Sprinkler question

[Yankee Chronicler]

We have a pending application under review for a new medical facility. It's not a hospital, but it's a diagnostic clinic associated with a hospital and will include an MRI facility within the building. Type II-B construction, sprinklered.

As is usual (at least around here) the detailed design of the sprinkler system is a deferred submittal. What got my attention is a note on the building construction drawings that the water service for sprinklers will be verified at the time of the sprinkler submittal. This is contrary to anything I've ever encountered until now. While the layout drawings and calculations require time and we don't need them up front to issue a permit, what's the point of issuing a permit for a sprinklered building if there isn't enough water in the street to run the sprinkler system?

Around here we typically defer to the fire marshal's office for review of sprinkler systems, because fire marshals receive training in reviewing sprinkler layouts and calculations from the state, and building officials don't. I ran this question by our deputy fire marshal and he said no problem, they'll review everything when it comes in. Which ignores my concern -- what happens if the building is half finished and they find that there isn't enough pressure and/or volume at the street?

Would you issue the permit without knowing there's sufficient water supply?

 

[jar546]

We have a pending application under review for a new medical facility. It's not a hospital, but it's a diagnostic clinic associated with a hospital and will include an MRI facility within the building. Type II-B construction, sprinklered.

As is usual (at least around here) the detailed design of the sprinkler system is a deferred submittal. What got my attention is a note on the building construction drawings that the water service for sprinklers will be verified at the time of the sprinkler submittal. This is contrary to anything I've ever encountered until now. While the layout drawings and calculations require time and we don't need them up front to issue a permit, what's the point of issuing a permit for a sprinklered building if there isn't enough water in the street to run the sprinkler system?

Around here we typically defer to the fire marshal's office for review of sprinkler systems, because fire marshals receive training in reviewing sprinkler layouts and calculations from the state, and building officials don't. I ran this question by our deputy fire marshal and he said no problem, they'll review everything when it comes in. Which ignores my concern -- what happens if the building is half finished and they find that there isn't enough pressure and/or volume at the street?

Would you issue the permit without knowing there's sufficient water supply?

Lawn or fire sprinkler?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Lawn or fire sprinkler?

We have a pending application under review for a new medical facility. It's not a hospital, but it's a diagnostic clinic associated with a hospital and will include an MRI facility within the building. Type II-B construction, sprinklered.

Fire. Why would I ask the fire marshal about a lawn sprinkler system?

 

[Inspector Gift]

Yes, a building permit may be issued with some necessary information being deferred. The responsibility will fall on the Registered Design Professional. However, the Certificate of Occupancy should not be issued until all the Fire-Life-Safety items are approved.

 

[Yikes]

Around here, they would issue the deferred approval of the fire sprinkler system (FSS) design and plan check. But during original plan check they would still require the developer to obtain a fire hydrant flow test (not deferred) to comply with IFC 507 and IFC Appendix B. The minimum required flow rate is based on the size of the building, and also on whether or not it has a FSS.
But even if it doesn't have a FSS, it would still need a flow test anyway, just to prove compliance with Appendix B for nonsprinklered buildings.
California has further modified this to allow the water department to provide a modeled theoretical flow analysis rather than wasting precious water for flow tests.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Around here, they would issue the deferred approval of the fire sprinkler system (FSS) design and plan check. But during original plan check they would still require the developer to obtain a fire hydrant flow test (not deferred) to comply with IFC 507 and IFC Appendix B. The minimum required flow rate is based on the size of the building, and also on whether or not it has a FSS.
But even if it doesn't have a FSS, it would still need a flow test anyway, just to prove compliance with Appendix B for nonsprinklered buildings.
California has further modified this to allow the water department to provide a theoretical flow capacity rather than wasting precious water for flow tests.

Thanks. This is what I have always seen before, both as an architect and as a building official.

 

[jar546]

Fire. Why would I ask the fire marshal about a lawn sprinkler system?

I don't know. Why would you?

 

[steveray]

Not my problem if they need a tank and pump….issue with a note if you have concerns on pressure or volume…

 

[Tim Mailloux]

this could be related to insufficient supply or pressure, and both problems have solutions.

Not my problem if they need a tank and pump….issue with a note if you have concerns on pressure or volume…

I was thinking the same thing

 

[mtlogcabin]

Here is what we require prior to issuing a building permit

https://www.kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/1430/Fire-Sprinkler-Conceptual-Example-PDF

 

[Yikes]

Here is what we require prior to issuing a building permit

https://www.kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/1430/Fire-Sprinkler-Conceptual-Example-PDF

I have a dumb question from down here sunny southern California: do you conduct dynamic flow tests during freezing weather in Kalispell? Doesn't it make a mess, with ice on the streets?

 

[Yikes]

Not my problem if they need a tank and pump….issue with a note if you have concerns on pressure or volume…

Regardless of sprinklers, at time of initial building plan check don't you have to at least establish adequate flow at nearby hydrants in order to demonstrate that the site is in compliance with IFC 507 and IFC Appendix B?

IMO, at a minimum I would initially require a flow test or flow report from the water company in order to deem the plan check submittal package sufficient to complete basic fire plan check. Or if the Owner insists on deferring the flow test to a later date, then either withhold issuance of permit, or make it a foundation-only permit, or at least require some at-risk acknowledgement for proceeding in advance of knowing available fire flow.

In the 90s I had an infill affordable housing development in an older neighborhood. The developer put off getting the flow test.
When they finally got it, the static vs. residual pressure indicated a huge occlusion out in the street main. Residual flow was down somewhere around 600. It was so bad that a fire pump would potentially collapse the main, and there was no room left onsite to install a tank, so there was no kick-the-can-down-the-road solution.

HUD was not going to pay for offsite street improvements, so it appeared the nonprofit developer was going to be on the hook for hundreds of feet of new water main, or else abandon the project. Fortunately we found a way to intertie the other end of the main to another loop at an intersection a half mile away, which helped minimize the cost.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Yikes, that's exactly my concern. It seems stupid and short-sighted to start construction on a sprinklered building without knowing whether or not there's enough water, but if the owner wants to roll that way I guess we'll allow them to do so.

We can certainly write the permit to specify that the owner is at risk (and we will do that), but I've been in this game for over 50 years and this is the first time I have encountered a building permit application where the water flow and pressure at the street wasn't determined before the plans were completed. But, the Fire Marshal's office isn't concerned and the town water department says they "think" the water supply is adequate, so it looks like (against my better judgement) we're going to issue the permit with a disclaimer that the owner is proceeding at risk.

I expected to find something in the IBC requiring adequate water supply for sprinklers as a condition to issuing a permit but, if it's in there, I can't find it.

 

[mtlogcabin]

do you conduct dynamic flow tests during freezing weather in Kalispell?

No they where done during the summer months in the past by the fire department. Today that information is calculated and provided by the public works department.

 

[steveray]

Regardless of sprinklers, at time of initial building plan check don't you have to at least establish adequate flow at nearby hydrants in order to demonstrate that the site is in compliance with IFC 507 and IFC Appendix B?