Stairwell 3-Way Switches

Status
Not open for further replies.
iwire said:
OK, make it a department store in a mall.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. There is more to it than the clips that are being sent. There are tons of locations that this doesn't apply to. An operating room, jail etc. That code section quoted, is not in a vacuum. Like everything else we do, research for the specific situation has to be done by someone.
 
Strathead said:
I agree with you. There is more to it than the clips that are being sent. There are tons of locations that this doesn't apply to. An operating room, jail etc. That code section quoted, is not in a vacuum. Like everything else we do, research for the specific situation has to be done by someone.
Click to expand...

I sent the whole code section lol. As for a department store in a mall, yes, the code applies there too (if the walls are full height). I've designed over 500 different retail jobs much like the ones you describe and all of them had to be done this way. If you see it done differently in the field that's a different story, and is likely not compliant with the energy code, but the reality is that not many take the energy code requirements seriously. Of course you have your states and jurisdictions that are the opposite and treat it more strict than NEC requirements, but that's a different story.
So long story short ... is it technically required? Yes, and I'm going to design to that because if I don't and an inspector doesn't like it then my company is paying for it. Is it taken seriously? Most of the time, no.
 
Fitzdrew516 said:
I sent the whole code section lol. As for a department store in a mall, yes, the code applies there too (if the walls are full height). I've designed over 500 different retail jobs much like the ones you describe and all of them had to be done this way. If you see it done differently in the field that's a different story, and is likely not compliant with the energy code, but the reality is that not many take the energy code requirements seriously. Of course you have your states and jurisdictions that are the opposite and treat it more strict than NEC requirements, but that's a different story.
So long story short ... is it technically required? Yes, and I'm going to design to that because if I don't and an inspector doesn't like it then my company is paying for it. Is it taken seriously? Most of the time, no.
Click to expand...

I just finished a 5 story dormitory last year. The corridors had 50% of the lights that burn 24/7 with no control and the other 50% were controlled by occupancy sensors only. I just stayed in a hotel where all the hallway lights burn 24/7 and I have bid on many that are controlled the same way over time. I would have to assume that the guests in hotel rooms or dormitories would be considered "occupants". What about you?
 
Strathead said:
I just finished a 5 story dormitory last year. The corridors had 50% of the lights that burn 24/7 with no control and the other 50% were controlled by occupancy sensors only. I just stayed in a hotel where all the hallway lights burn 24/7 and I have bid on many that are controlled the same way over time. I would have to assume that the guests in hotel rooms or dormitories would be considered "occupants". What about you?
Click to expand...
No idea what codes would require, but will say the "guests" of a dormitory are typically there for a longer stay and become more familiar with the surroundings then those in a hotel room typically will become, so I could see that making some difference in minimal amount of lighting required.
 
Strathead said:
I just finished a 5 story dormitory last year. The corridors had 50% of the lights that burn 24/7 with no control and the other 50% were controlled by occupancy sensors only. I just stayed in a hotel where all the hallway lights burn 24/7 and I have bid on many that are controlled the same way over time. I would have to assume that the guests in hotel rooms or dormitories would be considered "occupants". What about you?
Click to expand...

A dormitory is way different than a department store. Also... look at the code again - It refers to manual control devices, not oc sensors. Most codes allow for oc sensors only (California definitely requires manual switching as well as oc sensors in some areas). As far as the lights with no control, you are allowed to have "Night Lights" (in most jurisdictions), but they are for egress to the control of the main lighting.
 
kwired said:
No idea what codes would require, but will say the "guests" of a dormitory are typically there for a longer stay and become more familiar with the surroundings then those in a hotel room typically will become, so I could see that making some difference in minimal amount of lighting required.
Click to expand...

The distinction isn't really germane to the conversation. This installation is in conflict with the energy code the person submitted. In a box retail space, "occupants" could loosely be interpreted as say, only the manager who has access to the light "switch" while no one else does, but given the Webster definition of occupant:


  • : a person who is using or living in a particular building, apartment, or room
  • : a person who is in a room, vehicle, etc., at a particular time


    And the fact that the code section states, "Occupants" in lieu of "at least one occupant" that would still be a violation. And I am pretty sure most Box stores don't have light switches out in the store accessible to anyone to turn off the lights.
 
There is a distinction between requirements for different building types. A high rise would be treated differently than a retail space, etc. The code section that was snipped applies to commercial applications.
 
Fitzdrew516 said:
A dormitory is way different than a department store. Also... look at the code again - It refers to manual control devices, not oc sensors. Most codes allow for oc sensors only (California definitely requires manual switching as well as oc sensors in some areas). As far as the lights with no control, you are allowed to have "Night Lights" (in most jurisdictions), but they are for egress to the control of the main lighting.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't explain a typical Hotel with lit corridors 24/7, many of which rent rooms by the week. I would also bet that most Condo's with internal corridors don't have light switches either. I just haven't been in one or built one. I also commented further on the box store below. The code you cited doesn't say one occupant, or some occupants, or supervisory occupants etc.
the simple word occupants is everyone occupying the store at the time. So you either have a very poorly written code, or there are clarifications elsewhere.
 
Fitzdrew516 said:
Also, in most codes there are exceptions for 24 hour uses so that could explain the hotel.
Click to expand...

But you stated you sent the whole code section and even included a snide little "LOL" which is it, there are exception you didn't send or the code you sent is the whole section dealing with light switching? Don't worry, I know the answer it is just that the snide LOL got my goat up a little.
 
Strathead said:
But you stated you sent the whole code section and even included a snide little "LOL" which is it, there are exception you didn't send or the code you sent is the whole section dealing with light switching? Don't worry, I know the answer it is just that the snide LOL got my goat up a little.
Click to expand...

As stated... my response, and snip was in reference to the department store example. Condos and other such installations are handled completely differently. The "lol" was not meant to be snide by any means, and if it came off that way I apologize. With that being said, this forum is for people to learn, not to argue. I feel as if the latter is how you are receiving this conversation so I will respectfully bow out.
 
Fitzdrew516 said:
As stated... my response, and snip was in reference to the department store example. Condos and other such installations are handled completely differently. The "lol" was not meant to be snide by any means, and if it came off that way I apologize. With that being said, this forum is for people to learn, not to argue. I feel as if the latter is how you are receiving this conversation so I will respectfully bow out.
Click to expand...

Debating is often the way we must learn. Arguing is merely heated debating. In the spirit of debating, tell us that you believe that most larger retailers have light switching in an accessible location to the customers who are occupants, explain how the code you cited is complied with in your mind, or join me in assuming that this code doesn't cover the typical retail occupancy where the light switching is not accessible to the occupants. I and others have presented examples we believe are contrary to your cited section. You have not rebutted.
 
Strathead said:
Debating is often the way we must learn. Arguing is merely heated debating. In the spirit of debating, tell us that you believe that most larger retailers have light switching in an accessible location to the customers who are occupants, explain how the code you cited is complied with in your mind, or join me in assuming that this code doesn't cover the typical retail occupancy where the light switching is not accessible to the occupants. I and others have presented examples we believe are contrary to your cited section. You have not rebutted.
Click to expand...

I do not believe that most retailers have light switching in an accessible location to customers.

The code I cited is correct and still applies to retail applications. The reason you may see otherwise is either a) utilizing the exception in said code and using the "security" caveat that is ultimately an AHJ call. Or b) a violation of the code (again depending on the AHJ).

Here's the approach when designing a retail space - Don't make the call yourself. Either coordinate with the AHJ and make sure they are ok with remotely located switching, or ask the client what they want and when they tell you that they want the switches in the "employees only" area you just inform the client that you'll do it this way, but you need to make them aware that (as with any AHJ issue/code interpretation) the AHJ could make you move them.

Overall I agree that the exception should cover remote locations based on my interpretation, but I have had AHJs disagree with me before so there's always that.
 
I worked on a Target store expansion when I just got out of college (in Spokane, WA), and if we needed a section of lighting shut down, we had to call Arkansas, and they shut them down from there! I tried opening the breaker to the lighting contactor in question, and the entire (seemed like, anyway) Spokane fire dept and police dept showed up!:angel:
 
jumper said:
For a stairwell? One SPST switch at the top and one at the bottom controlling two separate lights that each illuminate the stairwell is way legal. Maybe not efficient or practical but legal.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that is true for a code discussion. But when you have a building department through plan review and field inspections stipulating the there be a required lighting outlet for the purpose of illuminating the stairway, I think the control from both levels would be for the required stairway outlet(s).
 
Johnnybob said:
I worked on a Target store expansion when I just got out of college (in Spokane, WA), and if we needed a section of lighting shut down, we had to call Arkansas, and they shut them down from there! I tried opening the breaker to the lighting contactor in question, and the entire (seemed like, anyway) Spokane fire dept and police dept showed up!:angel:
Click to expand...

Did you also have to travel to Arkansas and place your LOTO device there and then go back to remove it when done with your work?:cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top