Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-13-04 Special Called Meeting of the La Porte Fire Review Board Minutes ORIGINAL CITY OF LA PORTE FIRE CODE REVIEW BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING OCTOBER 13, 2004 Members Present: Richard Browder, Bryan Moore, Tom Handy, Tom Hayes, and Floyd Craft Members Absent: Jim Suber, Louis Heintschel, Emery Farkas, and Sam Brechtel Staff Present: Interim Planning Director, Wayne Sabo; Fire Marshal, Laurie Christensen; Chief Inspector, Mark Huber; and Secretary, Peggy Lee 1. CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order at 6:37 P.M. by Chairperson Richard Browder. 2. CONSIDER APPEAL #04-01 REQUESTED FOR PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION OF PROPERTY AT 9601 FAIRMONT ADJACENT TO THE FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, APPEAL IS IN REFERENCE TO DECISION MADE BY FIRE MARSHAL TO REQUIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM BE INSTALLED PER ORDINANCE 603.15.9. THIS APPEAL IS BEING SOUGHT UNDER THE TERMS OF SECTION 105.3 OF THE SBCC11994ed. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Fire Marshal Laurie Christensen reviewed Appeal Request #A04-01 as outlined in the Fire Marshal's Report dated October 4, 2004. The applicant has requested an Appeal to the Fire Marshal's decision to require installation of a sprinkler system for new construction at the First United Methodist Church, 9601 Fairmont Parkway. PROPONENTS Melissa Centanni and Tom Baker, Architects with the SLI Group, addressed the Board. They are working with the First United Methodist Church on the planned construction. Ms. Centanni and Mr. Baker listed their reasons for why they feel the Appeal should be granted to allow construction without a sprinkler system. The facts represented were outlined in a slide show (printed document attached). Mike Clausen, La Porte citizen and member of First United Methodist Church, addressed the Board. Mr. Clausen feels that the City has not always interpreted codes consistently in the past. He believes if this is a life safety issue, then a monitored fire alarm system would be more effective than a sprinkler system. Mr. Clausen mentioned the library has the same occupancy rating and does not have a sprinkler system. Danny Wayman, Pastor of First United Methodist Church, feels his group is interpreting the codes correctly and the plan is safe as designed by the SLI Group. OPPONENTS There were no opponents The following was noted by Ms. Christensen: Fire Code Review Board Minutes of 10-13-04 Page 2 of 2 . The assembly occupancy was not based on the Life Safety Code, but rather the Building Code. . The interpretation is that with the new construction, this will become one building with one address. . Plans were never forwarded; they were not received until August 27. It was never the intention to change anything or cause any grief. . Fire alarm systems notify people to get out of the building. Sprinkler systems put out 97% of fires before firemen arrive. . Staff's decision is based on the ordinance requirements for assembly occupancy. Ms. Centanni stated the difference of opinion is because there are no definitions for Assembly types A, B, and C within the City of La Porte amendments. With regard to the plans not being forwarded, she visited the City in February and proceeded with the answer she was given at that time. Interim Planning Director, Wayne Sabo, noted the Fire Marshal's assessment was based on a verbal conversation and not a formal plan review. With regard to definition, staff interpreted the definition from the Building Code. Staff believes they have interpreted the ordinance correctly. They do not dispute the safety of the building with the four-hour firewall. Board Members took no action of the Appeal and requested additional time to review the material. The Board will meet again on October 20, 2004, at 6:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers to consider the Appeal Request. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 P.M. Approved on this .,2,0 day of Oc./;J;vr- k~Pv. ~A--- Richard Browder Chairperson, Fire Code Review Board ,2004. ~ -to )vt~- D (O-13-0lj- ~!t ~/D-IH~ ;r 'I Site Plan , ~ "1IWONf" ,.HSJNAV Q)~r~~ ~ - E~~1 1 , - _ _ _ BUi~din~_ Separation ~ ~ Standard Buil~ing Code 1994 Fire Wall - a 4 hour fire resistant wall, having protective openings which restricts the spread of fire and extends continuously from the foundation to or through the roof, with sufficient structural stability under fire conditipns to allow collapse of construction on either side without colliapse of the wall ; Party Wall - a fire wall on an interior lot line, used or adapted for joint service between two buildings Section 504 Buildings Located on the Same Lot Where the exterior walls of two or more buildings located on the same lot face one another, and one of the walls In not constructed as required for a fire wall, a property line shall be assumed between them. The fire resistance requirements for such facing walls and for the protection of openings therein shall be the same as required by this code for walls and openings facing an assumed I?roperty line, as provided in Table 600. IJ _...~... , : Table 600 I J~ i' --~-. , ---- I ==-..~ "-""--- '-__-'10 - ':':.-::::-- :;::=== ~E~- ___I0Il.... -,- -- """""""" ..""'" -.- 1Dllnu;_. -- ==rn -- --- ~~:~ t TablelOQ FIR "..jatanee Rlltlngl ".......d AnI A..lllanee Irl HOUri lW""~ ,__ '-" ,- - '_VI ,- ."- '-' ,- - . '. .. ~....-,..,....., -. . .. .. . '. .. . . .. ,- ~\ .. ... .. .. , .. - ":" 1- . nblatKlCl [ F1,.RnI't.nc.R.UIlIII.....-... r ,.,..IV 1_\1 ',...- ,- ,_ ,- . _u..._~ ~"'-~ .. ,. , ...--..---... -....."..-_, , .. .. - .. .. - - .. .. ... ... .- - .- .- .... ... ... ... .. .... ... -- .... -.. ... ... ... ... - ... -- ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... .. .., .., ... I =::. i==-- - -as = ~ ggf~:::' = 5 ~ -= ~ T - ! ~ , IJ --~I- ,. ,.!...-...-....__..."..__1 .. -- -- ... - .- --. ... - - .- .... ... ... .. ... .- ... .., "0'_1__ ... ... -, ..., ..., 3 I Table 500 Notes ~ en ~ Q. .. a g' ~ ~ '" o ~ 6 ;D f Notes: a. For height modifICations and limitations by occuparicy, see: 1. Mezzanines ................................................... .................................................................. .................... .. ..............,.....503.2.3 - 2. Basements -.' ............,....................._.................~..........._........ ....................................................................... .......... ...., ..."..............503.2.4 3. Assembly Bas.ment...................................................................... .............................................................................. .....................503.2.5 :::=~~i:~~~~:~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::T:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::'.::::::.'::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:':::::::::EH~ 7. Aosldonllal........................................................~........................................................................................................,.... ..5032 2 50326 b. For area modifications and Omllations by occupancY see: - -.. . 1. Areelnctease for separation (AU occ~pancios ei<cept H) .................................................................................................................503.3.2 2. Assembly...........................................................~......................................................................503.4'3. 503.4.4 ,503.4.5, 503.4.6, 503.4.8 H::~:s~;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::L::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.::::::::::::::'::::::::::::::::::::::~~:::+E::.~ ~: ~I=~~=:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::~: ~~~:.:' :~.:.~~ C. Modifications in height and area shall not be permitted in Group H occupancies. . ., ., d. See 903.7.5 and 903.7.6 for height limitations of unsprinklered R1 and R2 occupancies. Height and area increases in 503.2 are not permitted for NFiPA 13R sprinkler SYSlems,lllStaIled as an option in 903.7,6. e. See 411 ,3.1 for aUowable height and Door areas of'Opsn AutomQbile Parking Structures, 1. Total area for unsprinklered Group M occupancies after Inc198S8 permtlled by 503.3 shan not exceed 15,000 sq ft. g, Height In feet nor apPUcBble to Group S and Group, F occupancies. h. When all ponk>ns of buildings are sprinklered In a~daf1C8 with the standards listed in 903,2. the height of buildings listed under this column may be increased one story. A general area increase priWlded for in 503,3.2 may be applied before usklg footnote h. I. Automatic sprinkler proledion required throughout all buildings where Use Condition 5 is used. See 409.2.~. and 1024.2.2. j. When all portions or buildings are sprlnklered in acoprdance with the standards listed in 903.2, the allowable heights and areas of buildings shaJl be as listed under this column. 1 ~ , _..~.... Area Modifications t 503.3 General Area Modifications 503.3.1 The exceptions and requirements of 503.3 and 503.4 shall modify unsprinklered areas permitted by Table 500 and the specific use provisions of this chapter. 503.3.2 Where streets or public spaces, or horizontal separation from property lines of total width of not less than 30 ft (9144 mm), or 30 ft (9144 mm) between buildings on commonly owned property, extend along the building perimeter, except for hazardous occupancies, the areas permitted by Table 500 ,may be increased as follows: 1= 4/3[100 (FIP - 0.25)] Where I = Percent incr~ase of unsprinklered areas in Table 500 F = Building perimeter which fronts on streets, public spaces or honzontal separation not less than 30 ft (9144 rom) wide l P = Total perimeter o(building LI _...~.... \ 5 r _ NFPA 101,~Life Safety Code 1997 _ ~ , 8-3.5 Extinguishing Requirements 8-3.5.1 Buildings containing ass~mbly occupancies with occupant loads greater than 300 shall be protected by a:n approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system Exception No.2. Assembly occupancies consistirtg of a single multi-purpose room of less than' 12,000 sq. ft. and not used for "hibition or display and are not part of a mixed occupancy ; ; Appendix A It is the intent to permit a single multipurpose room of less than 12,000 sq. ft. to have certain small rooms as part of the single room. These small rooms could be a kitchen, office, equipjnent room, and the like. It is also the intent that an addition could be made to an existing building without requiring that the existing building be sprinkle~ed, where both the new and existing buildings have Independent means of egress and a fire-rated separation is provided to isolate on building from another~ a school gymnasium with egres~ independent of and separate from the school would be included in this exception as would a function hall attached to a church with a similar egress arr~ngement. , ....~... .' ., . , )' , l~umma~ ~ 1. A monitored fire alarm system per NFPA 72 and portable fire extinguishers per NFPA10 will be installed. 2. A 4 hour party wall will be built between the existing church and the new addition creating 2 separate buildings with separate means of Egress. 3. The building size is 11,010 sq. ft. which is below the maximum of 12,397 sq. ft. therefore a fire sprinkler system is not required per Standard Building Code (1994). 3. According to the La Port;e Amendments to the 1994 Standard Fire Code in a Class C Assembly Occupancy a fire sprinkler system is not required.' 4. Per NFPA 101 (1997) thi~ type of assembly building with an occupant load of less than 300 does not require a fire sprinkler. Generally an allowance 4!!xists for all assembly buildings under 12,000 Square Feet to not require any type of automatic fire ,extingUiShing system. ...~... 7 'Fire Marshal Report October 4, 2004 Appeal Request #04-001 Requested by: Melissa L. Centanni, A.I.A. Vice President (Architect for United Methodist Church) Requested for: Appeal to Fire Marshal plan review requiring sprinkler system installation per subsection amendment 603.15.9 of the City of La Porte ordinances. Location: 9601 F ainnont Proiect Description: The City of La Porte received a drawing for the property at 9601 Fairmont that is an addition to a pre-existing worship assembly structure. Per the notes on the drawings submitted: "This project involves construction of a one story family life building (11,010 S.F. First Floor Only) 7;270 square feet consist of a concrete tilt wall building with a concrete slab on grade foundation and steel bar joist roof framing. The remaining 3,740 square feet consist of a wood stud frame building with brick veneer, composition shingle roof, and a prefabricated wood roof trusses. The new building and the existing building are separated by a four-hour concrete masonry unit wall except where the 7 1/4 "thick concrete tilt wall serves as part of the four hour separation this fire wall will be built 18" above the existing building gable and the new building roofs." Analvsis: Ordinance amendment 603.15.9 states: In addition to any other fire and/or building code requirements, the following occupancies shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. Section 1. (A) All Class A assembly occupancies. The adopted Life Safety Code 1997 ed. A-8-1.4 states: "Assembly occupancy requirements should be based on a room-by-room basis, a floor-by-floor basis, and a total building basis. The requirements for each room should be based on the occupant load of that room and the requirements for each floor should be based on the occupant load of that floor, but the requirements for the assembly building overall should be based on the total occupant load. Therefore, it is quite feasible to have several assembly occupancies with occupant loads of 300 or less grouped together in a single building and that building would be an assembly occupancy with an occupant load of over 1000." Note: Assembly occupancies with 300 or greater load requires a sprinkler system - if the occupant load was to go over 1000 the type of Construction would be reviewed. This structure is a Type A-2 Occupancy as per Standard Building Code 1994ed. United Methodist Church Fire Review Request Conclusion: The Fire Marshal has determined that this proposed building must be built with a sprinkler system meeting NFP A 13 standards. The system must be monitored at an offsite location. This was determined based on the local ordinance listed previously and interpretation of NFPA I011997ed. Appeals: As per Section 105.3.1 Variances. City of La Porte Fire Code SBBCI 1994ed. The Board of adjustments and Appeals, when so appealed to and after a hearing, may vary the application of any provision of this code to any particular case when, in its opinion, the enforcement thereof would do manifest injustice and would be contrary to the spirit and purpose of this code or public interest, or when, in its opinion, the interpretation of the fire official should be modified or reversed. As per Section 105.3.2 Action. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall, in every case, reach a decision without unreasonable or unnecessary delay. Each decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall also include the reasons for the decision. If a decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals reverses or modifies a refusal, order, or disallowance of the fire official, or varies the application of any provision of this code, the fire official shall immediately take action in accordance with such decision. As per Section 105.3.3 Decisions are Final. Every decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall be fmal, subject however to such remedy as any aggrieved party might have at law or in equity. ATTACHMENTS: · Amendment Document · National Fire Protection Article from NFP A Journal January/February 2002 · National Fire Protection Report - Structure Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties Statistical Analysis United Methodist Church Fire Review Request 1994 STANDARD FIRE eOl ".v1ENDMENTS cont. PAGE 14 OF 28 603.9 Detailed Installation Requirements Revised to read: 1. When a building has a sprinkler system and/or standpipe system installed for fire protection. regardless if it is required or not by the building code or fire code. the system shall be a wet system. The design and installation of the sprinkler system shall be as per NFIPA #13 specifications. The design and installation of the standpipe system shall be as per NFIPA #14 specifications. 2. When a sprinkler and/or standpipe system has been installed in a building and the occupancy changes to a occupancy not requiring said system, the system must remain in proper installation and operation or the system must be removed. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, S 2-9-98) . 603.11 "Dry Standpipes Revised to read: When in the opinion of the fire chief and fire marshal a wet standpipe system would be detrimental to the occupancy. contents or process, a dry system or other NFIP A approved fire protection system may be installed. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, S 2-9-98) ~ '--. - .u... --603~15--'" Automatic' Sprinkler . Systems - - . ".. ..-.-....... -. ... '" -'" A.. . .. . '.' . .. ~.. . . . ....~ ..~. -~, .....M.__.....~.._... _.____u. _ ""._._._._.._.._. ... '. __.._ ......._..__.. ........_...... "._ - '-.,--. ~.._-.......,. - ... - -.- ",._....'. -....... ._-.,.- ...--....-.. -,~ ADDED NEW SUBSECTION: 603.15.8 Dry Sprinkler Systems When in the opinion of the fire chief and fire marshal a wet sprinkler system would be detrimental to the occupancy, contents or process, a dry system or other approved fire protection system may be installed. . (ORD. NO. 98-2222, S 2-9-98) ADDED NEW SUBSECTION: 603.15.9 Additional Required Automatic Sprinkler Systems In addition to any other fire and/or building code requirements the following occupancies shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. 1. ASSEMBLY OCCUPANCIES (A) All Class A assembly occupancies. 19~4 STANDARD FIRE CODE AMENDMENTS cant. PAGE 15 OF 28 (B) When a Class B assembly occupancy is located in a building above the level of exit discharge, the entire building shall be equipped with a sprinkler system. (C) When a Class C assembly occupancy is located in a building two (2) stories or more above the level of exit discharge, the entire building shall be . equipped with a sprinkler system. 2. BUSINESS OCCUPANCIES A business occupancy 3 stories or more in height shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. 3. RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCIES (A) Hotels, motels, dormitories or lodging or rooming houses 3 stories or more in height, with exterior means of egress, the entire building shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. (B) Hotels, motels, dormitories or lodging or rooming houses 2 stories or more in height, with interior means of egress, the entire building shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. (C) Apartment buildings, townhouses and condominiums 3 stories or.more in height, with exterior means of egress, the entire building shall be totally equipped'!Vith a sprinkler system. '.:,.: . (0) Apartment buildingsttownhouses and condominiums 2 stories or'rrfore.'in height, with interior means of egresst the entire building shall be totally equipped'\vith a sprinkler system. (ORn. NO. 98-2222, ~ 2-9-98) ADDEO NEW SUBSECTION: 603.15.10 Flow and Tamper Switches All buildings totally equipped with a sprinkler system shall have installed at each risert an approved electrically supervised waterflow and tamper switch. These switches shall transmit an alarm to a fire alarm panel located in the building. The fire alarm system, which has been installed as per NFIPA #72 specifications, shall transmit an alarm (no automatic dialers) to the fire department dispatch office by way of a fire alarm monitoring service or direct telephone line. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, ~ 2-9-98) . inaflas Structure Fires in Public Assemblies Between 1994 and 1998, there was an average of 6,000, struc- tural fires in assembly properties, with religious facilities accounting for 2,000 of the total. Public assembly properties include country clubs, fixed-use amusement places, swimming facilities, exhibition halls, arenas. theaters. studios, and reli- gious facilities. Eating and drinking establishments are considered assembly properties but are a separate category for study. Church fires were among the most costly and resulted in the highest number of civilian deaths and injuries. According to NFPA statistics, the leading cause of the fires was incendiary or suspicious. Some 22 percent, or 440 of the fires, were incen- diary or suspicious. In response to the high number of church arsons, President Clinton formed the National Church Arson Task Force in 1996. Between 1996 and 1999, the task force investigated 827 arsons, bombings. or attempted bombings of churches. Some 294 arrests were made, and 287 defendants were convicted in connection with 206 arsons or bombings at houses of worship. NFPA's Fire Analysis and Research Divi- sion's One-Stop Data Shop at www, nfpa.org/research offers a package of sta- tistics about fires in religious properties. Although fatal fires in assembly occu- pancies are rare, the potential for loss of fife is high. Historically, the deadliest single-building fire in the United States was the Iroquois Theater fire in 1903, in Chicago, which killed 602 people.~ 16 NFPA JOURNAL JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2002 Structure Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties by Major Cause Unknown-Cause Fires Allocated Proportionally 1994-1998 Annual Averages Cause Incendiary or suspicious 440 22.1" 0 11.7% 3 9.8% $19.7 Electrical distribution 350 17.6% 0 0,091: 5 15.2% $10.9 Heating equipment 230 11.6" 1 31.8% 3 8.2% $4.5 Other equipment 190 9.7% 1 28.3% 10 31.4% $6.6 Cooking equipment 180 8.9% 1 28.3% 4 11.7% $0.7 Open flame, ember. or torch 150 7.3% 0 0.091: 4 12.9% $3.2 Natural causes . 110 5,3% 0 0.091:' 0 0,9% $5.9 Appliance. tool. or air conditioning 100 4.9% 0 0,0% 1 4.3% $2.7 Exposure (to other hostile fire) 90 4,4% 0 0.091: 0 0.0% $0.8 Other heat source 80 4.2" 0 0.091: 2 4.7% $1.5 Smoking materials 50 2.3% 0 0.091: 0 0.091: . $0.7 Child playing 30 1.7% 0 0.091: 0 1.0% $0.1 Total 1.990, 100.0% 2 100.091: 33 100.091: , $57.4 Hottt: ThftSft are ~s reportmJ to U.S. m/llicipal fire OOpanments and so ~1udt1 fires re/lOfted only to ~1lI1 or stattt agencies or industTial ~ brigades. FileS are rounded to the nearttst ten, cMIian deaths and eMllan inftxies are expressed to the nearest one, and property damage is roundrld to the nearllSt hundred thousand doRars, Property damage figurttS /Ja1.e not been iJlfUSlBd for intIation. Thft major cause categoOOs are based on a hierarchy developed by the U.S. Fire Administration. Sums may not equal totals dut! to rounditf ttmxs. SOURCE: NationalllStimates based on NRRS and NFPA sllfVl!y. Structure' Fires' in Public Assembly Properties * 1994-1998 Annual Averages Occupancy . Fixed-Use amusement lie recreation place ~ ..... 4",.-")''!t.l :~. ... ~~'.iJ: VariabltHJse amusement. or recre, alion Place,' ~ , ',", ,. " iIIJ ..,. '~:} Religious or funeral property ~ .l!. ''',''-':'n ~ ~I .t~:k~ Clw - 'l'O t3J'vm Ubraries, museums, or courtrooms ~ .& ".,we, ",V,''','' ~ -Y' ';.:f~~.~l~ Passenger terminal - e Ot'$ii Theater or studio CJ- G ..t:~:ll Unclassified or unknown-type public assembly property _ ~ .& ,.,,;;~:...ti'~ ~ II(lI ~.~...;:;-,i;;' mrn:'I 6,000 5 _ Fires ., Civilian Deaths . Civilian Injuries Direct Property Damage (mllions) 99 $142.5 · Excluding eating and drinking establishments. Note; These are /ires reportftd to U.s. municipal "re departments and so exclude fires reported only to federal or state agencies or industrial tite brigades. Fifes are rounded to the nearest hundred, deaths and injuries to the nearest one, and direct property damage to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Damage hasn't been adjusted for inflation. SOURCE: National estimates based on NRRS and NFPA Sllfll!!Y. ILLUSTRATlONS: ANNIE BISSETT The following information is taken from the One-Stop Data Shop's Special Information Data Package on Religious and Funeral Property Fires. If you are interested in receiving published fire incidents involving religious and funeral properties, please contact Nancy Schwartz at 617-984- 7450 or e-mail osds(Wnfpa.ore. Structure Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties Statistical Analysis Prepared by: Marty Ahrens Fire Analysis and Research Division National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02169-7471 www.nfpa.org December 2003 Structure Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties This report contains infonnation about structures fires in churches, temples, mosques, religious education facilities, funeral parlors and related properties that were reported to local fire departments. In the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS), these are identified by fixed property use codes 130-139. The number of specific code property use code choices has been reduced in Version 5.0 ofNFIRS, and some older codes have been combined. Due to these changes, data from 1999 must be analyzed separately. Because five-year annual averages are less likely to be skewed by random variation and the older data had some features not captured by NFIRS version 5.0, separate tables are provided with the most recent data (1999) and five-year annual averages for 1994-1998. The frequency of these fires and associated losses during 1999 and the average number of fires, casualties and direct property damage per year from 1994 through 1998 for the specific occupancies are shown in the following tables. In 1999, an estimated 2,000 structure fires in places of worship and funeral properties caused three civilian deaths, 26 civilian injuries, and $110,800,000 in direct property damage. Overall, the 2,000 fires accounted for 0.4% of the 523,600 structure fires reported during the year. During the five-year period of 1994-1998, an estimated average of 1,990 religious or funeral property fires caused two civilian deaths, 33 civilian injuries, and $57,400,000 in direct property damage per year. The 1,990 religious and funeral property fires accounted for 0.4% of the 567,100 structure fires reported per year during that time period. 1999 Structure Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties by Property Type Civilian Civilian Direct Occupancy Fires Deaths Injuries Property Damage Church, mosque, or chapel* 1,720 3 19 $93,300,000 Funeral parlor 90 0 0 $2,300,000 Unclassified or unknown-type 190 0 6 $15,300,000 religious or funeral property Total 2,000 3 25 $110,800,000 * The category of church, mosque or chapel now also includes church halls and religious education facilities. These three categories, listed separately in previous years, totaled an average of 1,730 fires per year during 1994-1998. Note: These are fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. Fires are rounded to the nearest ten, deaths and injuries to the nearest one, and direct property damage to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Damage has not been adjusted for inflation. Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFP A survey. Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties. 12/03 NFP A Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA Structure Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties by Property Type 1994-1998 Annual Averages Civilian Civilian Direct Occupancy Fires Deaths Injuries Property Damage Church, temple, mosque or chapel 1,240 1 23 $40,500,000 Church hall 330 0 3 $5,800,000 Religious education facility 160 0 2 $2,500,000 Funeral parlor or chapel 80 1 2 $2,000,000 Unclassified or unknown-type religious or funeral property 180 0 1 $6,600,000 Total 1,990 2 33 $57,400,000 Note: These are fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. Fires are rounded to the nearest ten, deaths and injuries to the nearest one, and direct property damage to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. Sums may not equal totals due to rounding errors. Damage has not been adjusted for inflation. Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFPA survey. Since 1980, religious and funeral property fires fell 43%. Church fires and church arsons caused considerable concern in the mid-1990s. While these fires did jump 16% from 1,890 (the lowest point since 1980) in 1995, to 2,180 (the highest point since 1992) in 1996, the long-term trend shows that the problem is getting better. Fires in the religious and funeral parlor occupancy group fell 43% from 3,500 in 1980 to 2,000 in 1999. From 1998 to 1999, they rose 5%. Intentionally set fires in this occupancy class fell 70% from 1,320 in 1980 to 390 in 1999. This is consistent with the record low numbers of these fires seen in 1997 and 1998. (See Tables I and 2.) These trends are graphed in Figure 1. In comparison, structure fires of all types declined 51 % from 1980 to 1999, and rose 1 % from 1998 to 1999. * Intentionally set structure fires fell 64% from 1980 to 1999. ** Electrical distribution equipment and intentional firesetting were the leading causes. Tables 3-6 provide causal information about fires in the whole occupancy class and in each specific occupancy. The 1999 data is presented first, followed by annual averages for the five year period from 1994 through 1998. (Some property use codes have been consolidated in Version 5.0 ofNFIRS. The1994-1998 tables for categories that have been consolidated are grouped together.) In 1999, electrical distribution equipment (20%) ranked first among the causes of these properties as a whole, and intentional firesetting (also 20%) was a close second. The order was reversed in the 1994-1998 period, with * Marty Ahrens, The US. Fire Problem Overview Report - Leading Causes and Other Patterns and Trends. Quincy, NFP A, Fire Analysis and Research Division, June 2003. .. John R. Hall, Jr., US. Arson Trends and Patterns. Quincy, NFPA, Fire Analysis and Research Division, March, 200 I. Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties. 12/03 2 NFP A Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA 22% of the fires intentionally set, and 18% caused by electrical distribution equipment. During 1999, 24% of all reported non-residential structure fires were intentionally set. Intentional causes were blamed for 27% of all non-residential structure fires during 1994- 1998. * The causes varied by specific occupancy, with intentionally set fires topping the list for church, temple and mosque fires in both time periods. In 1999, the leading cause of fires in funeral parlors or chapels was an open flame, ember or torch; electrical distribution equipment led in the 1994-1998 time period. National Church Arson Task Force was formed in 1996. In response to a number of reports of church arsons early in the year and increasing concern about a possible racial motivation for these arsons, President Clinton ordered the formation of the National Church Arson Task Force in June 1996. The Task Force was charged to identify and prosecute church arsonists, help religious communities rebuild their houses of worship after fires, and to offer fire prevention assistance. The Task Force was to coordinate the efforts of law enforcement agencies from all levels of government. An Operations Team, made up of agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (A TF) and of prosecutors from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and U.S. Attorneys' offices, provided assistance to local task forces. The Task Forces and Operations Team investigated fires in churches or other religious properties that occurred on or after January 1, 1995. Between that date and August 15,2000, 945 investigations of arsons, bombings or attempted bombings were conducted. Four hundred and thirty-one (431) arrests were made in connection with 342 incidents; 305 defendants were convicted in connection with 224 arsons or bombings at houses of worship. Fourteen percent of these arrested were children between 6 and 13 years of age; 25% were between 14 and 17 years old. One-third were between 18 and 24. * While some arsons were racially motivated, they found the usual range of other motives such as vandalism, pyromania or mental health issues, burglary cover-up, retribution against religious authorities, other disputes and financial profit. Their study also indicated that church arson has fallen since the inception of the Task Force.** Nationally, intentionally set fires in these properties hit two consecutive (but close) low points in 1997 and 1998, below any other year since the first available data in 1980. (See Table 2 and Figure 1.) Religious and funeral property fires were more common on weekends. Sunday was the peak day for fires in churches, other places of worship and funeral homes with 18-19% of these incidents. Despite this peak, two-thirds of the fires occurred on weekdays. (See Table 7.) oil Fourth Year Reportfor the President: National Church Arson Task Force. U.S. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Department of Justice: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Federal Bureau of Investigation, September 2000, downloadable from httl)://w.....".....atf.gov/pub/gen nub/report2000/ ** Second Year Reportfor the President: National Church Arson Task Force. U.S. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Department of Justice: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Federal Bureau of Investigation, October 1998, downloadable from httn:/iwww.usdoi.gov!crtlchurch arsoniarson98.html Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties. 12/03 3 NFP A Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA 2/3 offires occurred between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Table 8 shows that fires in religious and funeral properties were failry evenly distributed between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., with more variation in 1999 than in the 1994-1998 period. Two-thirds of the fIres occurred during this half day. The smallest shares of fires occurred between midnight and 3:00 a.m. The period from 3:00 to 6:00 a.m. was a close second. The kitchen was the leading area of origin. Table 9 shows that religious and funeral property structure fires started in a wide variety of areas. The kitchen or cooking area was the leading area of origin in both 1999 and the 1994-1998 time-period with 12-13% of the fIres. The rank order varied slightly for the other areas. Seven to eight percent started in the sanctuary or assembly area with fIxed seating for 100 or more people; 8% started in the attic or ceiling/roof assembly or concealed space; 7% stated in the heating equipment room, 7% started in a small assembly area for fewer than 100 people; and 7-8% started on the exterior wall surface. Fire Protection Features in Religious and Funeral Property Structure Fires Reported to Public Fire Departments: 1994-1998 Annual Averages Percent of fIres in buildings with smoke or other fire alarms present Percent of fIres in buildings having smoke or other fire alarms in which devices were operational Percent of fires in buildings with operational smoke or other fire alarms (product of fIrst two statistics) Percent of fires in buildings with automatic suppression system Deaths per 1,000 fires with automatic suppression system present Deaths per 1,000 fires with no automatic suppression system present Reduction in deaths per 1,000 fires when automatic suppression systems were present Average loss per fire when automatic suppression system was present Average loss per fire with no automatic suppression system Reduction in loss per fire when automatic suppression systems were present Source: National estimates based on NFIRS and NFP A survey. 39.1% 75.1% 29.4% 4.6% 0.0 0.8 100.0% $17,210 $32,276 46.7% 2/5 of these fires occurred in properties with smoke alarms. Thirty-nine percent of the reported structure fires in religious or funeral properties during the 1994-1998 time-period occurred in properties with smoke alanns or other detection equipment. Automatic suppression systems were present in only 4% of these fires. The Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties, J 2/03 4 NFP A Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy. MA average estimated direct property damage was 47% higher when no automatic suppression system was present. No deaths were reported in religious or funeral properties protected by automatic suppression systems. Data for 1999 is not provided because of difficulties introduced by the process of converting the data collected in the older version of NFIRS to NFIRS 5.0. Because the majority of 1999 data was collected in this older fonnat and converted, drawing reliable conclusions on this topic form more recent data is difficult. Almost 1,700 outside and other fires and about 300 vehicle fires were reported on these properties per year. In 1999, an estimated 1,660 outside and other fires in or on religious or funeral properties caused $140,000 in direct property damage. The 320 vehicle fires on these properties caused $900,000 in damage. During the five-year period from 1994 through 1998, an average of 1,690 outside and other fires per year in or on these properties caused an average of two civilian injuries, and $300,000 in direct property damage per year. An average of 260 vehicle fires caused three civilian injuries and $600,000 in direct property damage per year. Narratives provide information about what can happen, not what is typical. Incident narratives and articles from NFP A publications about fires that have occurred since 1980 are also included to illustrate some of the situations encountered. It is important to remember the difference between statistical and anecdotal information. The statistics describe the big picture; the anecdotes may illustrate unusual circumstances. Anecdotes show what can happen; they are not a source to learn about what typically occurs. NFP A 909 provides fire safety guidelines. Individuals interested in keeping religious properties safe from fire should consult NFP A 909: Standard for the Protection of Cultural Resources. Including Museums, Libraries, Places of Worship, and Historic Properties for information about fire prevention in these properties. Concern about church fires prompted new program: SAFE congregation, SAFE community. Because of the media attention about church fires, many congregations began talking to fire officials and trying to make their churches safer. The NFP A Center for High-Risk Outreach saw this as another opportunity to tell people how to protect themselves from fire in their place of worship and at home as well. A folded 11 x 17 pamphlet was prepared. The interior, with fire safety tips, can be hung in a church hall. The back has a covenant for fire safety and encourages church members to work together to make sure they know how to be safe at home. All parts may be photocopied and included in a church bulletin, This publication is available in English and Spanish and may be obtained free of charge by contacting the Center for High-Risk Outreach, National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 (617) 984-7286. Fires in Religious and Funeral Properties. 12/03 5 NFP A Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA ....: PERMIT, APPLICATION City of La PorJ~~t,w." Established 1892 ,'( r: '.' .." '., t " AUG 2 72004 281-471-5020 Ext. 259 Building Mechanical *Electrical *Plumbing *(See back of form) Project Address: Lot: Subdivision: LA ~ ~ Block: Owner's Name: FI Address: ..,\ W. LA Street City Contractor: 1\oC.. ~L.' Ot~/A\.f\.t~UStA'A Phone:~.4(,50(X'~) Address:JOI.= CU'.) ~ ~stQl 71c+!I Street. City Zip Engineer: Q""--~~ltI""~~""(""''')i '~ 6~'-tCt.1- ~ ~~~ (t4.~~ Building Use:~~.~~US r~Ct&.l1"( . , Sq. Footage: ". 0 '0 # Stories I Valuation:( ~ ~ Describe Work: J1~ ~'" " For City Use Only ^ L ~~ Occupancy Type-1\. - ' ,'>" \'" Flood Zone X . . ..},./ Construction Type ~, r I, ';., ~. Use zone-R,. ~ Commercial Building~ Plans Only-Fire Marshal Approval .,.,......... Class Work Sq. FlM D $ # StOriOS~Parlcing~,at-~ Date Checked! Approved for Issuance By: Date Special Conditions: = ot~ HeAD Da3-J4~-ooo- 07/7 Taxt:.J Pem..it No. Permit Fee Plan Check Fee: S:\CPSbare\InspectionslBldgPermitApp 1 Oi03.doc L-, 1..1\. 'PORTE FIA.,.E.,., ~MARSHA1.S . , '" OFFICE .. IIiJ ~ Laurie 1. Christem_ , CFI Fire Marshal City Of La Porte Fire Marshal's Office BUILDING PLAN REVIEW First United Methodist Church The following items were identified during the plan review for this project on 08/30/04. ~ See attached amendment: Assembly must have sprinkler system. ~ Label all rooms/doors. ~ Ensure kitchen door swings out - different on floor plan and kitchen plan. ~ Fire pull stations must have alarmed tamper proof covers. ~ Classroom and choir rooms need audiovisual alarms. ~ FMO will need to perform acceptance test on alarm system. ~ Need more information on type of stove/oven being installed. ~ Fire lanes to be determined with construction manager or project engineer during construction. Any questions please contact the Fire Marshal's Office. 604 West Fairmont Parkway La Porte, IX 77571 Office: 281-867-4603 Fax: 281-842-1868 1994 STANDARD FIRE CODL . .MENDMENTS cont. PAGE 14 OF 28 603.9 Detailed Installation Requirements Revised to read: 1. When a building has a sprinkler system and/or standpipe system installed for fire protection. regardless if it is required or not by the building code or fire code. the system shall be a wet system. The design and installation of the sprinkler system shall be as per NFIP A #13 specifications. The design and installation of the standpipe system shall be as per NFIPA #14 specifications. 2. When a sprinkler and/or standpipe system has been installed in a building and the occupancy changes to a occupancy not requiring said system, the system must remain in proper installation and operation or the system must be removed. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, ~ 2-9-98) 603.11 "Dry Standpipes Revised to read: When in the opinion of the fire chief and fire marshal a wet standpipe system would be detrimental to the occupancy, contents or process, a dry system or other NFIPA approved fire protection system may be installed. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, S 2-9-98) ~ 603~15-. -.. Automatic.Sprinkler'Syslems-'.- . ..-_.... .-.... _._"--. -- ....- . ...~. . '. .. _'__'__.~ _n._, _._ _ ... ._.__...... ADDED NEW SUBSECTION: 603.15.8 Dry Sprinkler Systems When in the opinion of the fire chief and fire marshal a wet sprinkler system would be detrimental to the occupancy, contents or process. a dry system or other approved fire protection system may be installed. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, ~ 2-9-98) ADDED NEW SUBSECTION: 603.15.9 Additional Required Automatic Sprinkler Systems In addition to any other fire and/or building code requirements the following occupancies shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. 1. ASSEMBLY OCCUPANCIES (A) . All Class A assembly occupancies. 19fi}4 STANDARD FIRE CODE AMENDMENTS cont. PAGE 15 OF 28 (B) When a Class B assembly occupancy is located in a building above the level of exit discharge, the entire building shall be equipped with a sprinkler system. (C) When a Class C assembly occupancy is located in a building two (2) stories or more above the level of exit discharget the entire building shall be .equipped with a sprinkler system. 2. BUSINESS OCCUPANCIES A business occupancy 3 stories or more in height shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. 3. RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCIES (A) Hote/s, mote/st dormitories or lodging or rooming houses 3 stories or more in height, with exterior means of egress, the entire bUilding shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. (B) Hotels, motels, dormitories or lodging or rooming houses 2 stories or more in height, with interior means of egress, the entire building shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. (C) Apartment buildings, townhouses and condominiums 3 stories or:more in height, with exterior means of egress, the entire building shall be totally equipped With a sprinkler system. .r' :;,(" ' (D) Apartment buildings, townhouses and condominiums 2 stories or'rrl:Qrefin height, with interior means of egress, the entire building shall be totally equipped'~ith a sprinkler system. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, ~ 2-9-98) ADDED NEW SUBSECTION: 603.15.10 Flow and Tamper Switches All buildings totally equipped with a sprinkler system shall have installed at each riser, an approved electrically supervised waterflow and tamper switch. These switches shall transmit an alarm to a fire alarm panel located in the building. The fire alarm system, which has been installed as per NF/PA #72 specifications, shall transmit an alarm (no automatic dialers) to the fire department dispatch office by way of a fire alarm monitoring service or direct telephone line. (ORD. NO. 98-2222, ~ 2-9-98) . Hunter, Glenda From: Sent: To: Subject: Christensen, Laurie Friday, October 08, 2004 1 :00 PM Gillett, Martha; Sabo, Wayne; Glenda Hunter (hunterg@ci.la-porte.tx.us); Huber, Mark; Debbie Wilmore (wilmored@ci.la-porte.tx.us); Creamer, Philip FW: 8279/First United Methodist Church of La Porte: Submittal of appeal letter to City of La Porte Fire Review Board ~'i;' i y.-'",:w_-_w.. . ~ ~ 100804 Fire Appeal.doc )22004 E-mail from Mark Huber.... -----Original Message----- From: Alan Balius [mailto:abalius@thesligroup.com] Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 10:56 AM To: ChristensenL@ci.la-porte.tx.us Cc: danwayman@gmail.com; claude.a.graves@nasa.gov; "Melissa Centanni"; "Scott Hollingsworth"; "Tom Baiker" Subject: 8279/First United Methodist Church of La Porte: Submittal of appeal letter to City of La Porte Fire Review Board Dear Ms. Christensen: Attached is SLI's letter to the Fire Review Board, requesting through the appeal process that our client, First United Methodist Church of La Porte, not be required to sprinkler their new and existing buildings. Please reply with any questions, or you may call me at 713-465-4650, extension 126. Thank you very much, Alan Balius, AlA The SLI Group, Inc. 1 . " GROUP,INC. . . .. .an integrated deslgnlbulldfirm October 8, 2004 City of La Porte Fire Review Board 604 Fairmont Parkway La Porte, Texas 77571 RE: First United Methodist Church of La Porte New Family Life Center Dear Fire Review Board: The S.L.I. Group, Inc. met with City of La Porte officials on February 4,2004, to review the preliminary site and floor plans for a new Family Life Center for the First United Methodist Church of La Porte. City of La Porte officials present that day included Debbie Wilmore, Chief Building Official, Nicholas Finan, Interim Planning Director, Robert Cummings, Supervising Engineer and Masood Malik, Planning Coordinator. The Fire Marshal, Laurie Christiansen, was not able to attend. Debbie Wilmore agreed to forward the proposed plans to Laurie Christiansen and get back with SLI to verify fire sprinkler requirements. \11 The Family Life Center is to be an 11,010 s.f. building with a total occupancy load ofless than 300 persons. SLI determined according to the Standard Building Code 1994 and the Life Safety Code 1997 that a fire sprinkler system was not required for this size building with an occupancy load of less than 300 persons. Standard BuildiDl! Code 1994: Table 500 - Allowable Heights and Building Areas a ) 1,.-'( A-2 Small Assembly :;. -:) e..~ J ~. "'( '1. f L Type VI One-Hour Maximum building area: 7,500 sq. ft. Exception: 503.4.4 See attached - "construction may be increased 50% over the un-sprinklered areas specified in Table 500" Maximum building area: 11,250 sq. ft. Between February 11th and February 20th SLI exchanged e-mails with Mark Huber, City of La Porte Building Official. In the final correspondence (see attached) Mark said" My review of this issue with the fire marshall resulted with her strongly recommending (but not required) that you install a fire sprinkler and or monitored alarm system." At that time the final budget for the project was put together by the Church administration based on SLI's research of the Fire Code requirements and Mark Huber's letter. The budget was then presented to and approved by the Congregation of the Church. The final budget did include a monitored fire alarm system but did not include a fire sprinkler system, as it was not required by any code. Thereafter, SLI submitted to the City of La Porte for a building permit on August 26,2004, based on the previously reviewed plans. However, during the permitting process Mark Huber notified SLI that the fire marshal was going to require a fire sprinkler system. SLI met in regard to this issue on September 15th at the City of La Porte with Laurie Christiansen, Mark Huber and Masood Malik. At this meeting Ms. Christiansen told SLI she would require the new building to be fire sprinklered according to the City of La Porte Amendments to the 1994 Standard Fire Code. 1994 Standard Fire Code with City of La Porte Amendments: 603.15.9 Additional Required Automatic Sprinkler Systems In addition to any other fire and or building code requirements the following occupancies shall be totally equipped with a sprinkler system. 1. Assembly Occupancies a. All Class A assembly occupancies b. When a Class B assembly occupancy is located in a building above the level of exit discharge, the entire building shall be equipped with a sprinkler system. c. When a Class C assembly occupancy is located in a building two (2) stories or more above the level of exit discharge, the entire building shall be equipped with a sprinkler system SLI could not find a definition of Assembly Occupancies Class A, Class B and Class C in the City of La Porte Amendments or the 1994 Standard Fire Code. SLI did find a definition for this classification system in the NFPA 101, Life Safety Code 1985. NFPA 101. Life Safety Code 1985: l-- \ o\f) ~t ! 8-1.4.1 Classification of Assembly Occupancies "Each assembly occupancy shall be classified according to its occupant load, as follows: Class A, occupant load greater than 1000 persons; Class B, occupant load greater than 300 but not greater than 1000 persons; Class C, occupant load greater than 50 but not greater than 300 persons." There was a subsequent meeting at the City of La Porte including Ms. Christiansen on September ~ ~ " 2 151 where Ms. Christiansen advised SLI that because the proposed building was considered an 'f'~ ~ ~c.~ ~I A-2 small assembly in the Standard Building Code that it was considered a Class A Assembly in '-,)(\..L ~4'-- the La Porte Amendments. SLI strongly disagrees with this interpretation. The NFP A 101 Life I .kl"v Safety Code 1997 clearly abolishes the distinction between the Classes of an assembly building provided in the 1994 Code. This thus results in the City of La Porte Amendments to the 1994 Fire Code and the Life Safety Code 1997 conflicting with each other. 'J-i ",-I- t s.. l.. ~~ e s "'('0 ~v \ o.J' jO? / ~ e.o-r-(. 0":> <- In a follow-up phone conversation between SLI and Ms. Christiansen SLI was advised that the C requirement to sprinkler the building was based on the NFP A 101, Life Safety Code 1997. Ms. Christiansen also advised SLI at that time that she was going to require the Church's Family Life Center to be fire sprinklered and the Church could file for an appeal if they wished. NFPA 101. Life Safety Code 1997: 8-3.5 Extinguishing Requirements 8-3.5.1 "Buildings containing assembly occupancies with occupant loads greater than 300 shall be protected by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 7-7 as follows: Exception No.2: Assembly occupancies consisting of a single multipurpose room of less If; than 12,000 sq. ft. and not used for exhibition or display and are not part of a mixed occupancy." 't) \.'" Appendix A: "It is the intent to permit a single multipurpose room of less than 12,000 sq. ~J,-t ~ ft. to have certain small rooms as part of the single room. These rooms could be a \t-l- j kitchen, office, equipment room, and the like. It is also the intent that an addition could q/l be made to an existing building without requiring that the existing building be sprinklered, where both the new and existing buildings have independent means of egress and a fire-rated separation is provided to isolate one building from the other." "A school gymnasium with egress independent of and separate from the school would be included in this exception as would a function hall attached to a church with a similar t" egress arrangemen . As dictated by the 1994 Standard Building Code, and with the approval of the City of La Porte Building Officials, a four hour-rated fire wall will be built between the existing and new buildings, so that the new and existing buildings are isolated from each other. As the Church feels strongly that their new Family Life Center is not required to be fire sprinkled by code and such would be an unnecessary expenditure of the Church's limited funds, the Church has elected to appeal the decision requiring such expenditure. In connection with this I appeal the Church is also asking that the Fire Review Board please take into consideration the ) I J ~ I'~ fact that the Church is installing a monitored active and passive fire alarm system in the new t-~~ building. In summary of the foregoing information and arguments, on behalf of the Church SLI maintains that there is no requirement for a fire sprinkler system being installed in the Church's proposed new Family Life Center under anyone of the three different Code provisions suggested over the last eight months as being potentially applicable to the project, as follows: 1. The 1994 Standard Fire Code provides that a Type VI One Hour building up to 11,250 s.f. in size is not required to have a fire sprinkler system. The Church's proposed Family Life Center will have a total of 11,010 s.f. and thereby falls below the threshold requirement mandating the installation of a fire sprinkler system. 2. The City of La Porte Amendments to the 1994 Standard Fire Code provide that a fire sprinkler system will be required if certain occupancy projections exist for a building. Presuming that the three recited occupancy categories, Class A, Class B and Class C, are defined by the 1985 Life Safety Code (which is the only known source of definition for these categories and there is no specific definition of such categories in the City of La Porte Amendments), then the proposed Family Life Center would fall into the Class C category, i.e., "occupant load greater than 50 but not greater than 300 persons". However, the requirement that a Class C category building have a fire sprinkler system only applies when the building's assembly area is located "two stories or more above the level of exit discharge", i.e., on the third floor or higher. Consequently, since the Family Life Center's assembly area is on the ground floor, a fire sprinkler system would not be required in the building under the City of La Porte Amendments if the specified classification system is applicable to this situation. However, the classification system for assemblies was abolished under the Life Safety Code 1997 so such should not be applicable in the current instance. Likewise, SLI believes it to be clear that an "A-2 small assembly with no stage requiring proscenium opening protection" under the 1994 Standard Building Code does not in any way classify the building as a Class A assembly under the City of La Porte Amendments. 3. The NFP A 10 I, Life Safety Code 1997 provides that buildings with occupant loads above 300 persons shall be equipped with a fire sprinkler system. However, the Code also provides certain exceptions to this requirement. Specifically, Exception No.2 to this Code provision specifies that a fire sprinkler system will not be required in buildings which have "Assembly occupancies consisting of a single multipurpose room ofless than 12,000 sq. ft...." In the current situation the Family Life Center assembly area and the building itself is less than the stipulated 12,000 s.f. Consequently the Church is not required under this Code provision to install a fire sprinkler system in the building. -I,,) UJI~ ) I 'i.' ,.-( For the foregoing reasons, on behalf of the First United Methodist Church of La Porte SLI respectfully requests that the City of La Porte Fire Review Board determine that the Church is not required to install a fire sprinkler system in its new Family Life Center. Thank you for your time in regard to this matter and we look forward to further discussing this issue with you at the upcoming hearing. Sincerely, The S.L.I. Group, Inc. Melissa Centanni Vice President -----Original Message----- From: Huber, Mark [mailto:HuberM@ci.la-porte.tx.us] Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 3:02 PM To: 'melissa@thesligroup.com' Cc: Christensen, Laurie; Wilmore, Debbie; Huber, Mark Subject: RE: 9601 Fairmont 1st United Meth. Church Melissa, Thank you for bringing Section 503.4.4 to my attention. If all the conditions of that section can be met\achieved, then we agree. no fire sprinkler would be required up to 12,000 sq.ft max limit. However, the four hour fire wall is still required separating proposed from existing. My review of this issue with the fire marshal resulted with her strongly recommending (but not required) that you install a fire sprinkler and or monitored alarm system. Mark Huber -----Original Message----- From: Melissa Centanni [mailto:melissa@thesligroup.com] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 3: 11 PM To: 'Huber, Markt Subject: RE: 9601 Fairmont 1st United Meth. Church Mark, We found the same information as stated below with one change. Table 500 for A-2 Small Assembly Type IV Unprotected construction provides for 8,000 sq. ft. then section 503.4.4 provides for an area increase of 50%. This brings the total allowable area up to 12,000 sq. ft. without a fire sprinkler system. Please let me know if this is acceptable. Thank you, Melissa Centanni The S.LI. Group, Inc 713-465-4650 x123 -----Original Message----- From: Huber, Mark (mailto:HuberM@ci.la-porte.tx.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 1:34 PM To: Melissa L. Centanni (melissa@thesligroup.com) Cc: Huber, Mark; Wilmore, Debbie; Christensen, Laurie Subject: 9601 Fairmont 1st United Meth. Church We have reviewed the 1994 edition of the Standard Building Code as it applies to the information that was provided to us from your office, and determined the following: The proposed 11,200 square foot expansion of the church would be classified as Small Assembly, Type 4 construction, single story. If this is incorrect or it changes, please let us know. Based upon Table 500 in the building code, the proposed addition would require a fire sprinkler system and a fire alarm system with audible strobes,pulls, and smokes. The one exterior wall closest to the existing walls would need to have a 4 hour rating. If you have further questions or comments J please let me know. C',()Ar~O' Of . err GROUP.INC. . .. .nh integrated design/bulld finn September 30, 2004 Ms. Martha Gillette City Secretary 604 Fairmont Parkway La Porte, Texas 77571 RE: First United Methodist Church of La Porte New Family Life Center Dear Ms. Gillette, On September 23rd I had a discussion with Laurie Christiansen, City of La Porte Fire Marshall, at which time she advised me that in order to receive a City of La Porte building permit the Church would have to install an automatic fire sprinkler system in the above referenced project. As the Church feels this building is not required to he sprinkled by code and would be an unnecessary expenditure ofllie church's limited funds, the church wants to appeal this decision. Ms. Christiansen advised me to contact you to determine the procedure for an appeal. As We discussed this morning, I am writing this letter to request an appeal of the Fire Marshall's decision. The Church would like an OPportunity to further discuss this ruling and why we do not agree that a fire sprinkler system is required according to the building and fire codes used by the City of La Porte. Please contact me as the representative for the Church and let me know what the next step is in the process to obtain our requested hearing. Thank you for your time in regard to this matter. Sincerely, The S.L.!. Group, Inc. ~ Melissa Centanni Vice President