Brad, Yes only because it doesn't make sense to drag hose lines through a building, just place the hose valves in the stairwells on the combo riser, minimal cost, much easier on the fire department and the building. But you're correct +30 is the height criteria, with exceptions of course....stages, malls, et seq. There are addition provisions for large buildings +10,000 sf where hose lines from apparatus simply wouldn't reach without manually adding lengths. Again as I stated before this should be a performance issue, if we eliminate the fire pump for some class I standpipes (not all) instead relying on FD engines owners might be more receptive to "piping our handlines" to strategic locations within the building.
As noted I also subscribe to eliminating the fire pump solely for the standpipe in certain cases since the fire department engine is capable of delivering water supply at low altitudes and the hose valves aren't getting used until the FD arrives anyway. If the sprinklers need the pump that's a different issue, automatic and sufficient water supply must be provided immediately. Chief, no, but the I do sit on the Fire Department Planning and Advisory Board and that's who reviews and comments as the Chiefs delegates. NJ just issued a bulletin on this topic. John Drucker, CET Assistant Construction Official Fire Protection Subcode Official Building/Fire/Electrical Inspector Borough of Red Bank Red Bank, New Jersey Email: [email protected] Cell/Text: 732-904-6823 Opinions are mine and mine alone, code sections cited are as adopted from the NJ Uniform Construction Code and adopted codes and standards. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Casterline Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:43 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: 100 PSI requirement at top of Standpipe Thanks John. Question for you: If you were the sole decider, would you require them within 30 feet above or below your level of access? I ask because I think they are not required for that range. I guess it would further complicate things though to have them on 3 thru 14 but not 1 & 2. So, ya... Chief???? :) -----Original Message----- From: John Drucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 2:22 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: 100 PSI requirement at top of Standpipe Brad, Bottom line, it's a performance issue focused on the local fire service who is the intended user of Class I standpipes. The sooner we get away from prescription the better. John Drucker, CET Firefighter Assistant Construction Official Fire Protection Subcode Official Building/Fire/Electrical Inspector Borough of Red Bank, New Jersey Office: 732-530-2760 X 331 Cell/Text: 732-904-6823 Email: [email protected] http://www.redbanknj.org PS, Hose Valve locations....Chief where do you want them ? -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Casterline Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: 100 PSI requirement at top of Standpipe Thanks Roland and Ed and everyone else again for comments. I have a better idea of what to think about 2.5" hose valves located at ground level (or 1 or 2 floors above or below) now. I think it would be amusing if they were the pressure reducing type. Brad Casterline, SET Designer Member, AFSA _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler .org CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY: This email message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential, nor is it, unless specifically stated, intended to be relied upon by any person or persons other than the individual or entity named above and no warranties or representations are made or intended to persons or entities not named above. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, return this message to the address above and delete all copies. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
