My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Building Code Board of Appeals Agenda and Packet 2013 11 21
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2000-2019 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
2013 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
Building Code Board of Appeals Agenda and Packet 2013 11 21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:00:20 PM
Creation date
6/25/2018 10:28:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BCBOAPKT 2013 11 21
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Building Code Board of Appeals <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 19, 2013 <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />Mestas has spoken to the fire sprinkler installers for the Copper Hill Subdivision and <br />their fees are running $2.25/sqft if the water is brought in and $2.50/sqft for a tank. <br />These fees include the excavating for lines and the tank and the engineering. <br />Staff has spoken with Tom Ramsey, Westmark Design and Construction, and the <br />systems he had installed ran between $2.00 - $2.50/sqft. Each installer sets their own <br />fees and vary from installer to installer. <br />Johnson stated this sprinkler topic will become irrelevant in a few years and it is <br />inevitable there will be a sprinkler code. Just like the IgCC and green building code, <br />it is the way codes are leaning and it is a matter of time for when and how the codes <br />will be adopted. <br />Johnson and Geise have both had issues in the past with systems failing during the <br />first test after install. Repairs to the failure can become costly. Johnson added the <br />most common failure he has seen has been with the head. He has done three <br />houses with sprinklers and all have failed when the water has been turned on and <br />Geise has seen three out of 15 systems fail. <br />Mestas stated the Fire Department tests at the time of rough plumbing with all heads <br />on, this catches more of the potential failures prior to the completion of a project. <br />Johnson says he realizes there is the potential for failing with any type of job and is in <br />favor of sprinkler systems. He feels the life safety is greater than the convenience of <br />not installing the system. <br />Geise is for the systems, but feels there should be more information in place for <br />everyone prior to the code going into effect including the cost of install and the why <br />the system should be installed. <br />Johnson added education, like with anything new, is key throughout the process. <br />Geise added he doesn't want to just adopt the sprinkler code and have it fail without <br />the education behind it. <br />Geise has a contact with Viega, a fire sprinkler system company, and they have <br />offered to come in to talk to the Board about any questions they may have about the <br />systems and the fire sprinkler supplies. <br />Geise prefered to see more discussion happen toward the cost effectiveness of <br />adding sprinkler systems. <br />Johnson asked Geise if the cost of the system is his main standing point against the <br />new code. <br />Geise replied he is also concerned with what requirements will be in place for those <br />who design and install these systems. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.