• 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

U.S. Fire Administration “Residential Sprinkler Water Supplies”

Mark:From your link, we are on a well and this is what they are enforcing:


The existing home was required to have a 5,000 gallon tank and wharf hydrant for domestic and firefighting purposes and it has that, adding sprinklers triggered the additional 10,000 gallons for fire protection use only. The owner installed a 5,000 gallon stainless steel tank, not wanting his family drinking water from plastic, if we do have to add the additional 10,000 gallons I suppose plastic might be alright since they can't drink from it. But I don't know, the owner had me put this on every page of the plans.​

To comply with the California Wildlands-Urban Interface Code :Fire-dampers on foundation and eave vents. Wood columns 50% increased size.This home is to be a "healthy home", no engineered wood, decay resistant chemically treated wood, chemically treated fire resistant wood, caulking, sealants, insulation or other products are to be used that contain formaldehyde, other aldehydes, stoddard solvents, styrofoam , polyethylene, isocyanate resins.No plastic piping, plastic wiring, or any other toxic substances are to be used in the construction of this house.".
Click to expand...

/monthly_2010_10/sc-fire.jpg.11d72237b8972d17dc281b183bd707ac.jpg
 
Fire marshalls can only enforce code. Until they have convinced the local jurisdiction to ammend the code they cannot enforce a requirement.

It appears that these requirements are documented in CFMO-W1 and CFMO-SP6 and similar documents. The question is how were these requirements adopted. The County of Santa Clara Ordinance Code in Division B7 lists a number of amendments to the California Fire Code but I do not see any reference to the CFMO documents nor does it appear that the detail requirements in the documents are reflected in the amendments. I am still suspicious that these are what are considered underground regulations, which are illegal.
 
Regarding the owner's requirement that no formaldehyde is to be used. My understanding is that there is some formaldehyde in the glues used to make plywood but that the amounts are considered acceptable by the new federal legislation that regulates formaldehyde in wood products.
 
Mark:

Thanks for that information, if I lose my battle to permit as a remodel rather than as a new home or rebuild, I'll certainly use it. I had been designing the home to fit within their definition of a remodel, I called the county recently and was informed that the Board of Supervisors had passed an ordinance closing that loophole, that she had informed all contractors that were "in the pipeline" to get their applications in before October 1st to become grandfathered but had neglected to notify me. I went down and got my plans and application in and the CBO agreed to grandfather me although I was 6 days late. I may not be out of trouble yet so I have my fingers crossed, it's not only the sprinkler mandate but the green code and more geological studies that will be triggered.

As to the plywood, I've eliminated wall sheathing, but there is nothing better than 1-1/8" plywood @ 16" centers for subfloor, there will be plywood on the roof under the tile, I will order all formaldehyde-free plywood, subfloor, roof sheathing, and cabinets, and test everything before it goes in. I will be buying this meter. I will be having an industrial hygienist certify the home toxic-free before occupancy, owners can furnish with formaldehyde-laden products and the home get blamed if it's toxic.
 
mark handler said:
thats over 31 Sq miles per station.
Click to expand...
That's smaller than a township in the midwest.

Personnel could walk from the center to the corner in two hours.
 
brudgers said:
That's smaller than a township in the midwest.Personnel could walk from the center to the corner in two hours.
Click to expand...
In the city I live in, fire/medical response is three to five min. to anywhere in the city
 
I like this discussion. Because it opens up the true issues with regard to water supply.

First the building in question is a residential building that is 4000 square feet. Guessing that ceilings may be at least 8 foot (probably more). That results in at least 32,000 cubic space of living area (not including other areas not counted in the total square footage). Needless to say this is not the standard 3 bedroom 2 bath residential occupancy.

The picture tells more of the story. A generator, two propane tanks, and a water tank in a heavily wooded area. I am only guessing but this looks rural (well vs. municipal water supply). No hydrant systems for fire flow. A county where housing costs much more than, well then most locations in California.

The water flow discussions involve two types of conditions. First water supply for a sprinkler system that is designed for "life safety" not property protection. Second, fire flow for property protection is based on the "needed fire flow" to extinguish the fire. That can be calculated a number of ways. If for example you estimate one fire engine with two hose lines each flowing 250 gallons a minute it would only take 10 minutes to exhaust a 5000 gallon tank.

So it is my understanding the designer of this home is not a proponent of protecting the owners property in the event of a fire. Because 10 minutes of water supply in a fire event is very minimal. Given the 4000 square feet, the heavily wooded area, the propane tanks, and the generator, the fire department is going to have its personnel very busy trying to protect this property.

Another reason the wildland fire insurance rates in California are sky rocketing.

Have the owner of the property sign an agreement allowing the home to burn down. That should save some money. Make sure the insurance company gets a copy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top