Calif. has just adopted fire sprinklers in new residential construction. Is there a percentage out there used to trigger sprinklers in remodels? For instance if some one has a 1000sf house and wants to add on a 2000sf addition, would that do it or does the code call for only new construction? Ideas will be appreciated.
-
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
Residential fire sprinklers
- Thread starter charlie
- Start date
conarb
Registered User
Charlie:
It's a complex formula that varies with AHJs, I've just gone through it. Basically a new home has to have them, a remodel doesn't, a rebuild of a new home does have to have them. When I started my negotiations with the AHJ I decided to leave some old walls up qualify as a remodel rather then building a new house, so many builders were doing this that they went to the Board of Supervisors and passed a new ordinance changing the rules defining Remodel vs. Rebuild, I was able to go by the old definitions by arguing that I was in the "pipeline" and should be "grandfathered in" under the old definition, basically I had to leave 50% of the "contiguous" old exterior walls up, I missed the word "contiguous" and had to redesign. I would have never made it under the new ordinance, my customer said that if he had to have sprinklers and huge ugly tanks he'd not do it and move his family and software corporation out of state, California has gone to far with something this stupid. BTW, it's probably costing me as much to avoid the sprinklers as it would have to have put them in.
Additions over 500 square feet trigger sprinklers as well under their ordinance, so check with your local AHJ to see what ordinances they have adopted to deal with it, as you can imagine people are trying to find any workaround the can sending the AHJs into fits and to their city councils and boards of supervisors, if you win you not only avoid the sprinklers you avoid the new toxic green code, so it's a political and moral issue with people.
If a sprinkler goes off inadvertently, and they do all the time, it can cost anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions, within 24 hours the home has to be stripped of all carpet, sheetrock, and insulation, a remediation company has to start dehumidification machines that run for weeks while scientists come in and continually take samples back to the lab for mold analysis, when clearance is finally given the home has to be rebuilt. Insurance does not cover mold caused by anything but an actual fires, it does not include accidental or inadvertent release, so it could mean loss of the home or bankruptcy for owners. To give you an idea of what's involved I recently did expert on a window leak where mold started in that stupid styrofoam the window guys sprayed around the windows, a sprinkler going off would cause the same procedures. The occupants of two units had to be relocated, fortunately not all 15 units, all because of a small leak.
It's a complex formula that varies with AHJs, I've just gone through it. Basically a new home has to have them, a remodel doesn't, a rebuild of a new home does have to have them. When I started my negotiations with the AHJ I decided to leave some old walls up qualify as a remodel rather then building a new house, so many builders were doing this that they went to the Board of Supervisors and passed a new ordinance changing the rules defining Remodel vs. Rebuild, I was able to go by the old definitions by arguing that I was in the "pipeline" and should be "grandfathered in" under the old definition, basically I had to leave 50% of the "contiguous" old exterior walls up, I missed the word "contiguous" and had to redesign. I would have never made it under the new ordinance, my customer said that if he had to have sprinklers and huge ugly tanks he'd not do it and move his family and software corporation out of state, California has gone to far with something this stupid. BTW, it's probably costing me as much to avoid the sprinklers as it would have to have put them in.
Additions over 500 square feet trigger sprinklers as well under their ordinance, so check with your local AHJ to see what ordinances they have adopted to deal with it, as you can imagine people are trying to find any workaround the can sending the AHJs into fits and to their city councils and boards of supervisors, if you win you not only avoid the sprinklers you avoid the new toxic green code, so it's a political and moral issue with people.
If a sprinkler goes off inadvertently, and they do all the time, it can cost anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions, within 24 hours the home has to be stripped of all carpet, sheetrock, and insulation, a remediation company has to start dehumidification machines that run for weeks while scientists come in and continually take samples back to the lab for mold analysis, when clearance is finally given the home has to be rebuilt. Insurance does not cover mold caused by anything but an actual fires, it does not include accidental or inadvertent release, so it could mean loss of the home or bankruptcy for owners. To give you an idea of what's involved I recently did expert on a window leak where mold started in that stupid styrofoam the window guys sprayed around the windows, a sprinkler going off would cause the same procedures. The occupants of two units had to be relocated, fortunately not all 15 units, all because of a small leak.
Last edited by a moderator:
fatboy
Administrator
If it's based on the IRC requirements morphed into CA code, then only new residential structures apply, does not apply to remodels, additions , etc.......
I see now Con Arb has also responded. I really don't know why anyone lives in California. It is not like that in most of the rest of the country, sheesh.
I see now Con Arb has also responded. I really don't know why anyone lives in California. It is not like that in most of the rest of the country, sheesh.
rshuey
Registered User
We use 09 IRC only. you can have a 1500 sf house, add an addition that is 2000 sf and it still doesnt require sprinklers.
conarb
Registered User
Fatboy:Fatboy said:
What's happening is many builders are attempting to work around the requirement by not building new but keeping walls up on the old and calling it a remodel, the fire marshals are responding by trying to stop the workaround by requiring them in a "Rebuild" and creating different definitions of "Rebuilds" and "Remodels". To be fair, we are not only trying to avoid the sprinklers we are trying to avoid the green code, both have hit us at the same time. another problem is that the sprinkler fitters' union has successfully obtained a statute requiring a certificate from an apprenticeship program before anybody can work on sprinklers, the apprenticeship programs are run by the unions, so that makes sprinkler installation all union work.
R Shuey:
As I said above, an addition of over 500 square feet triggers the "Rebuild" ordinance and requires sprinklers, these are not state statutes, these are local ordinances introduced by the fire marshals so intent on requiring sprinklers everywhere possible.
The fire marshals' job is to sell sprinklers to keep the money flowing into their union coffers to use for bargaining purposes, which translates to their huge salaries and pensions.
Last edited by a moderator:
fatboy
Administrator
They did the same thing in CO, although the one exception is a combination system installed under P2904 of the 09 IRC, can, and must be installed by a licensed plumber, a sprinkler fitter would not be allowed to install a combo system. A far cheaper system, $750-1000 for a typical tract home, plumber installs it as they are doing the regular potable water system. A few extra feet of 3/4" pipe, and a head in each room.......pretty simple stuff. The entire requirement is 6 pages in the IRC, 4 of them are tables.
conarb
Registered User
Fatboy:
I think one of the glaring problems here, both from what I've read these many years on the ICBO Bulletin Board, ICC Board, here, and watching the Minneapolis webcast, is that cheap tract homes in cheaper areas were addressed, nobody addressed the impact on custom homes, especially in an expensive area like I work in. I remember the question posed to the water district as to why so much for a large sprinkler meter? The guy's answer, tongue in cheek, was "If the sprinkler guys are going to making all that money, we should too." The reality is that they jacked the costs of large meters way up ostensibly to save water (and make a lot of money in the process), nobody bothered to lobby the water districts for a reduction in meter prices, so it's all pure profit for them now so why should they change? That would be like asking the fire sprinkler coalition to drop their exorbitant prices for the public safety (they're are all made for pennies each in China and Mexico). In fact if sprinklers are all that great, why didn't the fire service first lobby the coalition for a huge price reductions before the mandate? Tyco makes huge amounts of money worldwide in many businesses, maybe they should give the sprinklers away?
I think one of the glaring problems here, both from what I've read these many years on the ICBO Bulletin Board, ICC Board, here, and watching the Minneapolis webcast, is that cheap tract homes in cheaper areas were addressed, nobody addressed the impact on custom homes, especially in an expensive area like I work in. I remember the question posed to the water district as to why so much for a large sprinkler meter? The guy's answer, tongue in cheek, was "If the sprinkler guys are going to making all that money, we should too." The reality is that they jacked the costs of large meters way up ostensibly to save water (and make a lot of money in the process), nobody bothered to lobby the water districts for a reduction in meter prices, so it's all pure profit for them now so why should they change? That would be like asking the fire sprinkler coalition to drop their exorbitant prices for the public safety (they're are all made for pennies each in China and Mexico). In fact if sprinklers are all that great, why didn't the fire service first lobby the coalition for a huge price reductions before the mandate? Tyco makes huge amounts of money worldwide in many businesses, maybe they should give the sprinklers away?