Decommissioning of Sprinkler Systems

[Ben Trendle]

Hypothetically – if you had a building in your municipality that at one time was required to be sprinklered but is now essentially an empty, vacant building, what would your department require for the owner to decommission the sprinkler system?

[Joseph Gardiner]

Hello Ben,

Our office would require the owner to get a building permit to decommission the sprinkler system. If they chose not to do that they would have to maintain the system.

Hope this helps,

Joe Gardiner

North Bay

[Vince Tripp]

We would require the sprinkler system to be maintained, if the owner didn’t want to do that he could take out a demolition/building permit to decommission/remove the sprinkler system.

[John Wilson]

By vacant, do you mean gutted to the basic shell or do you mean that they simply stopped using it and left everything as was? If it was gutted under a building permit then I’d agree with the others. BUT, if the building was simply stopped being used, then the sprinklers would have to stay and be maintained.

When considering change-of-use, the most recent occupancy still prevails for determination so that may weigh in on the question.

[Fritz Mattern]

We have used section 6.9 as systems continued to freeze. Once building is empty there is limited danger. No different from the building being under construction.

[Author]

Posts