Designers of the East Montpelier Elementary School expansion project found out the hard way that a major section of the state’s fire code was updated last fall — and one engineer is determined to prevent others from stumbling on the same mistake.
After the estimated $6.5 million school renovation and 10,000-square-foot addition went out to bid this spring, state fire prevention officer Stan Baranowski pointed out the plans did not include sufficient water supply for firefighters, who will not have the luxury of tapping a municipal fire hydrant at the school’s rural location.
The state’s fire code is updated about every six years to keep pace with standards set by the National Fire Protection Association. Whereas the old code referred vaguely to an “adequate” water supply being available and provided no more than guidelines for determining adequacy, changes adopted in 2012 specify exactly how much water is required for every size and type of building. A wood-frame building between 0 and 3,600 square feet, for example, must have access to a two-hour flow of 1,500 gallons of water per minute.
“Do that math!” exclaimed Bill Bissell, the electrical and fire protection engineer hired to design the sprinkler system for the East Montpelier school. It’s Bissell who’s trying to get word to his colleagues around the state that the recent revisions carry potentially major implications.
The math for even a tiny wood-frame building is 180,000 gallons of water, the smallest amount required for any building, barring reductions for sprinkler systems. (The code doesn’t apply to one- and two-family dwellings.)
Aside from his concern that more designers need to know about this rule, Bissell fears it may shut down projects that are currently in the works. Some might not have the budget to build the necessary fire retention ponds, and others might not have the land.
“It puts quite a large burden on potential construction, when it had been completely off the radar,” Bissell said. “From a fire protection standpoint, having a standing pond is nice, but sprinklers are the ultimate. It’s the difference between having your doctor on speed dial and having him live in the house with you,” he said.
Joseph Benard, director of the state’s regional fire safety office in Williston, agreed that the rules could have serious implications. “It could be an issue where they might not even be able to build a building because they don’t have an adequate water supply,” he said.
For him, it comes down to safety. “They have to be able to fight a fire … and how can they do it if they don’t have water?” he asked.
Benard pointed out that not only new constructions, but also additions and in come cases renovations require permitting that entails enforcement of the most current fire code, even if the regulations differ from what was in place when a building first was built.
At the East Montpelier school, Bissell said a fire pond with 270,000-gallon capacity might have to be added to the plans, even after taking sprinklers into account.
Architect Peter Burns, of TruexCullins in Burlington, is not concerned. He’s in charge of the school project.
“Yes, we’ll have to do more to satisfy the code,” Burns said. “But there are good reasons behind it. It makes it safer, and it makes the firemen’s job safer.” He said the fire pond design is not yet complete, so he can’t say how much it will add to the cost of construction.
“I was not aware of (the requirement) before. I probably should have been,” Burns said.
He’s not alone. None of the several architects and engineers contacted by VTDigger.org had been aware of the new specifications before being contacted about them.
Responsibility
While the fire code now makes specific demands on water supplies and flow rates, it also makes exceptions.
In the event that the required water supply is not practical for any reason, such as in rural areas, for example, the fire authority with jurisdiction over the project can modify what’s required.
Just who has that authority depends, Benard said.
The state’s Division of Fire Safety most typically is the “Authority Having Jurisdiction” (as it’s called in the code), although 11 communities manage enforcement on their own. The state occasionally concedes authority to fire departments for localized details — such as water supply.
This makes sense, said Jeff Stetter, an architect at Gossens Bachman Architects in Montpelier. “They’re the ones who know their capability to fight a fire,” he said, citing variations in personnel and equipment from one municipality to another as a reason that one-size water supply may not fit all projects.
With that authority comes a fair amount of discretion, he acknowledged, especially in volunteer departments.
“The fire chief is typically a member of the community. He may … throw around his power a little bit. But hopefully you can rely on people to do things in good faith and do their job,” Stetter said.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter who sets the rules. Once they’re in place, they’re “the law of the land,” said Burns, the designer on the elementary school project.
“Building codes change all the time,” Burns said. “They go from less to more stringent. They have a tendency to get safer and safer.”
“They can impose any rules and … it’s really up to us to do it the best we can,” Stetter echoed.
The Vermont Division of Fire Safety conducted four seminars around the state after the 2012 fire code was adopted in November, with the goal of making architects, engineers and inspectors aware of all the code’s changes — and not just to water supply requirements.
But only 50 to 75 people attended each seminar — a far cry from the total number of professionals now responsible for meeting the requirements, Benard said.
“(Fire code) has become a large factor in design, because there are changes … that are not outlined in the building code or life safety code,” Benard said, adding that last year brought a major rewrite of many codes. “They have to review all three,” he emphasized.
