5 ms·

There are many, but this is an example in CA: All new tenants and new occupancies hereafter constructed, which exceeds 3,600 square feet shall have an approved

There are many, but this is an example in CA: All new tenants and new occupancies hereafter constructed, which exceeds 3,600 square feet shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout.

idiotsecant 4y ago
fire sprinklers are the hill you're going to die on here?
- mikeg8 4y ago
  Great response to someone who answered your invitation for a specific example. But I'll die on this hill. I can totally understand requiring them in multi-family or town-homes where there are shared walls - but not in single family homes. A residential fire suppression system for a ~2,500 Sqft home can cost anywhere from $10-25k to include on a new build in northern CA (I know from recent bids). That isn't a negligible cost and mandating them for smaller dwellings (in my county it's anything over 1,000 sqft) is a fine example of regulation that has "great" intentions but is making affordable housing un-afforable.
  - 8note 4y ago
    Are single family homes what's being considered affordable housing?
  - mlyle 4y ago
    It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings, and also questionable whether the property damage they prevent from fires is larger than the property damage they cause through inadvertent activation/leaks/etc.
    - m0llusk 4y ago
      Actually, the statistics are rather stark. Without sprinklers people may be seriously injured or killed by fire. With sprinklers present and functioning risk of injury or death from fire becomes negligible.
      - pclmulqdq 4y ago
        Is this true in single family dwellings or only in apartment complexes? I would believe that sprinklers have a lot of value in apartment complexes but less value in single family homes. Not to mention that people who buy single family homes are a lot more likely to have more expensive furniture that would be ruined by a flood.
        andbberger 4y ago
        your assumption that only poor people live in apartments is troubling and very american
        mlyle 4y ago
        I do think it's probably a fair assumption that people in apartments have less expensive furnishings than people in houses.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        They specifically wrote “a lot more likely” so they clearly do not believe ONLY poor people live in apartments.
      - mlyle 4y ago
        > > It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings > Actually, the statistics are rather stark. AFAIK, this is all information about multi-family dwellings and has not been demonstrated in single family homes. The benefit of sprinklers is certainly more obvious in large buildings with multiple residences inside, in slowing fires from reaching new dwelling units. I find plenty of factsheets about residential sprinklers, that cite numbers of 80% reduction in death... which then ends up relying upon benefits seen in apartments... and which mostly evaporates when controlling for income.
      - dredmorbius 4y ago
        This discussion (both sides) would benefit greatly from some citations to back up assertions.
amluto 4y ago
The problem here isn’t the sprinklers — it’s the cost to install the sprinklers. The cost of a few hundred feet of CPVC or PEX pipe is low. The cost of an off-the-shelf sprinkler riser, pre-assembled, is a couple hundred dollars. The amount a Northern CA contractor will charge to install the parts is insane. (There is a problem with too little code. NFPA 13R and 13D do not clearly specify backflow protection requirements, and the California Plumbing Code, which follows UPC, only specifies it by reference to a subjective hazard level as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. This means that different local jurisdictions disagree, which creates both added complexity when designing a system and a significant risk of an actual hazardous condition existing. Situations like this are why codes exist, and IMO the code authors thoroughly dropped the ball on determining the extent to which the water in non-passively-purged fire sprinkler system is hazardous and how to prevent it from getting into drinking water. If an actual standard existed, then there could be an off the shelf compliant system, and time and money would be saved.

idiotsecant 4y ago

fire sprinklers are the hill you're going to die on here?

mikeg8 4y ago
Great response to someone who answered your invitation for a specific example. But I'll die on this hill. I can totally understand requiring them in multi-family or town-homes where there are shared walls - but not in single family homes. A residential fire suppression system for a ~2,500 Sqft home can cost anywhere from $10-25k to include on a new build in northern CA (I know from recent bids). That isn't a negligible cost and mandating them for smaller dwellings (in my county it's anything over 1,000 sqft) is a fine example of regulation that has "great" intentions but is making affordable housing un-afforable.
- 8note 4y ago
  Are single family homes what's being considered affordable housing?
- mlyle 4y ago
  It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings, and also questionable whether the property damage they prevent from fires is larger than the property damage they cause through inadvertent activation/leaks/etc.
  - m0llusk 4y ago
    Actually, the statistics are rather stark. Without sprinklers people may be seriously injured or killed by fire. With sprinklers present and functioning risk of injury or death from fire becomes negligible.
    - pclmulqdq 4y ago
      Is this true in single family dwellings or only in apartment complexes? I would believe that sprinklers have a lot of value in apartment complexes but less value in single family homes. Not to mention that people who buy single family homes are a lot more likely to have more expensive furniture that would be ruined by a flood.
      - andbberger 4y ago
        your assumption that only poor people live in apartments is troubling and very american
        mlyle 4y ago
        I do think it's probably a fair assumption that people in apartments have less expensive furnishings than people in houses.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        They specifically wrote “a lot more likely” so they clearly do not believe ONLY poor people live in apartments.
    - mlyle 4y ago
      > > It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings > Actually, the statistics are rather stark. AFAIK, this is all information about multi-family dwellings and has not been demonstrated in single family homes. The benefit of sprinklers is certainly more obvious in large buildings with multiple residences inside, in slowing fires from reaching new dwelling units. I find plenty of factsheets about residential sprinklers, that cite numbers of 80% reduction in death... which then ends up relying upon benefits seen in apartments... and which mostly evaporates when controlling for income.
    - dredmorbius 4y ago
      This discussion (both sides) would benefit greatly from some citations to back up assertions.

amluto 4y ago

The problem here isn’t the sprinklers — it’s the cost to install the sprinklers. The cost of a few hundred feet of CPVC or PEX pipe is low. The cost of an off-the-shelf sprinkler riser, pre-assembled, is a couple hundred dollars. The amount a Northern CA contractor will charge to install the parts is insane. (There is a problem with too little code. NFPA 13R and 13D do not clearly specify backflow protection requirements, and the California Plumbing Code, which follows UPC, only specifies it by reference to a subjective hazard level as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. This means that different local jurisdictions disagree, which creates both added complexity when designing a system and a significant risk of an actual hazardous condition existing. Situations like this are why codes exist, and IMO the code authors thoroughly dropped the ball on determining the extent to which the water in non-passively-purged fire sprinkler system is hazardous and how to prevent it from getting into drinking water. If an actual standard existed, then there could be an off the shelf compliant system, and time and money would be saved.