As Steve points out, it is AM&M. If you are a 3rd party designer and didn’t ask if there was an AM&M, as it is quite common in CA, then lesson learned. If the builder, owner or sprinkler contractor didn’t review prior to bid then lesson learned for them.
AM&M can be costly. But it was owner/builder choice to encroach on the setback. So I assume they chose the cost of doing the AM&M was less important than building into the setback. If you had the information up front and didn’t use it, then redo the design and move on. If the owner / builder had it and didn’t get it to you, submit change order, redo the design and move on. As I was taught long ago, all education costs. Some you pay to universities and such. Others you pay to the School of Hard Knocks. Travis Mack, SET M.E.P.CAD | Instructor / Support 181 N. Arroyo Grande Blvd. #105 I Henderson, NV 89074 www.mepcad.com<http://www.mepcad.com/> | m: 480.547.9348| Whatspp: +14805479348 Email: [email protected] AutoSPRINK | AutoSPRINK FAB | AutoSPRINK RVT | AlarmCAD From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 6:52 AM To: 'Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers' <[email protected]>; 'Steve Leyton' <[email protected]> Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Modified 13D System per FD I am not sure, but I don’t believe I’ve ever seen rules related to wagering on the forum. I do not believe it would be appropriate however, in the unlikely event of “off-track” betting on the outcome of a code application, the house should get 10%. No vig. [https://www.dropbox.com/s/g4h8r7hdtsr6154/AFSA_L.png?raw=1] Bob Caputo, CFPS President American Fire Sprinkler Association c: 760-908-7753 p: 214-349-5965 ext124 w: firesprinkler.org<http://firesprinkler.org/> [http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/184235/dev_images/signature_app/facebook_sig.png]<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/> [http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/184235/dev_images/signature_app/twitter_sig.png] <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224> [http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/184235/dev_images/signature_app/linkedin_sig.png] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/> [http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/184235/dev_images/signature_app/instagram_sig.png] <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/> Treat Your Apprentices Like VIPs! AFSA’s Virtual Instruction Program (VIP) for Apprentices is training that comes straight from our expert instructors. They lead the way to ensure your men and women are trained, letting you focus on OJT. Click here<https://www.firesprinkler.org/sprinkler-apprentice-training/> to learn more and enroll From: BRUCE VERHEI <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 2:54 AM To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Steve Leyton <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Modified 13D System per FD Unfortunately I assume we can’t arrange wagers on this forum. I’d give odds Steve L is correct on more than one of his points. One more reason to follow the no installation prior to plans review practice. I’ve gone round and round more than once on 13-D that just don’t work hydraulically. Knowing there’s not enough margin to spend hours yakking with the plan reviewer on these jobs I finally learned to ask ‘Is this already installed?’ Uh, yeah. I was hoping to pick up permit today, for inspection tomorrow. You gotta approve it the GC is riding me. i wonder if the u/g is sized adequately. Best. Bruce V. On 02/20/2024 2:20 PM PST Steve Leyton <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: If you have a set-back deficiency and the project was permitted with the upgraded sprinkler system as a condition of approval, it’s perfectly legit. Before you designed the system, did the owner or their agent inform you that there were alternative means and methods required? I would first ask them, because if the situation is what LACFD informed you that it is, then the owner has almost certainly been informed of these upgrades in writing and the information wasn’t conveyed to the construction team. Did you look at the code analysis in the plans to see if it’s there? Are you the contractor or a contract designer? If you’re a 3rd party, did the contractor bid off of plans that may include this information and they’re the ones that didn’t convey to you? Steve L. From: Owen Evans <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:39 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Modified 13D System per FD I designed a standard 13D system for a new SFR in Hermosa Beach Ca.. The city of Hermosa Beach contracts with LA County for their fire protection. I received corrections requiring a 4 head calculation, heads in all compartments and attic, and under all exterior overhangs. They call it a modified 13D system. I spoke with the plans examiner and he stated this is an LA country requirement with approval from the city of Hermosa Beach. I asked for the amendment that allows this “modified 13D” system. He stated that because the SFR encroaches into the 5’ setback, it’s an alternate means and method, no amendment required. This is going to result in a significant cost increase. Is this situation legit? Owen Evans Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS<https://apps.apple.com/us/app/aol-news-email-weather-video/id646100661> _________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
