Ladies/Gentlemen: Regarding the overhang, I have a not dissimilar situation with a new 13'D' residence/single-family/two-story dwelling. The AHJ/plans reviewer spotted an elevator in the house. She wanted to see detail of shaft construction (combustible materials) - she states a sprinkler is needed in the shaft. No, says I - 13'd' specifically states not required. After consulting with her supervisor (Fire Marshal), they relented, however, it was "going in the file" that the AHJ urged us (me) to provide the sprinkler in the shaft. Okay...Could I have deferred and simply gone ahead and added ONE sprinkler? Of course. But I made the decision after not only reviewing the Code, but searching the fire "area of origin" in the back of 13'D'. Granted, few homes have elevators - and, no, these Clients are not one of your 'one-percenters' - but elevators are not listed in residential area of fire origin statistics. Here's my point Mr./Ms. AHJ: After forty years in the sprinkler profession , please do not tell me how to design fire sprinkler systems. I will comply with whatever you mandate - just as long as it is in the Code (i.e., "enforceable"). And please, stop making reference to the NAHB (our "friends") - In my humble opinion, they should be brought up on charges of crimes against humanity in an international tribunal...In a residential sprinkler conference in Tucson some thirty years ago (mandatory sprinklers were coming for multi-family dwellings) a local NAHB rep stood up and stated: "If we let the government require sprinklers in our homes, the next thing you know, they will be requiring us to wear seatbelts in our cars". I rest my case. Have a nice weekend, All. Warm regards from snowy Santa Fe... Jerry [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) Jerry D. Watts, SFPE President & Co-Founder ACCENT FIRE ENGINEERING INT'L. Ltd.* Santa Fe, New Mexico USA (800) 503.1961 nationwide *Licensed Fire Protection Engineers - Architects/Inspectors/Fire Investigators: AZ CA CO NM NV NY TX UT KS MD MS In a message dated 1/30/2015 4:22:41 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Ron, I know this is a sore subject that's been brought to a boil with the recent loss of a significant building displacing some 1000 people in the middle of winter. As both a firefighter and code official I am not alone, the public is also questioning this paradigm as well as the speaker of the assembly in New Jersey. What happened in Edgewater was just a matter of time. Its not all 13R's fault, combustible construction, pedestal buildings..... a cocktail for disaster. Steve said it best, local building and fire officials have been handcuffed. John Drucker - Mobile Email [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cell/Text 732-904-6823 "rongreenman ." <[email protected]> wrote: Hardly John. 13D and 13R are standards for different types of buildings and not stepping stones to better fire protection. On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:49 PM, John Drucker <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve, NFPA handed them the weapon, 13R.... > > As for IRC I subscribe to the life safety part (13D/P2904) for dwellings, > hey its you're home. > > But multiple dwellings on pedestals where we start counting stories at the > pedestal ?, wood frame 5 stories up ?, and then not fully sprinklered > ?.....13R ? > > > John Drucker - Mobile Email > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Cell/Text 732-904-6823 > > > Steve Leyton <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yeah, how about somebody file a lawsuit against the NAHB or all the > homebuilders who have lobbied and gotten return for the political patronage > in the way of suspended residential sprinkler requirements or other such > loopholes or relaxations? This is dirty business, but it's the only way > that things area going to change. Go to the Fire Sprinkler Initiative's > website and look for the page that has "Sprinkler Requirements By State". > I realize this is off the topic of Edgewater a bit, but it's outrageous > how many state legislatures have passed prohibitions against any ordinance > or adoptions. They completely handcuffed local building and fire > officials ... > > I've been asked to consult on projects where owners and/or architects are > trying to get 13D accepted instead of 13R, or 13R instead of 13. I won't > take the jobs, but I'm offered one or more a month. > > SL > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum on behalf of John Drucker > Sent: Thu 1/29/2015 6:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: 13D exterior overhangs. > > Owen, agreed 13D does not require heads under overhangs. What I am > saying is what's to stop an adopting agency from amending the standard ?, > nothing. Until a code or standard is adopted it has no jurisdiction. > > In any case I understand the value of 13D and P2904 hence why I supported > their use for amendments to R300 of the NJIRC. The recent events in > Edgewater NJ may change how and when 13R is deployed despite the standards > intent. People up there are really pissed, a second lawsuit was filed today. > > John > > > > John Drucker - Mobile Email > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Cell/Text 732-904-6823 > > > [email protected] wrote: > > John, > Thank you for responding. It goes back to the intent of 13D, to provide > people 10 minutes to escape and for the system to be affordable to install. > If the place burns to the ground but everyone escaped, the system worked > 100% as intended. It drives me crazy as inspectors come and go they add > their personal wants and desires for these systems without following proper > procedure. 13D does not require heads in exterior over-hangs. > Owen Evans > Former AHJ now 13D designer and consultant. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jan 29, 2015, at 5:46 PM, "John Drucker - Home" < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > Firstin, > > > > The question is too vague to be answered. As an active AHJ there are many > > variables, adopted codes and standards, local amendments, special > > circumstances not addressed by the code, variations, site approval trade > > offs and on and on. In order to answer the question each one of those > has to > > be addressed. Believe it or not most AHJ's have an underlying need, real > or > > imagined, that they are trying to address. Keep in mind cost is not one > of > > them since the AHJ doesn't (and shouldn't) profit from requiring > protection. > > I'm not defending this AHJ but you have to dig deeper. > > > > Lastly I've said this time and time again, why are designers and > contractors > > engaged in these arguments with AHJ's ?. Convey your situation to the > > beneficiary, that being the owner of the property. If he/she disagrees > let > > them take up the fight through appeal. > > > > John Drucker > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > [email protected]] > > On Behalf Of [email protected] > > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 6:29 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: 13D exterior overhangs. > > > > 13D does not require heads in exterior over-hangs, such as a second story > > over-hanging a driveway. Can an AHJ apply 13 rules to 13D systems > without an > > amendment and require heads in over-hangs 4' & greater? > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, inventor and engineer (1876-1958) _______________________________________________ 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
