NFPA 72 (2019) seems to address this too in 17.15.9.4:
But it seems more AHJs are approving the notion to remove pull stations. https://www.ecmag.com/section/miscellaneous/compliance-requires-proper-placement This article however suggests that previous versions of NFPA required at least one pull station in an entire building.
[/quote]
NFPA 72 doesn’t decide WHEN a device is required, only how it’s supposed to be installed.
The NFPA 101/IBC dictates if pull stations are required (unless a local codes or amendments override them which is often the case in large cities), and normally in fully sprinkled buildings you only need one pull station at the FACP for testing purposes. That specific pull station is for if the water flows are disabled while being tested, and there’s a fire reported in, the technician or someone at the panel still has a way to activate the fire alarm system.
For example, in the IBC chapter 9 where it tells when fire alarms are required, you’ll see this little clause under most occupancy types:
Exception: Manual fire alarm boxes are not required
where the building is equipped throughout with an
automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with
Section 903.3.1.1 and the occupant notification appliances will activate throughout the notification zones
upon sprinkler waterflow.
As for the OP, pull stations are largely a nuisance and with today’s climate can be a hazard in a lot of places. The sprinkler system, heats, and smokes will all do their job and activate a fire alarm system quicker and more accurately than someone running out of a burning building. On the other hand, the threat of someone activating a fire alarm to funnel everyone out onto the lawn can be bad news. Or even less nefarious, just emptying a 10 story building by making everyone run down the stairwells as a prank will cause more than a few injuries. If you trust the pull station to activate the fire alarm system, you can trust the other fire alarm devices to do the same. 