancy has not changed, the code for new construction wouldn't apply. But that is not what the small town fire marshal and hired out city inspector (too small to hire one full time) is saying.

I've had some zoning dealings that have required counsel to intervene on my behalf, which ultimately, you may want to as well. Sounds like the opinion of the city is that it is a new restaurant even though the use hasn't changed. Had there been some continuity in operation or even a short term delay, they may have granted that and not required the new equipment. Several years of no occupancy and it's a different game. Having said that, hiring a local zoning counsel to investigate and speak with the city could get them to have a different opinion.

Just as an FYI, we had an inspector insist on earthquake bracing, for the interior partition walls, to put offices in a warehouse, in a town without a fault line...

So many variables and likely local codes are driving this.

One of my clients owns several commercial buildings. One is a multi-story medical building built in the '60s. The local fire marshal has started to push for more upgrades. New tenant to get occupancy to have to make more and more upgrades.

They haven't pushed for sprinkles though. Although in an older multistory building I don't see that being feasible. Well, it could be done but it would be expensive and have effects on current tenants.

You are going to have to research and out what is truly required. Sometimes it's easier to just do things to make inspectors happy but a sprinkler system isn't one of those.

Every community is different. The code office, city officials and the Fire Department all play a role. Typically if there is a NEW owner, the building must be brought up to current code. The code for the city and the county are usually not the same. Of course politics plays a role as well.

In all likely hood you will need to install a sprinkler system.
We went through this three years ago.

Let me suggest you go and talk with the head building official. He has the ultimate authority. Everyone else is just speculating...

+1 ZSMICHAEL

FWIW, several decades ago I took building construction classes in my fire department.

We were taught if nothing is upgraded, you are grandfathered, if codes change. If anything is upgraded in any particular area, everything must be brought up to code in that area.

The ultimate decision lies with your local code enforcement office.

a1abdj,

Actually, the code you want is the NFPA Life Safety Code...2018 is the current edition. Typically, IBC quotes or reiterates NFPA on life safety, but by default, NFPA Life Safety rules should the codes be in conflict. I had advanced NFPA code training about 5 years back, but switched positions and never had a need to use it. Unfortunately I am in unrelated training this week or I would look it up.

My professional opinion would be to contact a professional fire protection engineer.

a1abdj,

Before my present job, I had a lot more involvement in fire code issues here in Minnesota from the side of the government. In looking over your post where you mentioned this:

quote:

But are they only talking about new? Because I ran across this:

https://nfsa.org/wp-content/up...C-IBC-IEBC-Guide.pdf

Where it is said:

quote:

The 2018 International Fire Code (IFC) has
a new retrofit requirement for fire sprinklers
in A-2 (bars, nightclubs, restaurants, halls,
etc.) that serve alcohol. This move stems from the
2003 Station Nightclub fire that claimed 100 lives
and injured over 187, that prompted changes in
building and fire codes to lower their fire sprinkler
threshold trigger to 100 occupants for new A-2
occupancies starting in the 2006 International Building Code
(IBC) and IFC. Existing A-2 occupancies can operate as status
quo, unsprinklered, with no requirements in the IFC to trigger
sprinklers until the 2018 edition.

These requirements would only apply if the jurisdiction where this space is located is enforcing the 2018 I-codes (IBC, IFC etc). This is possible if you are dealing with proactive government but it may be that they are enforcing an older
version of the code. In MN for example, the current state fire code is from 2015 which references the 2012 version of the IFC with MN specific amendments.

When I was more active with the codes, the general rule was that no change in use (i.e. was a restaurant and will be one again) should not trigger the new construction requirements, but as others have said there are many variables that could be in play including some type of local requirements. I would argue that the building official and fire marshal you have dealt with need to provide their basis for saying sprinklers are now required, including but not limited to a specific code section(s). When I helped with fire code training, we drove home the point that there is no "just because" section in the code, you need to be able to cite your basis or prove yourself.

I will admit that I am a believer in sprinklers but sometimes the codes allow for you to not have to install them. Hope this information helps a little while you assess your situation.

quote:

Sometimes it's easier to just do things to make inspectors happy but a sprinkler system isn't one of those.

The small community I am talking about has three options: Strip Center 1, Strip Center 2, or Build Something New.

Neither strip center has sprinklers, the owners of those centers have no desire to install sprinklers due to cost, and I'm not going to install sprinklers due to cost. I'm also not going to build a new structure to serve the 3,000 residents.

The city says they would love a new business, yet then make it impossible for a new business to open. This may explain why cities 15 minutes in both directions are booming while this one remains stagnant.

quote:

Let me suggest you go and talk with the head building official. He has the ultimate authority.

The building owner, his architect, the part time third party building inspector, and the full time firefighter/fire marshal did have a meeting at the space.

They are insisting on sprinklers, referencing new construction code.

quote:

We were taught if nothing is upgraded, you are grandfathered, if codes change. If anything is upgraded in any particular area, everything must be brought up to code in that area.

That seemed to be the impression everybody besides the building inspector and fire marshal had.

There was going to be no major upgrades. Minor electrical and plumbing work to accommodate different fixtures, new flooring, and new aesthetics. No load bearing walls being moved or anything along those lines.

Ironically, that's exactly what their other option was. If you don't want to install sprinklers, then you can build new fire walls to cut the space in half. This would require major construction.

quote:

These requirements would only apply if the jurisdiction where this space is located is enforcing the 2018 I-codes (IBC, IFC etc). This is possible if you are dealing with proactive government but it may be that they are enforcing an older
version of the code. In MN for example, the current state fire code is from 2015 which references the 2012 version of the IFC with MN specific amendments.

They are using the 2015 code.

quote:

but as others have said there are many variables that could be in play including some type of local requirements. I would argue that the building official and fire marshal you have dealt with need to provide their basis for saying sprinklers are now required, including but not limited to a specific code section(s). When I helped with fire code training, we drove home the point that there is no "just because" section in the code, you need to be able to cite your basis or prove yourself.

They are citing nothing other than the new construction code (2015), at least verbally.

quote:

I will admit that I am a believer in sprinklers

As am I when it's a real life safety issue. I believe the problem lies in the building code putting restaurants in the same category as night clubs.

Huge difference (and risk) between emptying 100 people off a dance floor and 100 people out of a McDonalds.

The only possible exception I see from a code standpoint is 3412.2.4 which says

An existing building or portion thereof, which does not comply with the requirements of this code for new construction, shall not be altered or repaired in such a manner that results in the building being less safe or sanitary than such building is currently. If, in the alteration or repair, the current level of safety or sanitation is to be reduced, the portion altered or repaired shall conform to the requirements of Chapters 2 through 12 and Chapters 14 through 33.

IOW, depending on your building official, you might could argue that your renovations are not making the building any less safe and sanitary than it is right now. If you are not altering layout, egress, exiting, and accessibility, they might allow it. It all depends on the building official.

This would be my argument. FWIW, I'm an architect and deal with IBC on a daily basis.