John Siewert called to say that it appears that approximately 150 in duct / duct detectors were omited from the original design. These were found by electricians removing the old system once the project had been completed. Fire Sentry has received mechanical drawings and provided pricing for the installation of the missed devices and will be submitting for a new permit on the added work.

Fire alarm conference complete.

Meeting with architect, electrical engineer, fire alarm contractor, electrical contractor and general contractor to discuss failed plan review comments. Each item was discussed. The primary concern was how and when occupancy was to take place. The engineer indicated the plan was to build the expansion but not occupy it until late summer. WHile the expansion was being built, the new fire alarm system would be added to the existing portion of the building. At that time, both system could be running. Once the new system was complete throughout the new and old building, the old one would be turned off and removed after the school year ended. New and old fire alarm control panels will be mounted next to each other. If the new building is to be occupied, the systems have to be interfaced to insure full evacuation and auxiliary function operate on both sides. The balance of items on the review comments are to be addressed by the engineer and the fire alarm contractor. Shilo sprinklers are to verify the existance of sprinklers at the existing stage. If no sprinklers exist, determination of any detection requirements will be evaluated.

Called John Siewert to discuss design errors and the scope of work. Errors included insufficient visible notification, multiple fire alarm systems in a single building without interface, multi phased work plan, partial corridor smoke detection and ceiling heights. Emailed John with a follow up recaping our conversation.

Application submitted via PDS Online on Oct 26 2017 2:45PM