If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by on June 19, 2007, 2:46 pm
I am having trouble with a restaurant next door (same landlord). They
ran their oven exhaust and ventilation ductwork into my retail store,
through my wall, ceiling and roof. It is "boxed-in" with T-bar and
ceiling panels. I can't believe that this is a legal structure. The
code inspector said, "It's not hot." I told him there, currently, was
no fire engulfing the restaurant. I can reference IBC 2000 303.2.2 :
"302.3.3 Separated uses: Each portion of the building shall be
individually classified as to use shall be completely separated from
adjacent areas by a fire barrier walls or horizontal assemblies or
both having a fire resistance rating determined in accordance with
Table 302.3.3 for the uses being separated, Each fire area shall
comply with the code based on the use of that space."
Can someone PLEASE post, or send, a verbatim wording of the updated
code. I think it is 508.3.3.
Also, as I understand it, local codes can be more stringent than IBC,
but not less. How much room is there for interpretation?
Thank you in advance.
|
|
Posted by dpb on June 19, 2007, 3:06 pm
sideshowhaas@netscape.net wrote:
> I am having trouble with a restaurant next door (same landlord). They
> ran their oven exhaust and ventilation ductwork into my retail store,
> through my wall, ceiling and roof. It is "boxed-in" with T-bar and
> ceiling panels. I can't believe that this is a legal structure. The
> code inspector said, "It's not hot." I told him there, currently, was
> no fire engulfing the restaurant. I can reference IBC 2000 303.2.2 :
...
> Also, as I understand it, local codes can be more stringent than IBC,
> but not less. How much room is there for interpretation?
...
Don't have the code so can't help there.
On the other questions, I think it is up to the local jurisdiction to
elect to follow any particular code, write their own, or not bother.
You'll need to find out what the actual code is for the jurisdiction
you're in and see what it actually is.
If the particular inspector let something go by which doesn't meet that
level of code, then you have a beef and can go to next level of
supervision about it.
What IBC says may or may not have any bearing. There's a good chance
it's what is used, but the folks at City Hall can tell you that and
should be able to provide reference as well.
--
|
|
Posted by Dennis on June 19, 2007, 7:40 pm
The restraunt is an A2 occupancy, your retail store is a B occupancy. Table
302.3.2 does not require a rated separation between the these two
occupancies. Only a separation is needed or he probably classified the
entire building as a nonseparated structure (worst case governs).
I don't know if this is worth anything or not but, the IMC requires that the
duct be enclosed throughout it's length "for shaft construction" (which
sounds like what they are achieving). Horizontal ducts which are
inaccessible from the duct entry or discharge (which would be the case here,
unless you gave permission for inspection), are required to have a cleanout
every 20 feet. Section 506.9 of IMC.
When you say "they ran .. ductwork" did you mean 'before' you were a tenant
or after? If after, would require your permission. Before (IMO) you had the
chance to refuse to rent.
If it's the sound your objecting to, talk with your landlord and have him
provide additional soundproofing. There are some new type of sound-reducing
gypsum available now that work wonders and are not too expensive.
>I am having trouble with a restaurant next door (same landlord). They
> ran their oven exhaust and ventilation ductwork into my retail store,
> through my wall, ceiling and roof. It is "boxed-in" with T-bar and
> ceiling panels. I can't believe that this is a legal structure. The
> code inspector said, "It's not hot." I told him there, currently, was
> no fire engulfing the restaurant. I can reference IBC 2000 303.2.2 :
> "302.3.3 Separated uses: Each portion of the building shall be
> individually classified as to use shall be completely separated from
> adjacent areas by a fire barrier walls or horizontal assemblies or
> both having a fire resistance rating determined in accordance with
> Table 302.3.3 for the uses being separated, Each fire area shall
> comply with the code based on the use of that space."
> Can someone PLEASE post, or send, a verbatim wording of the updated
> code. I think it is 508.3.3.
> Also, as I understand it, local codes can be more stringent than IBC,
> but not less. How much room is there for interpretation?
> Thank you in advance.
>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Project Management Tutorial (September 2006). | September 21, 2006, 6:11 am |
| MEEF CyberShow Top Ten Green Products in 2006 | December 27, 2006, 12:36 pm |
| 2006-2007 Online "Businessman Of The Year Award" | May 2, 2007, 1:27 am |
| NEED TO FIRE THE SUB FROM HELL | June 21, 2009, 1:08 am |
| Fire Prevention - Stove Top Fires | September 29, 2006, 10:28 pm |
| look for the best fire escaped stairs company | April 16, 2007, 5:08 pm |
| Fire Safety for Rigid Insulation Above Slab | August 25, 2006, 1:38 pm |
| FLorida Codes? | December 22, 2006, 4:39 pm |
| Building Codes | November 13, 2007, 3:07 am |
| outline codes | January 25, 2008, 12:14 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> ran their oven exhaust and ventilation ductwork into my retail store,
> through my wall, ceiling and roof. It is "boxed-in" with T-bar and
> ceiling panels. I can't believe that this is a legal structure. The
> code inspector said, "It's not hot." I told him there, currently, was
> no fire engulfing the restaurant. I can reference IBC 2000 303.2.2 :