Here's a discussion topic: Today's Retail Environment As "stores" morph into "boxes", we are seeing more and more "industrial" displays, with unadorned shelving and in some cases rack fixtures (I'm thinking PetSmart among others) where merchandise is displayed for sale within reach of customers on the floor, but also where backstock is kept above those levels, sometimes driving up the interpreted "height of storage" to the point where the question arises as to whether this is still OH2 mercantile use or if we've pushed into Chapters 14-17. PetSmart uses racking, Bed Bath & Beyond is one of many who use wide gondolas, Party City is just a box full o' plastic... there are seemingly endless permutations of "retail" and of course we now have §20.3 as an option where it applies. But what about stores on the lower end of the occupancy hazard class where it may or may not be so cut and dried? Discount shoe stores, loaded with synthetics for sure, but if they display shoes in boxes on shelves to 8'-0" or 10'-0" in only part of the store, does this retail store (that doesn't have a stockroom and keeps all its merch on the sales floor) really represent a "storage" use?
What triggers the post is a Burlington store in SoCal where the fire authority has requested a technical report to justify keeping an older OH 2 or 3 system in place in lieu of upgrading to protect "storage of plastics to 8'-0" AFF". There are just a few shelving fixtures in this 40,000+ sq. ft. store that hold merch up to that level and not all of it will be synthetics. It begs the question: When does retail display become storage when it's not exclusively representative of the use? Does a row of comforters at 7'-0" in the bedding section require specific address? Or the closeout wall in the shoe department? It's much easier when the entire store is typically fixturized (back to PetSmart) to say, "storage" but what if it's mostly on floor and low fixtures? For new builds it's easier because we can use EC-25 options, higher densities, whatever but the impact to existing stores is potentially significant and intrusive. I'm not saying we should look the other way because of concerns over cost or convenience but these are often last-minute catches on inspection and schedules can get vaporized in an instant. I've proposed a double-density approach in the past for uses like self-storage and §20.3 suggests that's a sound approach, but what in retail stores that may only have a handful of locations where this is even an issue? I'm curious as to whether there are regional best practices that have been undertaken or whether there's been any additional work done by consultants or industry to help establish a lucid benchmark for when a "store" crosses the line with regard to occupancy hazard class. Steve Leyton, President Protection Design and Consulting T | 619.255.8964 x 102 | www.protectiondesign.com<http://www.protectiondesign.com/> 2851 Camino Del Rio South | Suite 210 | San Diego, CA 92108 Fire Protection System Design | Consulting | Planning | Training _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
