Need some expertise here, because I am about to get slammed. Here is the background: type III 1 hr building with concrete roof, floors, columns and beams. Assembly Occupancy. I designed, and supervised construction on a 3' x 3' vertical grid hanging from the ceiing cut to look like an upside-down topo. Its a big honeycomb attached to the concrete celing with the downside edge of the vertical drywall cut and shaped to describe a distorted surface. The depth to the concrete ranges from 1' to over 4' depending on the flow of the topo. The space between the grid is open to the concrete ceiling and contains many lights, speakers, sprinklers, etc...
I went through everthing with the rough-in fire inspector, adding many sprinker heads, adjusting depths and was ultimately signed off. Then he retired.
When we called for final the new inspector went apeshiat over it and wants me to add a sprinkler head in ever square, over 300, or fill in every square with drywall to bring the depth between the ceiling and the edge of the vertical drywall to 22". Either solution will cost outrageous amounts and take forever, as well as ruin the design. They both have site limitations that would make thier construction almost impossible.
This new inspector will not budge or even compromise. He actually wants us to remove the changes required by the initial inspector which were performed as per his specifications at significant expense. Any sugestions?
in nj typically when we have a code problem with a local guy, we run it by the state agency - DCA, Dept. of Community Affairs - to gauge whether or not the local guy is just loco. when the DCA rules in our favor, the local guy usually backs down. in your case you might consult all sources, and have an attorney step in if that doesn't work - the lawyer is just my guess but hey the code was written by attorneys they ought to figure a way around it. good luck, sounds like a nightmare...
I can't envision what you're talking about and you haven't indicated which code you're designing under. That might help. With more information we might be able to find something in the code to back you up. Try going to ICCsafe.org and posting a question there.
Most likely, it's irrelevant though. Whether you find anything or not, you probably need to sit down with the inspector AND the client and discuss this. Make sure you're not missing something that you should be required to do, first. If it's just a bogus call by an inexperienced inspector, which is likely, you may want to ask for his superviser to sit in. Explain, with the client there, the history of the project and where you are now and that the client can't afford these changes. Let them know that if inspector persists, the client may have to abandon the project. If you've used an expeditor, bring him in. Get everyone there you possibly can and ask the reviewers and inspector what you an do to "work with them". A very important phrase. And don't let anyone lose it in the meeting. Let the client say as much as he or she is willing. Inspectors will frequently listen to clients in a way that they won't listen to architects and engineers.
I had exactly the same experience with a site inspector once. After a meeting we were able to come to an agreement on what we had to do and what he let us slide on, but prior to that he wasn't going to budge.
Good luck and keep us posted.
Aug 25, 04 8:44 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Technical Question: Sprinklers
Need some expertise here, because I am about to get slammed. Here is the background: type III 1 hr building with concrete roof, floors, columns and beams. Assembly Occupancy. I designed, and supervised construction on a 3' x 3' vertical grid hanging from the ceiing cut to look like an upside-down topo. Its a big honeycomb attached to the concrete celing with the downside edge of the vertical drywall cut and shaped to describe a distorted surface. The depth to the concrete ranges from 1' to over 4' depending on the flow of the topo. The space between the grid is open to the concrete ceiling and contains many lights, speakers, sprinklers, etc...
I went through everthing with the rough-in fire inspector, adding many sprinker heads, adjusting depths and was ultimately signed off. Then he retired.
When we called for final the new inspector went apeshiat over it and wants me to add a sprinkler head in ever square, over 300, or fill in every square with drywall to bring the depth between the ceiling and the edge of the vertical drywall to 22". Either solution will cost outrageous amounts and take forever, as well as ruin the design. They both have site limitations that would make thier construction almost impossible.
This new inspector will not budge or even compromise. He actually wants us to remove the changes required by the initial inspector which were performed as per his specifications at significant expense. Any sugestions?
in nj typically when we have a code problem with a local guy, we run it by the state agency - DCA, Dept. of Community Affairs - to gauge whether or not the local guy is just loco. when the DCA rules in our favor, the local guy usually backs down. in your case you might consult all sources, and have an attorney step in if that doesn't work - the lawyer is just my guess but hey the code was written by attorneys they ought to figure a way around it. good luck, sounds like a nightmare...
oh, if that doesn't work, do the other tried and true NJ method ---- hire an ombudsman - if you know what i mean.
I can't envision what you're talking about and you haven't indicated which code you're designing under. That might help. With more information we might be able to find something in the code to back you up. Try going to ICCsafe.org and posting a question there.
Most likely, it's irrelevant though. Whether you find anything or not, you probably need to sit down with the inspector AND the client and discuss this. Make sure you're not missing something that you should be required to do, first. If it's just a bogus call by an inexperienced inspector, which is likely, you may want to ask for his superviser to sit in. Explain, with the client there, the history of the project and where you are now and that the client can't afford these changes. Let them know that if inspector persists, the client may have to abandon the project. If you've used an expeditor, bring him in. Get everyone there you possibly can and ask the reviewers and inspector what you an do to "work with them". A very important phrase. And don't let anyone lose it in the meeting. Let the client say as much as he or she is willing. Inspectors will frequently listen to clients in a way that they won't listen to architects and engineers.
I had exactly the same experience with a site inspector once. After a meeting we were able to come to an agreement on what we had to do and what he let us slide on, but prior to that he wasn't going to budge.
Good luck and keep us posted.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.