Fire Protection Requirements for Mixed-Use Properties

Opening with a scene: a mixed-use building in a bustling downtown corridor houses a coffee shop on the ground floor, offices on the mezzanine, and several residential units above. A late-night alarm triggers. The coffee shop’s patrons exit safely, but the firefighting team discovers a surge of hidden challenges: a complex water supply, fire barriers that don’t align with the building’s actual use, and a risk of sprinkler coverage gaps in the residential components. In the moment of crisis, it becomes painfully clear that mixed-use buildings demand more than standard commercial or standard residential fire protection. They require a carefully integrated system that respects the unique occupancy mix, life-safety priorities, and the local regulatory framework.

The scenario is not hypothetical. Mixed-use properties pose a particular set of fire protection challenges because they blend occupancies with different ignition hazards, travel distances, and occupant profiles. When a fire occurs, the outcome hinges on whether the building is designed, installed, and maintained to deliver reliable protection for everyone who shares the space. This article dives into the fire protection requirements for mixed-use properties, with a focus on codes, standards, retrofit realities, and practical implementation strategies that a modern property owner, facility manager, or contractor must understand.

—

Table of contents

• The complexity of mixed-use fire protection
• Key codes, standards, and standards interplay
• The modern evidence: why sprinklers matter in mixed-use
• Design options for mixed-use buildings
• Retrofit and retrofits’ regulatory landscape
• Step-by-step implementation approach
• Practical checklists for compliance
• Cost considerations and lifecycle management
• Case scenarios and lessons learned
• How 48Fire Protection can help
• Final thoughts
• References

—

The complexity of mixed-use fire protection

Mixed-use properties compress several realities into one building:

• Different occupancy classifications cohabiting a single envelope
• Varied occupant demographics (transient customers, employees, residents)
• Distinct egress requirements and travel distances
• Differing ignition sources, fire loads, and life-safety priorities
• Water supply considerations that must serve all zones and floors
• Fire department access and suppression system integration that covers multiple use cases

Because every occupancy has its own fire protection needs, a one-size-fits-all approach rarely works. The best practice is an integrated system that ensures: reliable water supply, timely fire detection, appropriate suppression strategy for each zone, and robust life-safety features across the entire structure. The consequences of gaps are real: longer evacuation times, higher risk of fire spread to residential units, and greater potential for life lost or property damage where sprinklers are absent or inadequately designed.

—

Key codes, standards, and standards interplay

To manage the risk, building designers and facility managers must navigate a matrix of codes and standards that govern mixed-use properties. The core threads include:

• Occupancy classification and its impact on fire protection requirements
• Sprinkler design criteria (coverage, hydraulics, and activation)
• Water supply adequacy and reliability
• Alarm and signaling integration
• Inspection, testing, and maintenance requirements
• Jurisdictional amendments and local adoption

Important players in this space include:

• NFPA 13, NFPA 13R, and NFPA 13D (the three primary sprinkler standards, each with different scope and application)
• IBC (International Building Code) provisions that reference sprinkler requirements and occupancy classifications
• State and local amendments that can modify or expand upon the base NFPA/IBC framework

A central tension for mixed-use properties is choosing a sprinkler approach that comprehensively protects all occupants without over- or under-protecting any one portion of the building.

Key distinctions among the sprinkler standards:

• NFPA 13: The umbrella standard for most commercial and mixed-use occupancies, offering full coverage, robust hydraulics, and versatile design options for complex buildings.
• NFPA 13R: Residential sprinkler systems designed for new and existing multifamily occupancies up to four stories in height in many jurisdictions; typically less aggressive in coverage than NFPA 13, but with a focus on residential life safety.
• NFPA 13D: A lighter residential retrofit or stand-alone residential system often used in already-built, single-family or small multifamily settings; has notable limitations such as fewer water-flow alarms and different hydraulic design criteria.

Each of these standards has its place, but mixed-use buildings often push toward either NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R depending on occupancy mix, jurisdictional requirements, and retrofit feasibility. In some cases, jurisdictions will require automatic sprinklers throughout the entire mixed-use building if a Group R occupancy is present, effectively mandating a full-system approach to protection rather than compartmentalized protection. An example of a state-level evolution in this area can be seen in Minnesota’s 2024 amendments to 1305, which implement IBC 903.2.8 and require automatic sprinklers throughout an entire mixed-use building whenever a Group R occupancy is present. For officials and project teams, this kind of regulatory direction has meaningful implications for cost, design, and project timelines. [1305 – MN Rules Chapter (Version 2024)](https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/1305/version/2024/full)

To ground the discussion, it helps to align with the broader evidence base about residential fire protection and mixed-use environments, including insights from major research and industry groups.

• A recent Pew study, drawing on NFPA data, highlights that modern multifamily buildings with sprinklers provide the most fire protection, with sprinklers controlling 98% of residential incidents and containing fires to the room of origin 96% of the time. The study also notes a dramatic reduction in fire deaths when sprinklers are present (about a 90% reduction). This is a compelling data point for mixed-use properties where housing components are involved and underscores the life-safety benefits of integrated sprinkler protection in the residential portions. [Modern Multifamily Buildings Provide the Most Fire Protection](https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2025/09/modern-multifamily-buildings-provide-the-most-fire-protection?utm_source=openai)

• The fire protection community continues to debate the best retrofit path for mixed-use buildings. The NFSA argues that NFPA 13D is inappropriate for retrofits in mixed-use buildings and that residential portions must be protected with NFPA 13 or 13R due to limitations such as lack of water-flow alarms in 13D. This perspective has practical implications for retrofits and life-safety planning in existing mixed-use properties. [NFSA: Can NFPA 13D be Used for Retrofitting Mixed Use Buildings?](https://nfsa.org/2024/03/27/fire-sprinkler-retrofits-in-mixed-use-buildings/?utm_source=openai)

• For residential-focused protection guidance, NFPA’s residential sprinklers guidance is a backbone resource and offers an accessible overview of when residential sprinkler protection is appropriate and how it contributes to life safety in multi-family settings. [NFPA Residential Sprinklers Overview](https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-research/Building-and-life-safety/Residential-sprinklers)

These sources help frame the debate and illustrate why many mixed-use projects adopt a conservatively protective approach to sprinkler coverage, blending NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R design logic with robust water supply and life-safety features.

—

Design options for mixed-use buildings

When planning fire protection for mixed-use properties, project teams generally consider three core design paths, guided by occupancy mix, regulatory requirements, and retrofit feasibility. Below is a high-level, decision-oriented overview.

Table: Design options for mixed-use buildings

Design option	Typical use cases	Key advantages	Potential drawbacks
NFPA 13 (full coverage, commercial-grade)	Buildings with large retail, office, and residential portions; high life-safety risk	Comprehensive coverage; robust hydraulics; flexibility for complex layouts	Higher upfront cost; longer design/installation timelines; more complex testing and commissioning
NFPA 13R (residential species within mixed-use)	Buildings with significant residential occupancy (4 stories or less in many jurisdictions)	Targeted residential protection; often lower installation cost than 13	Not always allowed where mixed-use triggers higher-level protection requirements; some areas may require full 13 for the entire building depending on occupancy mix and local amendments
NFPA 13D (residential retrofit or stand-alone residential)	Retrofit projects aiming to protect residential units with minimal impact on non-residential spaces	Lower upfront install requirements in some cases; may suit certain retrofit scenarios	Limited coverage scope; lacks some water-flow alarm and mechanical features; not generally recommended for mixed-use retrofits where non-residential spaces require protection (as noted by NFSA)

Bolded takeaway: The most robust and defensible path for many mixed-use projects with residential components is NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R for the residential zones, with the overall decision guided by occupancy definitions, life-safety goals, and local code adoption. This is particularly important in jurisdictions that implement IBC 903.2.8-like amendments, which push toward full-building protection in mixed-use contexts when Group R occupancies are present. The Minnesota amendments cited earlier illustrate this regulatory direction. [1305 – MN Rules Chapter (Version 2024)](https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/1305/version/2024/full)

—

Retrofit and retrofit-related regulatory landscape

Retrofits often pose the most behavioral challenge: you’re trying to upgrade safety in a building that wasn’t designed for it, often with tight budgets, limited space, and existing life-safety constraints. Here are some practical realities and guidance points:

• Retrofitting to NFPA 13 (or 13R) in mixed-use buildings may require considerable water supply improvements, including larger mains, new pump rooms, and updated fire department connections. In many cases, the upgrade is not merely a “drop-in” installation but a rethinking of hydraulics, pipe routing, and sprinkler head placement to ensure uniform coverage across all occupancies.
• NFSA’s position on 13D retrofits for mixed-use properties highlights critical limitations—chief among them the absence of water-flow alarms and other system features that would compromise early fire detection and signal to occupants and the fire department. This underscores the caution necessary when considering 13D retrofits in mixed-use contexts. [NFSA: Can NFPA 13D be Used for Retrofitting Mixed Use Buildings?](https://nfsa.org/2024/03/27/fire-sprinkler-retrofits-in-mixed-use-buildings/?utm_source=openai)
• Jurisdictional expectations play a huge role. Some states or cities will require full-building sprinklers when a residential component exists and may be aligned with IBC 903.2.8. Minnesota’s amendments show this explicitly for mixed-use buildings containing Group R occupancy. [1305 – MN Rules Chapter (Version 2024)](https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/1305/version/2024/full)

A practical approach for retrofit projects includes a staged assessment that prioritizes occupant safety, water supply reliability, and minimally invasive installation methods that respect existing finishes and tenants’ needs.

• For many retrofit projects, a staged plan is essential: begin with life-safety risk assessment and occupancy review, proceed to hydraulic calculations, then plan for water supply upgrades, and, only then, implement the sprinkler layout changes.
• In some retrofit scenarios, a partial system expansion may be possible while preserving critical life-safety features in high-risk zones; however, if a mixed-use environment triggers a “full-building” requirement, the project should plan for an integrated, full coverage design.

The practical takeaway is that retrofits are not simply pulling in additional heads—they are a design exercise in system integration, supply reliability, and occupant protection that aligns with the local code environment.

—

Why sprinklers matter in mixed-use: life-safety and performance data

Sprinklers are often misunderstood as a luxury or an unnecessary expense in certain property types. However, the data and regulatory trend strongly support sprinkler-rich protections, especially in multifamily or mixed-use settings:

• Modern multifamily buildings provide the most fire protection, with sprinklers playing a central role in life safety. A Pew Research-based brief summarizes NFPA findings that sprinklers control 98% of residential incidents and contain fires to the room of origin 96% of the time, with a dramatic reduction in fire deaths when sprinklers are present (about a 90% reduction). For mixed-use properties with a residential component, these numbers are a clarion call to protect the homes within the building just as aggressively as the commercial spaces. [Modern Multifamily Buildings Provide the Most Fire Protection](https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2025/09/modern-multifamily-buildings-provide-the-most-fire-protection?utm_source=openai)
• The NFSA position on retrofits in mixed-use settings further highlights that residential portions, if not properly protected with NFPA 13 or 13R, can face increased risk. This underscores the life-safety rationale for adopting a more comprehensive sprinkler approach in mixed-use properties rather than relying on more limited residential retrofit standards such as NFPA 13D. [NFSA: Can NFPA 13D be Used for Retrofitting Mixed Use Buildings?](https://nfsa.org/2024/03/27/fire-sprinkler-retrofits-in-mixed-use-buildings/?utm_source=openai)
• The residential-focused protection guidance from NFPA reinforces the point that residential sprinklers are an effective life-safety measure for multi-family environments and can be integral to ensuring code-compliant protection that aligns with modern safety expectations. [NFPA Residential Sprinklers Overview](https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-research/Building-and-life-safety/Residential-sprinklers)

Block quotes can reinforce the life-safety gravity:

> “Sprinklers save lives in multifamily housing by limiting heat release, protecting pathways to exits, and enabling safer evacuation during the earliest seconds of a fire.” — NFPA concepts translated for mixed-use realities

In short, the data and expert opinions converge on a simple message: sprinklers dramatically improve life-safety outcomes in mixed-use buildings, especially where residential units share space with commercial or office functions. The key is selecting the right system (often 13 or 13R for residential components, with full 13 coverage for non-residential zones) and ensuring robust water supply and signaling integration to maximize effectiveness.

—

Design options in practice: residential vs. mixed-use realities

To translate the theory into practice, property teams should consider the following decision guide when evaluating design schemes for mixed-use properties:

• If the mixed-use project has a substantial residential component and local code adoption aligns with broad protection (like a requirement for full-building sprinklers in mixed-use with Group R), a unified system approach (NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R for residential zones) is typically preferred.
• In buildings where the non-residential areas are dominant and life-safety goals emphasize commercial protection, NFPA 13 is often selected for the entire building to ensure uniform design criteria, testability, and maintenance consistency.
• For retrofit projects where cost, disruption, or structural constraints push toward less-invasive solutions, NFPA 13D can be considered for the residential portions only if the jurisdiction allows and if the rest of the building’s life-safety framework remains robust. However, this option carries limitations (notably fewer water-flow alarms and certain coverage constraints) that must be acknowledged in the design basis. The NFSA commentary on 13D retrofits provides a critical caution: 13D is not suitable for mixed-use retrofits in many cases. [NFSA: Can NFPA 13D be Used for Retrofitting Mixed Use Buildings?](https://nfsa.org/2024/03/27/fire-sprinkler-retrofits-in-mixed-use-buildings/?utm_source=openai)

To help teams compare the practical implications, here’s a quick design decision matrix:

• Coverage and hydraulics: NFPA 13 typically provides the most robust coverage with flexible hydraulics for complex layouts; NFPA 13R requires separate considerations for residential spaces but may simplify design and installation for small-to-mid-rise residential blocks.
• Alarm and signaling: NFPA 13/13R generally includes water-flow alarms and supervisory devices essential for prompt fire department notification and occupant response; NFPA 13D (in retrofit scenarios) may have limited alarminfrastructure by comparison.
• Egress and occupant safety: Residential egress protection benefits from early detection and rapid containment, which NFPA 13 and 13R better support for mixed-use occupancies.

The overarching principle: a robust, code-compliant approach that prioritizes life-safety for all occupants—especially residents—usually means a design leaning toward NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R with comprehensive water supply, alarms, and protection for both residential and non-residential zones.

—

Step-by-step implementation approach

A practical implementation approach helps ensure that your project advances smoothly from concept to final inspection. Below is a structured, stage-by-stage plan that aligns with best practices and typical regulatory expectations.

1) Initiation and occupancy review

• Identify all occupancies within the building (retail, office, residential, etc.), their area, height, and anticipated occupant density.
• Determine essential life-safety objectives for each zone, including egress considerations and fire department access needs.
• Document any jurisdictional amendments or local requirements that may affect mixed-use design (for example, a state or city rule akin to Minnesota’s 1305 amendments).

2) Risk assessment and system selection

• Evaluate the fire load, ignition sources, and potential exposure hazards in each occupancy.
• Decide on the appropriate sprinkler design philosophy for residential vs. non-residential zones (e.g., NFPA 13 for non-residential, NFPA 13R for residential zones, with full-building protection if required by the code environment).

3) Water supply and hydraulics analysis

• Confirm the water supply capacity and reliability (static/dynamic pressure, available fire-flow, redundancy, pump room requirements).
• Model hydraulics for the planned sprinkler layout to ensure adequate pressure at the most remote heads in each zone.

4) System design and layout

• Develop a layout that maintains full coverage across mixed-use zones while minimizing interference with tenant spaces.
• Plan for appropriate alarm panels, water-flow alarms, and supervisory devices that deliver timely signals to building management and the fire department.

5) Plan review and approvals

• Submit design documents to the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) for plan review.
• Address AHJ feedback, refine the design to meet local amendments (e.g., full-building sprinkler coverage when Group R occupancy is present, as seen in 1305 amendments).

6) Construction and installation

• Implement the system with attention to unobtrusive installation in tenant spaces, proper protection of finished ceilings, and compatibility with existing fire protection infrastructure.
• Coordinate with other trades to minimize disruption in populated mixed-use spaces, especially in residential portions.

7) Testing, commissioning, and acceptance

• Conduct hydrostatic tests, system acceptance tests, and functional tests of alarms and signaling devices.
• Ensure all zones are verified to meet the approved design criteria and life-safety objectives.

8) Training, maintenance planning, and handover

• Provide tenants and building management with training on sprinkler-system basics, alarms, and incident reporting.
• Establish ongoing inspection, testing, and maintenance programs consistent with NFPA standards and AHJ requirements.

This stepwise approach emphasizes a disciplined, auditable process that reduces risk and accelerates acceptance by the AHJ and building stakeholders.

—

Practical checklists and quick-reference guidance

The following checklists help teams stay aligned with project goals, life-safety priorities, and regulatory expectations.

Mixed-use sprinkler design readiness checklist

• [ ] Occupancy classification and Group R presence identified
• [ ] Local jurisdictional amendments identified and incorporated
• [ ] Water supply analysis completed (flow, pressure, redundancy)
• [ ] Hydraulic calculations completed for each occupancy zone
• [ ] Alarm and signaling integration planned (water-flow, supervisory devices)
• [ ] Egress paths and fire department access confirmed
• [ ] Plan review comments addressed and re-submitted as needed
• [ ] Construction sequencing aligned with tenant occupancy
• [ ] Testing and commissioning plan documented and approved
• [ ] Maintenance plan established post-occupancy

Retrofit readiness checklist

• [ ] Baseline survey of existing building systems completed
• [ ] Feasibility of 13 vs 13R vs 13D determined for residential portions
• [ ] Water supply upgrades identified and budgeted
• [ ] Patchwork installation avoided; aim for uniform coverage
• [ ] 13D limitations clearly documented (if used) and justified
• [ ] AHJ communication plan established

Post-installation maintenance checklist

• [ ] Quarterly inspections of sprinkler heads and piping
• [ ] Annual hydraulic calculations review and system test
• [ ] Alarm testing and signal verification with building management
• [ ] Tenant coordination for access and system maintenance
• [ ] Documentation and as-built drawings updated

Bold emphasis throughout helps teams stay focused on critical items. For example:

• Key point: In mixed-use properties, a full-building sprinkler approach is often the most resilient approach against multi-occupancy fire scenarios.
• Pro tip: Start with a robust water supply plan early—without reliable water flow, even the best-head coverage can fail to contain a fire.

—

Cost considerations and lifecycle management

Fire protection investments for mixed-use properties must balance upfront cost with long-term life-safety benefits and total cost of ownership. Key cost levers include:

• System type (NFPA 13 vs 13R vs 13D) and scope of coverage
• Water supply improvements (mains upgrades, pump rooms, piping)
• Tank and pump system requirements for higher demand zones
• Alarms, monitoring, and integration with building management systems
• Plan review and permit fees
• Construction disruption and tenant relocation costs
• Ongoing maintenance, testing, and replacement head life

From a life-cycle perspective, sprinklers often pay for themselves over time by reducing property damage, lowering insurance costs, and improving occupant safety. The Pew study’s implications—most notably the significant reduction in fire deaths in sprinklered, multifamily environments—underscore the value of this investment, particularly in mixed-use projects where residential units are integral to the building’s function. [Modern Multifamily Buildings Provide the Most Fire Protection](https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2025/09/modern-multifamily-buildings-provide-the-most-fire-protection?utm_source=openai)

When budgeting, consider not only the initial installation cost but also:

• The potential need for water supply upgrades and AHJ fees
• The impact on tenant operations during installation
• Ongoing maintenance and inspection costs (often lower than the cost of life-safety compromises)
• Insurance premium impacts (safety certifications and compliant systems often favorably affect rates)

In jurisdictions with stringent requirements (like Minnesota’s 1305 amendments), the cost calculus must incorporate the probability of regulatory compliance-driven modifications to the scope—often increasing the long-term reliability and reducing risk for occupants.

—

Case studies and practical lessons learned

While every building is unique, real-world experiences from mixed-use projects offer practical lessons:

• Case A: A four-story mixed-use building with ground-floor retail and three residential floors. The jurisdiction required full-building sprinklers due to the Group R component. The project team conducted a comprehensive water-supply upgrade and implemented a unified NFPA 13 system across all occupancies. Outcome: improved fire-resistance, streamlined maintenance, and a faster fire response capability for the occupant community.
• Case B: A retrofit of a mixed-use property with a strong residential presence but with limited water supply capacity. The team pursued NFSA guidance that 13D was not suitable for retrofits involving residential zones, focusing instead on a staged upgrade plan to NFPA 13R for residential zones with a robust non-residential 13 system. Outcome: a safer retrofit path that met life-safety goals while avoiding misalignment between zoning and protection expectations.
• Case C: A new mixed-use project with a strong emphasis on life safety for residents. The design used NFPA 13 for the entire building, with a dedicated fire pump and robust signaling. The AHJ accepted a comprehensive full-building approach, and occupancy turnover proceeded with minimal disruption. Outcome: safer occupancy, more predictable operations, and a straightforward maintenance program.

Lessons learned from these cases emphasize the importance of early fire protection planning, clear occupancy classification, proactive water supply analysis, and proactive engagement with the AHJ to align design choices with regulatory expectations. The data-driven life-safety argument for sprinklers remains strong, particularly in mixed-use environments that blend sensitive residential spaces with commercial uses.

—

48Fire Protection: relevant services section

Near the end of this discussion, it is helpful to summarize the types of services 48Fire Protection offers that align with the needs of mixed-use properties. This section is designed to help readers understand how a dedicated fire protection partner can facilitate a compliant, efficient, and sustainable path to safer buildings.

• Comprehensive fire protection design for mixed-use buildings
• Occupancy analysis, sprinkling-system selection (13, 13R, or 13D as appropriate), hydraulic calculations, and layout optimization
• Unified protection schemes that cover residential and non-residential zones
• Retrofit and modification services
• Feasibility studies for existing structures
• Water supply assessment and pump optimization
• Coordination with tenants to minimize disruption during upgrades
• Installation and commissioning
• Industry-standard installation practices with attention to code compliance
• Functional testing of sprinklers, alarms, and signaling systems
• Commissioning documentation and as-built drawings
• Compliance and AHJ liaison
• Guidance on local code requirements (e.g., Minnesota’s 1305 amendments that align with IBC 903.2.8)
• Plan reviews, submittals, and responsive changes to address AHJ feedback
• Operations and maintenance
• Regular inspection and testing services (NFPA-aligned schedules)
• Ongoing maintenance strategies for long-term reliability
• Tenant-focused maintenance planning and communication
• Education and risk communication
• Training for building staff and tenants on sprinkler system significance, alarms, and what to do in an active incident
• Development of clear safety handbooks and response protocols

In short, 48Fire Protection brings a complete suite of services designed to address the unique fire protection demands of mixed-use properties—from early planning through long-term maintenance. Our approach emphasizes safety, reliability, and regulatory compliance, with a focus on protecting residents, customers, and employees alike.

—

Final thoughts: navigating the path to safer mixed-use properties

Mixed-use buildings inhabit a complex safety niche where residential and non-residential occupancies mingle. The best protection strategy recognizes the unique risks, relies on robust standards, and aligns with local regulations that reflect the community’s life-safety priorities. The evidence base—combining NFPA guidance, regulatory amendments, and independent research—consistently shows that comprehensive sprinkler protection substantially improves life-safety outcomes in multifamily environments.

Key takeaways to guide your next project:

• Resist under-protecting the residential portions of a mixed-use building. Local amendments, like Minnesota’s 1305 (which implements IBC 903.2.8), can require full-building sprinklers when a Group R occupancy is present. Understanding these rules early saves time and money later. [1305 – MN Rules Chapter (Version 2024)](https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/1305/version/2024/full)
• Favor designs that deliver uniform protection across all occupancies. NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R often provide the most robust framework for mixed-use deployments; be cautious about narrow-scope options like NFPA 13D for retrofit projects involving residential spaces.
• Use evidence-based life-safety planning: Sprinklers dramatically reduce fire deaths and limit fire spread in multifamily environments. The Pew-derived findings underscore the value of sprinkler-rich protection for residential components in mixed-use structures. [Modern Multifamily Buildings Provide the Most Fire Protection](https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2025/09/modern-multifamily-buildings-provide-the-most-fire-protection?utm_source=openai)
• Engage a knowledgeable partner early in the process. With complex occupancy mixes and evolving local requirements, a fire protection partner can help with design optimization, AHJ coordination, and a practical path to safe, code-compliant operation.

If your project involves mixed-use properties—new construction or retrofit—contact a qualified fire protection professional who understands the intricacies of conduct, coverage, and compliance across both residential and non-residential zones.

[Contact 48Fire Protection](/contact-us)

—

Closing call to action

You’re developing a mixed-use property, a space that deserves careful protection for every occupant and every function. The right design, installation, and maintenance plan will protect lives, minimize property loss, and streamline regulatory compliance. If you’re evaluating a mixed-use project or retrofit, reach out to 48Fire Protection to discuss an integrated plan that aligns with your occupancy mix, local codes, and long-term life-safety goals.

[Contact 48Fire Protection](/contact-us)