• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Architect pleads not guilty in firefighter's death

brudgers said:
.... the fact that he is not licensed in the US.
Assumes facts not in evidence, you do not know if he is licensed or has reciprocity anywhere in the US

The only fact is he is not licensed in CA
 
mark handler said:
Headlines are intended to get the greatest number of people to read The article not anything else
so it is an advertisement? "...advertise any title or description tending to convey the impression that he or she is a licensed architect or engineer..." ;)
 
I concede, it is what it is, and all points seem to have been made regarding these issues as well as they can be. If I knew how to post the 'man with stick (also know as an architect) beating a dead horse' emoticon I would.
 
Papio Bldg Dept said:
so it is an advertisement? "...advertise any title or description tending to convey the impression that he or she is a licensed architect or engineer..." ;)
Headlines are used to sell more newspapers, so yes, it is an advertisement
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The home has been rebuilt and is on the market for $11 million, if the rebuild is the same as Becker's original design it certainly looks like the work of a very good architect. I can understand a creative architect trying to slip in unapproved products like fire troughs, but why would any architect use plastic pipe or plastic of any kind in a home of this cost and quality? The rebuilt home.
 
Here are pictures of the actual damage, it appears to me that the sprinklers had nothing to do with it, it appears that the firemen attempted to ventilate the roof by sawing through the steel beams and the steel decking. Here are some pictures of the actual fire, although the gypsum discussion appears irrelevant to me.

It appears that the only thing the sprinklers can be faulted for is not doing any good by putting out the fire, did the dispatched firemen know that it was a steel structure? Did they know that it was sprinkled? Are these records given to firemen prior to dispatch? I would think there wouldn't be time to do that. Why do they ventilate fires anyway? To keep the building from exploding? Wouldn't the walls of glass blow out precluding the need to ventilate a fire? I'm asking questions, not critizing the actions of the firefighters, I would bet that Becker's defense to the criminal charges will be that the firefighters acted inappropriately for the type of construction they encountered. .
 
mtlogcabin said:
Does anyone else think the charges of "negligent homicide" in this case against the owner is a dangerous direction to be going?If he is found guilty based on the cause of the fire was the improper installation of the fire places where will it end. Will criminal charges be filed against all property owners when a fire fighter dies in the line of duty and the origin of the fire was determined to be faulty wiring during the installation of a ceiling fan?

It is a slippery slope this is starting down.

Reminds me of the case against the Colorado building inspectors.

Fire Fighters die in the line of duty that is a fact and unless the cause of the fire was arson, criminal charges should never be filed. Take it to civil court.
Well yes, I was thinking the same thing. The fire would have to be a crime in order for the manslaughter charge to be valid. Becker is guilty of code violations for installing mechanical equipment without a permit ....... a misdemeanor. To say that he should suffer a more severe penalty because he is an architect in Germany doesn't sit right with me. An architect is not a mechanical contractor. To practice architecture, an architect wouldn't need to know any more about a fireplace than an interior designer. The fact that the wrong fireplace was installed demonstrates that Becker is a dummy but not that he is a criminal.

For sure, the district attorney is not eager to bring charges that have no chance and I don't have all of the facts but this sounds like a tough one to prove.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gross negligence leading to manslaughter, from my understanding, the fireplaces were removed from the plans durring plancheck.

He chose To put them back in after the building department denied the use.
 
I'd be surprised if Herr Becker actually installed the fireplaces all by himself. If a contractor installed them I'd think he would be equally to blame.

I agree with mtlogcabin that a negligent homicide charge is a bit too much.
 
Paul Sweet said:
I'd be surprised if Herr Becker actually installed the fireplaces all by himself. If a contractor installed them I'd think he would be equally to blame.I agree with mtlogcabin that a negligent homicide charge is a bit too much.
It does not matter if he installed them himself

There are consequences in negligently disregarding the safety laws, in this case a death. If guilty, he needs to pay the price.

Is a negligent homicide charge justified when someone padlocks an exit door? Both result in death.
 
Since this ended up at the bottom of the previous page in this thread, I'm re-posting it (Thanks to Phil for posting it): http://documents.latimes.com/archite...ighters-death/

Bearing in mind that it is primarily presenting one side of the story, I'd encourage everyone to take a look at the information. It will help answer some of your questions as to the motivation for filing charges, the extent of his training, what the prosecution says happened and when, etc.
 
It appears that the only thing the sprinklers can be faulted for is not doing any good by putting out the fire, did the dispatched firemen know that it was a steel structure? Did they know that it was sprinkled? Are these records given to firemen prior to dispatch? I would think there wouldn't be time to do that. Why do they ventilate fires anyway? To keep the building from exploding? Wouldn't the walls of glass blow out precluding the need to ventilate a fire? I'm asking questions, not critizing the actions of the firefighters, I would bet that Becker's defense to the criminal charges will be that the firefighters acted inappropriately for the type of construction they encountered. .
The impression I'm getting from reading the link above is that the fire originated in a wall next to the fireplace rather than in the compartment where sprinklers could have had an effect. It wasn't entirely a steel structure. The information also make several references to wood framing. I don't know their local practices, but we don't typically conduct "pre-planning" activities for residential structures. It's difficult to speculate how much information they had about the way it was constructed. They were probably familiar enough with their area to expect the house to have sprinklers, but their initial size-up would have told them that sprinklers weren't controlling the fire.

Basically, ventilation removes products of combustion in an effort to avoid flashover and make the structure safer for remaining occupants (if any) and for firefighters. A horizontal opening such as a door or window is generally less effective than a vertical opening such as a roof. Products of combustion remain trapped above the level of a horizontal opening, but can escape through a vertical opening. Fire in an attic (as in this case) can't escape through a window or door in the room below.

IMO, it is unlikely that the steel beam you saw in the picture was cut during ventilation efforts. I'm sure their tools could cut through it, but their training would have told them that the level of resistance they were getting was too much and they would have moved to a different area. It is more likely that the beam was cut during the rescue of the trapped firefighters or during the investigation efforts.
 
The fire trough, Per the links, was built on 2X wood studs and the ceiling framing that crushed the firefighters was 2X wood framing

Firetrough-ge.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but why would any architect use plastic pipe or plastic of any kind in a home of this cost and quality?
99.9% of the multi-million dollar homes built here have plastic sprinkler pipe. One home that is being built at this moment has aquatherm polypropylene sprinkler "Red pipe" and polypropylene "Green Pipe" for domestic water, the permit valuation for this 5,417 sq. foot home is $950,000 and the small lot it sits on is valued at approx. 6 mil. The owner insisted that he be allowed to use plastic pipe in his home and the pipe is made in Germany!It looks like Christmas.........View attachment 1220View attachment 529

View attachment 529

/monthly_2012_02/572953c2aa76f_Redpipegreenpipe.JPG.658e089cc0d66bda6867c3455f759e6e.JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Beach:

In Santa Clara County when I called for my footing inspection I presented the municipal inspector my Soils engineers approval letter, my Chapter 17 Special inspection letter, my structural engineer's structural observation of the foundation letter, and my General Contractor's Chapter 17 letter, then we started walking the footings, the first one had an old PVC sprinkler line running through the corner of the footing, the inspector asked: "What's that plastic doing down there?", I said it's an old abandoned sprinkler line." He said: "Get it out of there, we don't allow any plastic in my jurisdiction." I called a man to remove it, we walked the rest of the footings and he found nothing wrong, he then checked to see if the plastic had been removed and signed me off.

In 1968 I was remodeling the Building Department in the basement of the old San Leandro City Hall, the CBO was inspecting my work, he came to me saying he was going to Hawaii and introduced me to the Deputy Building Inspector who would be handling my work while he was gone. I made a wisecrack about only building inspectors could afford to vacation in Hawaii, he said: "The plastic pipe industry is paying for it, I'll take their money but it'll be a cold day in Hell before they'll ever put plastic pipe in my town." It's 44 years later and he's long gone, but San Leandro still doesn't allow plastic pipe, from their current website (highlighted in yellow in the original):

It should be noted that the above codes have been modified by the State of California and the City of San Leandro to include various additional requirements based on local conditions. For instance, the Plumbing Code has been amended to prohibit the use of plastic pipe (i.e. ABS and PVC) within the drain, waste and vent system of a building. And the structural provisions of the Building Code have been modified to address earthquake design standards. ¹
They don't mention fire sprinkler pipe, but it carries the same social stigma.

BTW, maybe the German pipe doesn't have the terrific rate of lineal expansion as our CPVC? Also, that 5,417 square foot home I'd put down a permit valuation of $2.7 million, the AHJ would argue for $5.4 million, we'd compromise somewhere in between, the permit valuation would be the basis for the assessment and the Assessor would go nuts if he got the permit records showing a home built in an area of $6 million lots at $175.37 a square foot, I don't know what you guys do in Tinseltown, but you can't build the foundation for that around here.

¹ http://www.sanleandro.org/depts/cd/bldg/bldgcodes.asp
 
I agree, that valuation is too low, but the building dept. has a set price per sq. foot. That's a small home for around here......

We have allowed plastic sprinkler pipe for at least 25 years, one of our largest homes is 60,000 sq. feet owned by a well known author, plastic sprinkler pipe! Times change along with material quality, some material is now better, some worse..... There was a time when copper pipe with soldered joints was an outrage for domestic water...... Contractors living in the past will be out of business sooner than later, I'd love to see "real" wood joists, etc. but it ain't gonna happen! Adapt or go extinct!
 
Beach said:
I'd love to see "real" wood joists, etc. but it ain't gonna happen! Adapt or go extinct!
I've never used plastic pipe or those flimsy I Joists, I did start using roof trusses in the 50s, the originals had glue nailed plywood gusset plates on them, they are doing fine, but in the 60s the manufacturers switched to gang-nail plates, I can't tell you what it's cost me to go back and rebuild those roofs where they sagged from the gang-nail plates popping off.

Interestingly I heard from a realtor the other day, she is listing a home I built in 1976 and said that it has the most beautiful siding she has ever seen, she asked how that was because most siding is in horrible shape in 30 years today. I wrote a letter regarding the quality features of the home, the siding was real Clear Heart Redwood, brought down from the PALCO Mill in Scotia in bundles of 20' lengths, I wrote that you can't buy redwood like that anymore. I also explained that you never put redwood siding on sheathing of any kind, especially plywood sheathing, since the walls can't breathe, the engineer did require plywood sheathing on that home, so I got his permission to install it on the inside behind the sheetrock where the wall should be sealed, if you seal the walls on the interior and the exterior you create a dual barrier trapping water inside the walls. When we old guys are gone who is going to know how to build?

In this article the venerable Joe Lstiburek address a home built in 1965 with no insulation but sheathing behind the siding, it was fine until 1985 when someone pumped insulation into the walls, then the paint started peeling and the walls rotting. Bottom line is walls have to breathe, permeable WRBs don't cut it, even DuPont's 50 perm Tyvek, you can get by with air-sealing sheathing and no insulation, or insulation and no air-sealing sheathing, but combine them and you've got a disaster.
 
Top