Send the owner / Arch. The C.O. for the extra anti-freeze system, and let
them decide if it's worth their time and effort to battle the insp. (You've
done your part.)

Thom McMahon, SET
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
P.O. Box 882136
Steamboat Springs, CO 80488
Tel:  970-879-7952
Fax: 970-879-7926


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Don Lowry
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 9:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Detached Porte Cochere

Agreed Ron & Craig  

Craig, when the Architect asked him for his code reference that required
sprinklers, this is the paragraph he referred to, even though it doesn't
have anything to do with the issue.

  NFPA 13 (1999) 7-1.2
  For buildings with two or more adjacent occupancies that are not
physically separated by a barrier or partition
capable        of delaying heat from a fire in one area from
fusing sprinklers in the adjacent area, the required
sprinkler protection for   the more demanding occupancy
shall extend 15 ft (4.6 m) beyond its perimeter.

We can't seem to find a central management board or committee.  That is the
whole issue.  I think his department is flawed in this respect but for now
my opinions don't get the builders building opened.  I think the Architect
will pursue the overall issue with standardization soon prior to any more
projects.

I wish all of our legal advice were this reasonable !

Thanks for all the responses.

Don



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 10:06 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Detached Porte Cochere

We're all running on presumptions here, including, apparently, the AHJ, but
if the construction type, size and occupancy of the porteco do not require
sprinklers by any state or local code and if the separation is sufficient to
not present an exposure (you'll have to do your own code checking, or better
yet the architect needs
to) then
sprinklers are not required. NFPA 13 will not tell you in any place what
types of structures, based on occupancy, size, construction type or
exposure, need sprinklers but it will tell you where and how to lay out
sprinklers when necessary. THIS IS NOT A SPRINKLER ISSUE! At least not yet.
And again, in countries subscribing to a western liberal democratic
philosophy (disclaimer; Republicanism is western liberal democratic before I
start a political debate--not capital R, lower case d), particularly one
based on English Common Law, you are free to do whatever you want provided
you harm no one else and any proscription to that basic concept must be in
writing and specific.
You can't do it because a proscriptive document (NFPA 13 for
instance)
doesn't mention that you can does not hold water. Once again, very cheap
legal advice.

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 7:40 AM,  <[email protected]>
wrote:
> So where is his documentation saying that sprinklers are
required?  Remember we've discussed this kind of situation many times.  So
before caving in I'd ask for the code references upon which he bases his
opinion.  I'd tell him that the owner isn't going to provide something
unless it's required and the owner needs to see it in writing in the "code".
>
> Tell him you're going to have to get a change order from
the owner and you need proof of the requirement.  That way it's not a direct
challenge and forces him to come up with black and white requirements not
just "sumthin he thunk up".
 If he can't produce it then throw it back at him.
>
> Other measure is to call his department manager or other
supervisor for a clarification, don't give names or projects, you're just
doing research of a requirement for a prospective project and get them to
provide chapter and verse if it is a requirement of theirs.  Then make sure
to get a name, log the time and date and take good notes.  If you can get
them to e-mail you the same info that would be even better.  If it turns out
to not be a requirement you can use the name and date and quote the response
to the local yokel.
>
>
>
>
> Craig L. Prahl, CET
> Fire Protection Specialist
> Mechanical Department
> CH2MHILL
> Lockwood Greene
> 1500 International Drive
> PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC  29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - 
> 864.599.8439 [email protected] http://www.ch2m.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Don Lowry
> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 10:13 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Detached Porte Cochere
>
> Rick,
>
> Yes, that is the issue.  The builder / Architect don't
want to do the required connection of the buildings, but the DADS Inspector
for this region apparently interprets differently than the last regional
inspector did.
 Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a standard statewide, and the
decisions are left to the individual inspectors.  This makes it hard for the
builders to have a set of specific rules to follow when designing the
building.
Since the DADS inspectors don't review drawings prior to construction, (Arch
or FP) it ends up being an issue when it's down to the wire to open. This
particular inspector made the statement that he "didn't care what the IBC or
IFC states, we use NFPA codes" and it didn't matter if the city's Building
Official or Fire Marshal said.
> Guess this will be a learning experience for the
Architect.
>
> Thanks for the responses.  I can tell the builder that I
tried :>)
>
> Don
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Matsuda, Richard
> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 8:15 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Detached Porte Cochere
>
> Don,
> If this is some kind of care facility in Texas, then the
state inspector has slightly different requirements...and if you don't
comply, then the care facility might not receive state certification or any
state funding.
> The state inspector might be interpreting the 6-foot
clearance between the buildings as insufficient for this combustible
construction...and so he considers the porteco as part of the main building.
>
> rick matsuda
> city of dallas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Don Lowry
> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 6:32 AM
> To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler. org
> Subject: Re: Detached Porte Cochere
>
> Combustible
> Don Lowry
> Sent via BlackBerry
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerfor
> um
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email
> to:[email protected]
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerfor
um
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
[email protected]
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[email protected]
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) 
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerfor
um
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
[email protected]
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[email protected]
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



--
Ron Greenman
at home....
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerfor
um
For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
[email protected]

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[email protected]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected]

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected]

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Reply via email to