Do solar shade structures on commercial parking garages need rapid shutdown

R

ryangittens

Member
Location
usa
Per NEC2023 it seems pretty clear that a shade structure would not need rapid shutdown. I am unsure if a parking garage with no offices or anything like that would be considered habitable building.

Has anyone ever run into the situation where rapid shutdown was required for this type of system?
 
By the spirit of the code, no. And no for lots of reasons. RSD is there so fire officials can hack through the PV to ventilate a roof without getting shocked. Does anyone expect fire fighters would ventilate a PV canopy on a parking garage?

I've had scenarios where a particular owner insists on having RSD which set a precedent in the jurisdiction. Now all canopies in that town are required to have RSD.

Another scenario where the AHJ insisted that the garage structure was not "detached" from the adjacent office building because they shared a concrete sidewalk and awning.

"Habitable" has some debatable meanings as well. Most folks would conclude no kitchen + no bedroom + no bathrooms = non-habitable. Others would point to the homeless guy sleeping in the corner and state "he's habituating, isn't he?

The definition of a "building" is also up for grabs. By the NEC, I can stack two bricks on top of each other and that would be a "building".
 
A parking garage is not 'habitable' but that isn't the standard in the exception, the standard is 'nonenclosed'. A enclosed non-inhabitable industrial building would not meet the exception. A parking garage open to the wind, i.e. with the typical pillars but no walls, should meet the exception.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zee
BandGap1.1eV said:
By the spirit of the code, no. And no for lots of reasons. RSD is there so fire officials can hack through the PV to ventilate a roof without getting shocked. Does anyone expect fire fighters would ventilate a PV canopy on a parking garage?

I've had scenarios where a particular owner insists on having RSD which set a precedent in the jurisdiction. Now all canopies in that town are required to have RSD.

Another scenario where the AHJ insisted that the garage structure was not "detached" from the adjacent office building because they shared a concrete sidewalk and awning.

"Habitable" has some debatable meanings as well. Most folks would conclude no kitchen + no bedroom + no bathrooms = non-habitable. Others would point to the homeless guy sleeping in the corner and state "he's habituating, isn't he?

The definition of a "building" is also up for grabs. By the NEC, I can stack two bricks on top of each other and that would be a "building".
Click to expand...
Check the 2023 NEC Article 100 Definitions you'll find a variety of 5 definitions for... building.
 
It's AHJ's choice. No standard says 100% one way or the other for RSD on parking structures. If the AHJ says to put on RSD then save yourself the trouble of arguing and put on RSD.
 
BandGap1.1eV said:
The definition of a "building" is also up for grabs. By the NEC, I can stack two bricks on top of each other and that would be a "building".
Click to expand...
The NEC is really bad at this. Technically, going by a strict reading of the code, a ground mount PV array is built on a structure that is also a building. I've never heard of an AHJ going that way but there is nothing in the NEC to stop them.
 
Something I ran into in a couple of jurisdictions is that solar carport structures over some specified square footage in size or some length must have a sprinkler system installed. Watch out for that one.
 
ggunn said:
Something I ran into in a couple of jurisdictions is that solar carport structures over some specified square footage in size or some length must have a sprinkler system installed. Watch out for that one.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are a lot of local gotchas around parking structures. Always check the local requirements even more so than your usual projects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top