Date |
Text |
2020-05-21 13:42:52 | THIS PLAN WAS REVIEWED AND FAILED BY PETER LEDUC, FIRE |
| MARSHAL, WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: |
| |
| |
| 1) THERE INSUFFICIENT DETAIL SUBMITTED TO PROVIDE AN |
| APPLICABLE LIFE SAFETY REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED. |
| |
| THERE IS AN INDICATION OF OCCUPANCY USE/TYPE = |
| COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. |
| |
| THAT IS NOT AN INDICATION OF THE OCCUPANCY TYPE PER THE |
| FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION CODE. THE PREVISOU OCCUPANCY |
| TYPE APPEARS TO BE BUNISESS. |
| |
| IN AN EFFORT TO HELP CLARIFY THE OCCUPANCY TYPE, PLEASE |
| PROVIDE OF REVIEW OF WHAT KIND OF BUSINESS, WHAT IS |
| DONE IN THIS BUILDING. |
| |
| PER NFPA 101, CH 6 OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION |
| |
| 6.1 CLASSIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY. |
| 6.1.1 GENERAL. |
| 6.1.1.1 OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION. THE OCCUPANCY OF A |
| BUILDING OR |
| STRUCTURE, OR PORTION OF A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE, SHALL |
| BE CLASSIFIED IN |
| ACCORDANCE WITH 6.1.2 THROUGH 6.1.13. OCCUPANCY |
| CLASSIFICATION SHALL BE |
| SUBJECT TO THE RULING OF THE AUTHORITY HAVING |
| JURISDICTION WHERE THERE IS A |
| QUESTION OF PROPER CLASSIFICATION IN ANY INDIVIDUAL |
| CASE. |
| |
| BASED ON REVIEW OF THE ABOVE PROVIDED INFORMATION AND |
| RESPONSES TO THE BELOW QUESTIONS, A DETAILED LIFE |
| SAFETY REVIEW CAN BE PROVIDED. |
| |
| |
| |
| 1A) DOES THIS BUILDING HAVE AFIRE ALARM OF FIRE |
| SPRINKLER SYSTEM. |
| |
| PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS |
| |
| |
| |
| 2) THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF EXIT SIGNS |
| |
| PLEASE PROVIDE. |
| |
| |
| 3) THERE ARE NO INDICATIONS OF DOOR HARDWARE/ LOCKS ON |
| THE DOORS. |
| |
| PER NFPA 101, CH 7, MEANS OF EGRESS |
| |
| 7.2.1.5 LOCKS, LATCHES, AND ALARM DEVICES. |
| |
| 7.2.1.5.1 DOOR LEAVES SHALL BE ARRANGED TO BE OPENED |
| READILY FROM |
| THE EGRESS SIDE WHENEVER THE BUILDING IS OCCUPIED. |
| 7.2.1.5.2* THE REQUIREMENT OF 7.2.1.5.1 SHALL NOT APPLY |
| TO DOOR |
| LEAVES OF LISTED FIRE DOOR ASSEMBLIES AFTER EXPOSURE TO |
| ELEVATED |
| TEMPERATURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LISTING, BASED ON |
| LABORATORY |
| FIRE TEST PROCEDURES. |
| 7.2.1.5.3 LOCKS, IF PROVIDED, SHALL NOT REQUIRE THE USE |
| OF A KEY, A |
| TOOL, OR SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR EFFORT FOR OPERATION FROM |
| THE EGRESS |
| SIDE. |
| 7.2.1.5.4 THE REQUIREMENTS OF 7.2.1.5.1 AND 7.2.1.5.3 |
| SHALL NOT |
| APPLY WHERE OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN CHAPTERS 18 THROUGH |
| 23. |
| 7.2.1.5.5 KEY-OPERATED LOCKS. |
| 7.2.1.5.5.1* EXTERIOR DOOR ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE |
| PERMITTED TO HAVE |
| KEY-OPERATED LOCKS FROM THE EGRESS SIDE, PROVIDED THAT |
| ALL OF THE |
| FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE MET: |
| (1) THIS ALTERNATIVE IS PERMITTED IN CHAPTERS 11 |
| THROUGH 43 FOR |
| THE SPECIFIC OCCUPANCY. |
| (2) A READILY VISIBLE, DURABLE SIGN IN LETTERS NOT LESS |
| THAN 1 IN. |
| (25 MM) HIGH ON A CONTRASTING BACKGROUND THAT READS AS |
| FOLLOWS IS LOCATED ON OR ADJACENT TO THE DOOR LEAF: |
| THIS |
| DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHEN THE |
| BUILDING IS OCCUPIED. |
| (3) THE LOCKING DEVICE IS OF A TYPE THAT IS READILY |
| DISTINGUISHABLE |
| AS LOCKED. |
| (4) A KEY IS IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE TO ANY OCCUPANT |
| INSIDE THE |
| BUILDING WHEN IT IS LOCKED. |
| |
| PLEASE PROIDE DETAILS IN COMPLIANCE |
| |
| |
| |
| 4) THERE ARE NO DETAILS REGARDING THE CABINET |
| STRUCTURE. |
| |
| PLEASE PROVIDE HEIGHT/WIDTH, DOORS, ETC AND THE PURPOSE |
| THIS STRUCTURE SERVES. |
| |
| |
| |
| 5) THERE APPEARS TO BE STOVE LOCATED IN THE REAR AREA. |
| PLEASE CONFIRM AND WHAT IT'S PURPOSE IS AND ITS HOOD |
| AND FIRE SUPRESSION SYSTEM. |
| |
| RESIDENTIAL STOVES SHOULD NOT BE LOCATED IN CERTAIN |
| OCCUPANCIES, BASED ON HOW THEY ARE USED AND HOW THEY |
| ARE PROTECTED. |
| |
| PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS OR REMOVE. |
| |
| |
| |
| 6) WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE PLAN SHEET |
| REVISION CLOUDS OR NUMBERED NARRATIVE RESPONSES TO THE |
| ABOVE. |
| |
| |
| |
| 7) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS MAY BE PROVIDED ON THE |
| RE-SUBMITTAL OF THE ABOVE. |
| |
| |
| |
| PETER LEDUC |
| FIRE MARSHAL |
| 561-804-4709 |
| [email protected] |
| |