Fire station

Status
Not open for further replies.
Since I often consider a small break area in an office a commercial kitchen, I would probably say yes.

The funny thing is, if the firemen sleep at the station, it could also be a residential kitchen.

I don't know of anything in the NEC that says a space can't be commercial and residential both - and subject to the requirements of both occupancies.

Steve
 
I would think the zoning and primary use is what would determine whether its residential or commercial. Sleeping at the firestation is ancilliary to its primary use.
 
If it has a sink and permanent provisions for cooking, then it is a "kitchen," in the context of 210.8(B). The phrase "commercial kitchen" has no meaning outside that context, so there is no value in debating whether to call the fire house kitchen a "commercial kitchen." It is a "kitchen," and it is not in a "dwelling unit," and that is all that matters.
 
steve66 said:
The funny thing is, if the firemen sleep at the station, it could also be a residential kitchen.
Click to expand...
I don't think the fire station meets the article 100 definition of "dwelling unit." It is a work place. My view is that it does not have permanent provisions for living or for sleeping. As wireguru has said, the fire fighters can sleep there. But the permanent provisions are to allow them to be asleep while on duty, while enabling them to respond immediately to a call.
 
I'm thinking the same thing as Charlie. It is a "B" occupancy.

And in this case then I would treat the sleeping areas as the same as any other non-dwelling unit and there would not be any "required" receptacles.
 
charlie b said:

I don't think the fire station meets the article 100 definition of "dwelling unit." It is a work place. My view is that it does not have permanent provisions for living or for sleeping. As wireguru has said, the fire fighters can sleep there. But the permanent provisions are to allow them to be asleep while on duty, while enabling them to respond immediately to a call.
Click to expand...


I don't see it that way at all.

Does it have permanent provisions for living or for sleeping?

Yes.
 
iwire said:
I don't see it that way at all.

Does it have permanent provisions for living or for sleeping?

Yes.
Click to expand...

Well after I posted my last post, I had one of the other plan checkers look at it and now we have all kinds of questions.

They park the trucks inside, but the arch is calling that area a B and we're leaning towards an S1 or S2 and one would require a one hour seperation and the other doesn't. Or is it a B with accessory uses? The kitchen we did agree is a commercial kitchen.

I'm going to set this one aside until we get some clearer answers from the Arch.

This is why I keep saying that not all of the answers for the work we do are in the NEC. Sometimes we need to know what it is so that we can know how to build it.

Thanks for the responses.:smile:
 
iwire said:
I don't see it that way at all.
Click to expand...
That has happened between us before. :D
iwire said:
Does it have permanent provisions for living or for sleeping? Yes.
Click to expand...
Think of all the things you can do in the smallest building that could be someone’s permanent home, the things for which you need “living accommodations,” and ask how many of them are available at a fire station. Watch TV? Yes. Sit on sofa? Yes. Use the bathroom? Yes. Talk with friends? Yes. So in this context, it is hard to argue with your point of view.

But the facility is not designed to be a place to live. Nobody lives there. They go there to work. Sometimes their 24 hour work day does not allow them so much as an opportunity to sit and drink a cup of coffee. Sometimes they spend 24 hours without leaving the building. But they are there to perform a job, and they are paid to be there. Tell me any other circumstance in which a person living in a dwelling unit is paid to do nothing other than be there. The “permanent provisions” are not there to allow one or more persons to live there. They are there to allow the workers to perform their duties. What you have there is “permanent provisions to allow a worker to do a job.”

And as for “permanent provisions for sleeping,” when you or I turn in for the night, we intend to sleep for a certain number of hours. The permanent provisions in our homes would include one or more rooms isolated from the rest of the building by doors or other means, and that have space for a bed and bedroom furniture. That is not the case in a fire station. A fire fighter will have some opportunities to be asleep during part of their work day. But that can end on a moment’s notice. The intent is not to provide permanent provisions for sleeping, but rather permanent provisions to rest during a work day, and to enable the person to respond immediately to a call.

I would never bring any of the dwelling unit requirements (e.g., SA circuits, laundry circuits, kitchen countertop receptacle spacing requirements, bedroom AFCI requirements, etc.) into play, if I were assigned the task of designing a fire station.
 
charlie b said:
The permanent provisions in our homes would include one or more rooms isolated from the rest of the building by doors or other means, and that have space for a bed and bedroom furniture. That is not the case in a fire station.
Click to expand...
That is exactly the case in every fire station with a full time paid staff that I have been in. It is often a larger room with multiple beds, but in some cases smaller rooms with just one or two beds. The living areas are always isolated from the appratus bay, watch office and other work areas.
 
charlie b said:
But the facility is not designed to be a place to live. Nobody lives there.
Click to expand...
Where does the code defintion of dwelling unit say anything about someone actually living in the structure?
Dwelling Unit. A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation.
Click to expand...
The living area of a fire station conforms to the above definition.
 
Sorry, Don. I wasn't clear in my sequence of sentences. My use of "that is not the case" was intended to apply to the notion of going to sleep for the purposes of sleep, and with the intent of being asleep for a planned number of hours. I sleep because it is my time to sleep. They sleep because they have a few unscheduled minutes (or perhaps it will turn out to be hours, nobody knows in advance) in which they can sleep.

If you were to design a new fire station tomorrow, would you provide AFCI protection for all outlets in the rooms that have the beds (let's use the 2005 NEC for this question)?
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Where does the code defintion of dwelling unit say anything about someone actually living in the structure?
Click to expand...
What it says is that the design and installation include provisions for someone living and sleeping there. If the building was not designed for persons to live there, it will not meet the definition of "dwelling unit." As to the question of anyone actually living there, a vacant dwelling unit is still a dwelling unit, because it was designed and built with provisions for someone to live there.

 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Where does the code definition of dwelling unit say anything about someone actually living in the structure?
Click to expand...

That was exactly my thought as well.

The living area of a fire station conforms to the above definition.
Click to expand...

IMO there is no question about that.:smile:

I don't really think this changes what the NEC says a dwelling unit is but I will also point out that many firefighters do live in the station for days at a time at least in my area. They have odd shifts, like 5 straight days on duty living in the fire station then being off for quite a few days straight.
 
charlie b said:
What it says is that the design and installation include provisions for someone living and sleeping there. If the building was not designed for persons to live there, it will not meet the definition of "dwelling unit." As to the question of anyone actually living there, a vacant dwelling unit is still a dwelling unit, because it was designed and built with provisions for someone to live there.
Click to expand...
Again the code defintion doesn't say anything about being designed for people to live there. It just says "A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation." The living space in many fire stations meet these requirements and are therefor dwelling units for the purposes of the NEC. I am sure that is not the intent of the code, but it is the effect of the code words.
 
iwire said:
That was exactly my thought as well.



IMO there is no question about that.:smile:

I don't really think this changes what the NEC says a dwelling unit is but I will also point out that many firefighters do live in the station for days at a time at least in my area. They have odd shifts, like 5 straight days on duty living in the fire station then being off for quite a few days straight.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of examples of similar situations that are coincidental to the primary use of the building, such as:

Dormitory areas within hospitals(healthcare/institutional facilities) designated for the exclusive use of residents and other hospital employees.
I know of one example that was, literally, a college dorm that took up one whole floor in a hospital.

Certain arrangements in military barracks/facilities.

I worked on a job in a government facility that, for emergency purposes, was designated "shelter in place". It had an area with permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking and sanitation.
 
If the Fire station had a single unit it would be one thing, but unless there's an apartment-style single unit, than sleeping and eating spaces are incidental to the primary use which is the storage of fire trucks in bays with at-hand availability to roll the trucks in response to an emergency. It is possible to have a dwelling unit within a building containing S-1, but that would be classified as a mixed occupancy and fire resistance ratings would come into play.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top