|
Save 25% on our special introductory offer.
Subscribe today for only $14.99 per year.
|
|
|
 |
| Code Q&A
Balcony
Protection
When
fire and storm safety codes conflict, a reasonable real-life solution
needs to be found.
By Joe Belcher
|
Editor’s Note: The issue of storm protection
for apartment or condo balconies has raised many questions—particularly
when the installation of storm shutters seems to call for the addition
of sprinklers by local and national fire protection codes (see also,
HP, Summer 2002, page 7). The question of balcony storm shutters and
sprinklers was raised recently and addressed by the IHPA code consultant,
Joe Belcher, whose answer follows:
First, let me tell you
what I consider to be fire-safe residential construction: Noncombustible
construction, four feet under water and fully sprinklered. Outside
of that type of construction, we never can guarantee anything will
be totally safe from fire. We have to strive to come up with reasonable
provisions to assure a reasonable degree of protection to the public.
Having said that, let’s look at hurricane protection.
In all areas we always have the threat of fire. During a hurricane
or other high-wind event, we have two primary life safety considerations:
1) protection from the storm and 2) protection from fire. In my opinion,
when the National Weather Service indicates a storm is imminent the
threat of the storm outweighs the threat from fire because storm damage
is more likely to occur.
With Florida’s increases in population, the infrastructure is
simply not capable of handling a mass evacuation during high-wind
events. Emergency planners are placing a much greater emphasis and
reliance on “riding the storm out” at home as opposed
to evacuation. We have to draw a balance between the need to protect
ourselves from a fire and the need to protect ourselves from the storm.
I believe during the storm the potential for damage by wind-borne
debris is greater than the potential for fire. (The issues with shutters
that are closed when there is no storm threat will be addressed later
in this article.)
The Florida Building Commission apparently agrees with this position
and recently adopted provisions that will allow the temporary installation
of storm panels or the closure of shutters on emergency escape and
rescue openings when a storm threatens. Fire service members of the
Florida Building Commission/State Fire Marshal Joint Technical Advisory
Committee (Joint TAC) disapproved the original submittal, not the
concept, because the language did not state the installation or closure
was to be temporary and did not specifically address a secondary means
of escape. (The 12-to-4 vote in favor did not provide the required
75 percent for consensus.)
The proposal was modified to address those concerns and those objecting
to the original language found the revised version acceptable.
WHEN IS A BALCONY NOT A BALCONY?
Regarding a balcony with shutters or panels becoming an enclosure,
the balconies do not become a part of the habitable or living space
as is the case when enclosing a balcony with glass. Shutters and panels
are neither required nor are they intended to create a weatherproof
barrier. They are not even intended to protect the glazing from the
wind. This is why windows with shutter protection are still required
to meet the allowable loads for the glazing (FBC Ch. 24) and design
pressures for the frame and anchoring (FBC Ch. 16) of the building
code.
The sole function of impact resistant coverings (shutters, panels
and other systems) is to protect the glazing from missiles, thereby
preventing a rapid increase in internal pressure caused by glass breakage.
Researchers have stated the loss of a little as five percent of the
area of a wall may result in a very rapid 300 percent increase in
the internal pressure. In fact, the ASTM Standard (ASTM 1996) for
the performance of impact resistant materials contains a definition
for and provisions related to porous storm shutters.
On the other hand, enclosing a balcony with glass or sliding doors
is intended to be weatherproof and generally adds to the living space.
When enclosing the balcony with glass, in many cases, the sliding
door between the unit and the balcony is removed.
LONG-TERM ENCLOSURE
Regarding shutters that are closed six months at a time: I will not
say this doesn’t happen; however, since most people are beyond
the cave dwelling stage, I do not believe you will find these residences
occupied.
In most cases the balconies we are discussing are for condo or apartment
construction. In most cases, the glazing (sliding glass door) to the
balcony is the only source of natural light for the main living area
of the unit. I don’t doubt that there is that individual out
there who will live in the self-enforced darkness; however, I just
don’t believe this is a widespread problem.
Regarding storage on the balcony while the unit is closed for extended
periods, the residents will be fully aware that the shutters are not
weatherproof. I do not believe you will find a lot of readily ignitable
materials stored on the balcony.
Finally, there is the issue of barbeque grills on balconies. I don’t
see this as a threat because the dwelling is unoccupied in units where
the storm protection is left in place for months at a time. In my
time, both as a fire inspector and as a building official/plan reviewer/inspector
I always used the test of possibility versus probability. You have
to ask yourself, is it possible? And the answer will always be yes,
anything is possible. However, more germane is the answer to the question,
is it probable?
Is it possible for a homeowner to put storm panels up or close storm
shutters and live in the house or condo or apartment year round? Absolutely!
I just don’t believe it is probable. I know there always will
be that one person out there who will defy reason, but do we penalize
the rest of the population for the sake of that one?
COST VS. BENEFIT
Now, let’s look at the cost versus benefit of providing sprinklers
on the balcony. I know—and have said many times myself—that
cost is not a factor when it comes to the code and matters of life
safety. In this case, what protection from fire are we providing?
Whose life are we saving on this balcony? Obviously, nobody is going
to be trapped or sleeping on the balcony during a fire on the balcony.
In buildings higher than two stories, the balconies are most likely
going to be constructed of noncombustible materials. Fire breaking
out of the balcony is going to vent to the atmosphere. To deal with
the vertical spread of fire, the building code requires openings in
an exterior wall above and within five feet laterally an opening below
to be protected by vertical or horizontal flame barriers.
In one specific case, the unit owners wanted to have shutters installed.
The local fire department denied the permit based on the fact that
the balcony was not sprinklered. The fire department required 1) a
letter stating combustibles would not be stored on the balcony and
that the shutters would not be installed unless there was a threat
of a storm or the occupants were going to be away for “a long
time”; and 2) that sprinklers be provided.
The shutter contractor obtained an estimate from a sprinkler contractor
and was quoted a price of $1,400 to $1,500 to install the piping and
put two sprinkler heads on the balcony. This does not take into account
the work that would have to be done within the unit such as dry wall
repair, painting, etc. The total cost of the shutter installation
was $2,800. The sprinkler protection increased the cost by more than
half. The net result was that the homeowner decided against installing
the shutters. The home will have less protection from a storm. Is
this what we want to foster?
Admittedly, the cost for providing the sprinkler protection could
be less for new construction; however, we then get into the issue
of freeze protection, etc. I ask again, what is it are we trying to
accomplish? How many fires does the State Fire Marshal’s Annual
Report on Fires indicate originated on balconies? On balconies of
units that have been closed up for the season? This particular homeowner
now sees the government in general and the fire department in particular
as creating a barrier to his desire to increase the safety for his
home and possessions in the event of a hurricane. Again, is this where
we want to be?
In closing, I appreciate and share in the interest of protecting the
public. We all have to understand that we cannot pass enough legislation
or regulations to prevent people from doing stupid things. We firmly
do not believe the intent of NFPA 13R Exceptions 2 and 5 is negated
by the installation of hurricane shutters.
| Joseph D. Belcher, CBO,
JDB Code Services, Inc., is the Code Consultant for the IHPA. |
|
|
|
|
|
