# Residential fire sprinkler systems



## Inspector (Oct 13, 2012)

Hello everyone, I'm new to the forum and could use some help. I'm from western Illinois, and we our getting some resistance from home builders regarding the installation of residential fire sprinkler systems. Do any communities that you are aware of offer an "opt-out" option for homeowners, so they do not have to comply with residential fire sprinkler code?


----------



## cda (Oct 13, 2012)

Welcome

Have not heard of one, but does not mean it is not out there

Most codes apply across the board, though some have exceptions that could include a opt out if the owner does something else


----------



## cda (Oct 13, 2012)

You might give this org a call

Residential Fire Sprinkler Protection Systems Info from Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition

International Residential Code Fire Sprinkler Coalition | Home


----------



## cda (Oct 13, 2012)

Not sure if you would call this opt out

HBA President's Blog: Fire Sprinklers "Mandatory Option" is Just what the Doctor Ordered!

Do you want a sprinkler system ?

No

Ok


----------



## cda (Oct 13, 2012)

Sprinkler requirements by state - Fire Sprinker Initiative


----------



## Inspector (Oct 14, 2012)

cda,  Thanks for the help, I will pass this information on to our inspections department.

Regards: Inspector.


----------



## FM William Burns (Oct 14, 2012)

Inspector,

I moved this thread to this area for potentially greater coverage.  You may want to look into the City of Elmhurst's amendments.


----------



## Peter1963 (Oct 18, 2012)

Hoem sprinklers



			
				Inspector said:
			
		

> Hello everyone, I'm new to the forum and could use some help. I'm from western Illinois, and we our getting some resistance from home builders regarding the installation of residential fire sprinkler systems. Do any communities that you are aware of offer an "opt-out" option for homeowners, so they do not have to comply with residential fire sprinkler code?


Does Illinois require sprinklers in private homes by code ?   If so, the builders have very little to say at this point except to comply.

Here in NYS it is still a battle but not required by local codes as yet. No matter how much it shows they save lives, the dollar

always seems to win out.


----------



## AegisFPE (Oct 18, 2012)

You may consider writing your own "opt-out" provision.

An opt-out alternative could include requiring interconnected smoke alarms throughout the dwelling unit and/or providing access to grade or a landing a maximum of some distance (say max sill height + max no-guard deck height) below each EERO, or a permanent ladder or other acceptable emergency means of self-rescue at each EERO to grade.

Such a provision would provide more life safety for the occupants in the event of a fire than more robust framing having been used as an alternative.


----------



## fatboy (Oct 18, 2012)

Welcome Peter1963!

Hope you stick around and contribute!


----------



## globe trekker (Oct 19, 2012)

Inspector & Peter1963,

Welcome to both of you, to the building Codes Forum!

Inspector,

Some jurisdictions have been / are providing options to the RFS requirement.

Some, as AegisFPE mentioned, are requiring interconnected smokes

throughout the residence, ...additional MOE built in, and nominal lumber

framing versus engineered I-joists.

In this juridisction, as we prepare to adopt the 2012 edition of the I-codes,

the FCO wants language adopted to give the option of either using nominal

sized lumber (similar to heavy timber type), or an approved type of RFS.

The math (costs) of installing actual nominal sized lumber will probably be

more than an RFS.

In your jurisdiction, these are issues to be decided by your elected officials.

Yeah, it's still a "hot buttom" issue. I see it as the Fire lobby versus the home

builders lobby.

Peter1963,

When it comes down to a matter of the dollar, ..you see what we got for

30 pieces of silver. D`OH !!

.


----------



## AegisFPE (Oct 19, 2012)

To support your effort, consider the 2008 NFPA report which cites that there is a 99.45% chance of surviving a home fire when working smoke alarms are present. In the 2011 NFPA Report that survival rate is up to 99.59% for hardwired smoke alarms (99.99% with hardwired smoke alarms and wet pipe sprinkler protection).

This is based on the current hardwired arrangement, involving bedrooms and immediate hallway only. It seems like there should be a reasonable alternative to make up for that less than half-a-percent difference.

Compare these statistics to the 2008 Traffic Safety Facts which shows the chances of surviving a motor vehicle crash is 99.42%. Interestingly enough, while the number of traffic fatalities has generally been trending down, that 99.4% has remained unchanged for 20 years.

It would seem convenient from a policy-maker's perspective that the statistics of surviving a home with modern smoke alarms or a vehicle crash is comparable, and there is not a large margin to be gained by absolutely mandating sprinklers.


----------



## Inspector (Oct 22, 2012)

Peter 1963: Some of the Chicago suburbs do, we are on the 09 codes and didn't adopt the sprinkler requirement. We will adopt the 2012 codes soon but are getting resistance from HBA, so I'm looking for options.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Oct 24, 2012)

Interesting reading in regards to the posted question;

Residential Sprinkler Mandate

pc1


----------

