Loading...
2007-01-09 Futrell Fire Review " Fiff Proietfion Ellgilloori'W January 9, 2007 n ..,....,..r"'o:' ";r., "Y1'"'I\!' """r1' l~, L_;:ti~ lL TV .MtD Jon Sutherland Building Official City of Albertville 5975 Main Avenue NE P.O. Box 9 Albertville, MN 55301-9976 1 6 7 B '1.1" Ul, u mg !nspf'ctions Re: Review of Fire Department Access and Water Supplies Taco Belli Border Foods 65th Street NW (CSAH 37) and CSAH 19 Albertville, MN Case No. 2006-23 FFCDI #915aq Dear Jon: I have reviewed the site plans for the proposed Taco Bell Restaurant that were provided to us by the City of Albertville. This report details my review of these plans to determine if they are reasonably in compliance with the 2003 Minnesota State Fire Code for Fire Service Features found in Chapter 5 of the Fire Code. Futrell Fire Consult and Design Inc. (FFCDI) is involved in the review of these plans based on your city's contract with us to provide plan review services to the City of Albertville. Any comments in this review should be considered recommendations for your consideration, since FFCDI is not the Authority Having Jurisdiction for fire protection issues in the City of Albertville, nor is FFCDI the engineer or designer of record for this project. The scope of this review is limited to the fire service features and related site water supply for firefighting purposes. Any opinion of compliance should in no way be construed as approval or acceptance of the plans submitted by this contractor until they have received approval from the City of Albertville. This letter does not authorize the contractor to purchase materials or begin installation on the project. Finally, this review is based on evaluation with the codes and standards applicable to Minnesota and does not include determining compliance with provisions in bid documents, contracts or insurance standards. Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9, 2007 Page 1 of 7 MATERIALS REVIEWED This plan review is based on the following materials submitted to FFCDI: · Development Permit Application dated December 12, 2006 · Border Foods CUP and Site Plan Narrative dated December 11, 2006 · Drawings CO-1, C1-1, C2-1, C3-1, C3-2, C4-1, C8-1, C8-2, L 1-1, P1-0, prepared by Loucks Associates dated 12-12-06. · A 1.0, A4.0, and A4.1 dated 12.05.2006, and two color drawings, undated prepared by WCL Associates, Inc. · 1 and 2 of 2 prepared by Loucks Associates dated Nov. 22, 2006. Although these plans were included in the submitted set they have not been reviewed except as they specifically apply to the Fire Service Features in our review. No approval of any State Building Code or other Fire Code requirements is intended or implied beyond the review for compliance with the MSFC Chapter 5. It is expected that this review would need to be modified based on data not included in the above list, should all of the relevant material not be provided. Information about specific materials in the form of manufacturer's cut sheets or literature were not provided, thus this review does not include analysis of any specific product or its suitability for use. STANDARDS USED TO CONDUCT THIS REVIEW This plan review is based on the following standards as adopted in Minnesota: · Minnesota State Fire Code (2003) comprised of the 2000 International Fire Code plus state amendments (MSFC). · Minnesota State Fire Code (2003) optional Appendix Chapters B, C and D. · Minnesota State Building Code (2003) comprised of the 2000 International Building Code plus state amendments (SBC). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION USED TO CONDUCT THIS REVIEW From the information provided in the documents listed above or by the City of Albertville in Development Permit Application: · Current Zoning: Existing PUD · Proposed Building Area: 3,528 fe (on sheet A1.0). . Water flow test information: None provided. · Fire sprinklers: Will be provided. . Building Construction: Type V · Occupancy Classification: A-2 Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9, 2007 Page 2 of7 RESULTS OF PLAN REVIEW The construction type of the building has been indicated as Type V on the drawings. In addition, the submittal indicates that this building will have an automatic sprinkler system. It is assumed that the building will have an automatic sprinkler system and fire alarm system in accordance with the requirements of the State Building Code and Minnesota State Fire Code. On that basis this review will indicate the minimum requirements, in general, and if and when additional information becomes available changes may be necessary to the conclusions in this letter. Listed below you will find the items included in the review. I have indicated whether or not each item appears to comply with the provisions in the Minnesota State Fire Code, the NFPA Standards, or other nationally recognized standards. Insufficient information was provided to allow the complete plans to be reviewed. In those areas where information is missing, we have summarized the applicable fire code requirements to provide the City with the appropriate requirements. This submittal does not appear to be in compliance with the codes and standards as indicated. I recommend that the City of Albertville find the submittal acceptable pending compliance with the items identified below and the response to the comments that follow. GENERAL: 1. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction [MSFC (2003) Section 501.4). Fire department access is provided to the west by the existing CSAH 37, the private service road to the north and east of the site, and the parking lot to the south and thus would appear to be available during construction for limited access to the proposed building. 2. Access to Building Openings and Roofs is required as indicated in MSFC (2003) Section 504. 3. Premises identification is required as indicated in MSFC (2003) Section 505. 4. The building will require a key (Knox) box located as approved by the Fire Chief [MSFC (2003) Section 506). 5. Hazards to Fire Fighters shall be protected and identified as indicated in MSFC (2003) Section 507. 6. Fire Department access to equipment and labeling of rooms is required [MSFC (2003) Section 510). Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9, 2007 Page 3 of 7 FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADS: 1. Based on the current layout, it does appear that all portions of the proposed buildings are within 150 feet to an access road as permitted by MSFC (2003) Section 503.1.1. The dimensions of the access road and radius of the turns as discussed in item #2 below need to be verified to provide fire department access to the north, south, and west sides of the building. If the buildings are sprinklered, MSFC 2003 Section 503.1.1 allows the fire chief to modify (i.e. increase) the distance to an approved fire department access road to greater than 150 feet. 2. Dimensions, construction, surface, turning radius, and grade shall comply with MSFC (2003) Section 503.2. Based on MSFC Appendix Chapter D, nationally recognized standards of good practice, and data applicable to typical fire department ladder apparatus, we recommend a minimum 33-foot inside turning radius and 48 foot outside turning radius where fire department access roads around the building are required, along with a minimum clear width of 20 feet. The required turning radius could be larger based on any special apparatus in your fire department. At present the approach paths for the fire apparatuses appear to be within the 33-foot inside and 48-foot outside turning radii. 3. It does appear that the minimum dimension (width) of 20 feet is maintained over the length of the apparatus road, thus it is in compliance with the MSFC. The Fire Code recommends that both sides of fire apparatus access roads be posted "No Parking" when the net clear width is less than 26 feet [MSFC (2003) Section D1 03.6.1]. No permanent or temporary obstructions (i.e. dumpsters, bollards, parking, storage, etc.) are allowed to be located in the required 20 feet clear width. All sections of the fire department access roads appear to be 32 feet wide and therefore do not require signage indicating "No Parking". FIRE DEPARTMENT WATER SUPPLIES: 1. Fire protection water requirements shall be in accordance with MSFC (2003) Section 508 and MSFC Appendix B (a nationally recognized standard). Based on a fully sprinklered building, Appendix B allows a reduction by the fire chief of up to 75 percent in this water supply requirement, but to not less than 1,500 gpm. Therefore, the acceptable range of fire flows is 1,500 gpm for the building. The building construction is indicated to be Type V (regardless of Type V-A or V-B). a. Based on a 3,528 ft2 Type V building a minimum fire flow according to Table B105.1 is 1,500 gpm fire flow for a 2-hour duration. 2. Water supply test data was not provided thus could not be verified. It is recommended that the developer confirm with the City that the fire hydrants around the building can provide a flow rate of 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure for a duration of 2 hours. Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9,2007 Page 4 of 7 a. If a water supply test is required to verify the available supply it shall be conducted in accordance with MSFC Section 508.4 and a nationally recognized standard such as NFPA 921. This minimum flow of 1,500 gpm at 20 psi does not mean that this is an adequate supply for the sprinkler systems. Detailed hydraulic calculations are required to determine the water supply appropriate for approved sprinkler systems. 3. Fire hydrant locations shall be in accordance with MSFC Appendix C (nationally recognized standard). The minimum number of hydrants (at least one) does appear to be adequate. The maximum distance from any point on a street or road to a hydrant does not appear to be exceeded (250 feet is the maximum for a sprinklered building); and the average spacing between new hydrants (500 feet for a sprinklered building) does not appear to be exceeded. Hydrant information for CSAH No. 37 has not been provided. 4. At present no hydrant is within 100' of the location of the Fire Department Connection of the proposed building. The location of the sprinkler system Fire Department Connection (FDC) with respect to the nearest hydrant should be reviewed by the fire chief. NFPA 13 states in section 8.16.2.4.6: Fire department connections shall be on the street side of buildings and shall be located and arranged so that hose lines can be readily and conveniently attached to the inlets without interference from any nearby objects including buildings, fences, posts, or other fire department connections. 5. New underground water mains are indicated apparently to supply the new fire sprinkler system in the building. Private fire service underground main is to be installed according to NFPA 24 [MSFC (2003) Section 508.2.1]. CONCLUSIONS This submittal does not appear to be in compliance with the codes and standards as indicated for Fire Service Features. I recommend that the City of Albertville find the submittal acceptable, pending compliance with the items identified below, submission of updated plans to the city and any subsequent reviews you feel appropriate. It is not necessary for the plans to be submitted back to FFCDI for review given that these items are the primary issues, should you wish to confirm their correction: · Verify that the building will have automatic sprinklers and possibly fire alarm systems installed. · The location of the FDC and the distance to the nearest hydrant should be reviewed by the fire chief. The address side of the building does not appear to be within 100 feet of the existing hydrant. · Verify that the actual water supply is able to support the minimum fire flow of 1,500 gpm at 20 psi required for sprinklered buildings by the MSFC (provided the Fire Chief accepts a 1,500 gpm flow) and that the water supply is adequate for the automatic sprinklers. If the building will not be sprinklered the minimum fire flow will be dependent on the building construction and use occupancy. Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9,2007 Page 5 of 7 Finally, the City should confirm that sprinklers or fire rated separations are provided as required by MSFC (2003) and MSBC (2003). These provisions are outside the domain of the Fire Service Features that are the subject of this letter, so although we find the submission acceptable for fire department access roads and water supply, it may not be so in terms of sprinkler protection. This review is not necessarily intended to indicate all of the deficiencies on these plans, nor does this review relieve the designer of any of their responsibility to furnish documents in accordance with the State of Minnesota, the State Building Code, the Minnesota State Fire Code, and NFPA or other recognized standards. If you have any questions or wish to discuss the contents of this letter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, FUTRELL FIRE CONSULT & DESIGN, INC. Scott A. Futrell President cc: City of Albertville - City Planner, Mr. AI Brixius City of Albertville - Fire Chief, Steve Long DISCLAIMER This report has been prepared by FFCDI based on the information available to us as provided by the client and is limited to a review of the fire service features and water supply as defined in Chapter 5 of the MSFC for this building. FFCDI has not determined if the client or building is in compliance with any laws, rules, codes or standards. The scope of this report is limited to that in the contract between the client and FFCDI and is not to be used for other designs, locations, installations or situations outside those for which it was intended. FFCDI is not responsible for implementation, interpretation or confirmation of recommendations or requirements, including those indicated in this report, unless provided for in additional contracts outside the scope of the current work. Should the client not retain the services of FFCDI to review the implementation or any other use of this report through site observation, inspection, or audits, then the client and any end users agree to assume full liability and responsibility for the verification, implementation, interpretation, or any other use of this report and its findings for any purpose including, but not limited to development of construction documents, approval, or any other implementation in any form. Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9, 2007 Page 6 of 7 .' Additionally, the recommendations in this report are based on responsible parties, other than FFCDI, such as the building ownerloperator maintaining the fire protection, systems, maintenance, housekeeping and storage in accordance with local, state and national laws, and nationally recognized standards, including those outlined in this report. Copyright FFCDI 2007. Taco Bell Restaurant - Albertville January 9, 2007 Page 7 of7