Looking for thoughts for wiring method in restaurant

Status
Not open for further replies.
JohnE

JohnE

Senior Member
Location
Milford, MA
Hi everyone. Looking for thoughts on an upcoming installation. Situation is an existing restaurant wired with romex. New addition and small renovation to take place. Existing and new construction is built from non fire rated materials. So per 518.4B, romex is allowed to be used for addition, right?

So, given the choice, would you use romex for the addition and why or why not? My first inclination was not to. But upon further consideration I'm asking myself why not? There is no bid, and no job spec's. All decisions are mine. The owner is a close friend whom I do a lot of work for. I'm looking for his best interest, and some of that interest is in saving money if it is justified. We do have a ballpark budget, but he realizes that with the renovation, there may be some surprises.

I'm still on the fence, so I thought I'd throw it out there. All opinions will be welcomed.

Thanks,

John
 
Good Morning John

I assume the project is in MA

some thoughts

That being said !! Absent restrictions of article 518 the one draw back to NB-B in commercial space is suspended ceilings. We amend 334.12 (A) (2) requiring running boards or equivalent. Not sure that would apply but I see it missed all the time.
 
Last edited:
j_erickson said:
So, given the choice, would you use romex for the addition and why or why not? My first inclination was not to. But upon further consideration I'm asking myself why not?
Click to expand...

I had the same problem with a small grocery store a few years back. Romex was allowed but I went with MC and EMT because the original wiring was done in pipe. The building didn't belong to the customer having the remodel done ( rental ) so I didn't want to bring the quality of the installation down.

If the original installatin is done in Romex I'm not sure what gain there is in changing out a small amount of the wireing. Would it increase the value of the property, make it any safer, get cheaper insurance rates. Unless I could come up with a good reason not to do so I would just use the Romex. A restautant remodel is usually on a tight budget and there are other good places to use the money.
 
cpal said:
Good Morning John

I assume the project is in MA

some thoughts

That being said !! Absent restrictions of article 518 the one draw back to NB-B in commercial space is suspended ceilings. We amend 334.12 (A) (2) requiring running boards or equivalent. Not sure that would apply but I see it missed all the time.
Click to expand...

Charlie,

Thanks. I'm aware of this requirement (though it doesn't apply here) but I've had to fail many inspections since many others run romex abouve a drop ceiling like they would MC cable)

John
 
cpal said:
agreed

there are still quite a few who have not attended a 15Hr CEU
Click to expand...

I think they attend but they are the ones sleeping or chit chatting.

I could never understand that....if I have to be there I might as well take something away from it.
 
cpal said:
agreed

there are still quite a few who have not attended a 15Hr CEU
Click to expand...


That would be me. :roll: I am up to date however thanks to this site and the books I bought with the change of the code cycle.

Any classes coming up Charlie?

By the way John, I'd say go with the romex.
 
electricmanscott said:
That would be me. :roll: I am up to date however thanks to this site and the books I bought with the change of the code cycle.

Any classes coming up Charlie?

By the way John, I'd say go with the romex.
Click to expand...

This shows how ridiculous IMO the 15 hr continuing ed is. Scott hasn't taken it and is on top of everything due to his diligence. I took mine right after the new cycle began (from you Charlie:) ) and I know many people there left with nothing more than they came with. It's no fault of the instructor, it's just a good concept with poor results. It's my least favorite weekend of every 3 year cycle.
 
j_erickson said:
This shows how ridiculous IMO the 15 hr continuing ed is. Scott hasn't taken it and is on top of everything due to his diligence. I took mine right after the new cycle began (from you Charlie:) ) and I know many people there left with nothing more than they came with. It's no fault of the instructor, it's just a good concept with poor results. It's my least favorite weekend of every 3 year cycle.
Click to expand...


Not to lead the tread in another direction but I would like to hear any thoughts that might improve the content of the program.

that aside for those who stay on top of the Code it is difficult to present new material and follow state guide lines, thats why We attempt to field all questions.

as IWIRE mentioned if you have to be there you should participate and extract something. We try to bring something new, insightfull and infomative. But it is difficult to sell if the audiance is not buying.
 
Charlie,

Your program is fine. I got plenty from it. It's better than some of the others I've been to. Personally when I sit through one of the courses, I'll listen to what's going on as well as read through sections and make my standard notes and highlights. I might have one ear on what's going on and one eye reading through another section. And I participate.

My point (and I do fill out the comment sheet at the end) is that anyone who wants to just float and daydream can. They don't need to listen, participate or gain anything. The other problem with the whole gig is that I need to know about the changes long before I sit through the class.

I think those who want to learn might do so from the class, but also would do so on their own. And those who don't care don't get anything from the class anyway.
 
Re: lowryder88h's post about the 'new NEC compliant MC'
celtic said:
HUH??
You mean all the other MC is NFG?
Click to expand...

I presume that lowryder88h is refering to the newly permitted version of MC which has a full size uninsulated _aluminium_ EGC in place of the insulated copper EGC in normal MC.

Standard MC is fully acceptable and NEC compliant.

I suppose that the hope was that the new MC would be cheaper, since it has lower materials costs. I don't know how the pricing has played out in reality. If copper gets expensive enough, then it could be cheaper than romex...but I find that quite unlikely.

-Jon
 
I have a strong personal preference for MC rather than NM, and given the freedom (meaning given the $$) I will use it. But I am speaking as a customer here, not as an installer.

Trying to be rational, however, I'd probably want to match the wiring method already in place.

-Jon
 
I have a consideration about the addition changing the room occupancy values if the new space expands an existing room.

Does the new improved room increase the occupancy to a size that now requires MC and what does this do to the existing wiring method?

We had a restaurant here that was actually two separate storefronts with a firewall between. When they remodeled and opened the wall between the two areas, they were cited and required to eliminate pre-existing NM cable and extend the fire alarm to the upper floors of the second building, which had not previously required it.
 
robertwilber said:
I have a consideration about the addition changing the room occupancy values if the new space expands an existing room.

Does the new improved room increase the occupancy to a size that now requires MC and what does this do to the existing wiring method?

We had a restaurant here that was actually two separate storefronts with a firewall between. When they remodeled and opened the wall between the two areas, they were cited and required to eliminate pre-existing NM cable and extend the fire alarm to the upper floors of the second building, which had not previously required it.
Click to expand...

Because the entire building is constructed of non fire rated materials, nm cable is permitted in my installation described in the op. But I can see what you're saying in your past experience. Each restaurant may have had a capacity of under 100, but when combined now met the definition of place of assembly. Thanks for the input.
 
j_erickson said:
Each restaurant may have had a capacity of under 100, but when combined now met the definition of place of assembly. Thanks for the input.
Click to expand...

This is a question and not a comment. Can you use the 100 occupancy count to determine a place of assembly? Many of the definitions state that not less than 50 people gathered for various reasons such as eating and drinking.

The construction type should be determined before the job starts. I would think that the building plans for the addition would require a review.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top