≡ Menu

Does This Meet Code 17

It Looks Really Cool

There are times that fire protection features, egress doors, fire hydrants, and even exit signs get modified to become more attractive to the owner.  I may be a little odd, but I think a well lit exit sign looks great in a store!

For those of you who are not suppression inspectors, the picture shows a remote fire department connection.  A remote FDC is typically installed in downtown settings, west coast (warmer climates), and where a designer or AHJ feels these are more applicable to the fire protection scheme.

Therefore the question at hand, does this meet code?  Does it hamper the operation of the FDC?















If you are looking for resources on automatic sprinkler systems, check this out!

{ 20 comments… add one }

  • kevin O'Brienq December 19, 2011, 10:10 am

    I don’t think it would hamper the operation at all. I should have a sign, strobe or bell above it so it can be found quicker. Other than than it looks like it is operational.

  • Dorie Priolo December 19, 2011, 11:05 am

    Sock monkey! Technically, we’re not s’posed to obscure fire appliances, but it’s so doggone CUTE and toasty WARM in that harsh Michigan weather!

  • Mel December 20, 2011, 10:22 am

    Hamper operation? ….. no.
    Obscue? ……… yes.
    A sign is missing which will tell what it is, standpipe/sprinkler
    and what portion it covers. It may be present on top of the head, but still, I’d write it.

  • Tim Rogers January 3, 2012, 10:31 pm

    This seems to be the same thing we saw some time back when the exit doors were camoflged into the decor. It may be functional, but if you can’t find it, you can’t use it. Fire protection/safety features should be easily identified for emergency use.

  • Jeff Holbrook January 3, 2012, 11:22 pm

    It might look great and it is funny but, on a more serious note FDCs should be easily located, readily accesssible, and properly marked. I’m researching the code further in order to properly answer the question. I don’t know if I would say this is acceptible even if the local fire department knows this is an FDC. Another department could be assisting in a fire in the area and not know it’s location. Are there any other photos or information on the site where the photo was taken?

  • Williamson January 4, 2012, 9:24 am

    Its disguised and as the previous commenter wrote if you cant find it you can use it. Write it for needing a SIGN.

  • Gene Porter January 4, 2012, 9:32 am

    Not Sock Monkey….it’s E.T. Although this is cool and looks great, I would agree that it does abscure it which is a violation of code. Not to mention, all modifications to fire systems (to include color and design) are to be approved by AHJ.

  • Carl Wren January 4, 2012, 9:34 am

    I don’t think the FDC is any less recognizable than a wall mounted FDC that only exposes the hose connections. That said, I agree with Kevin and Mel that signs do appear to be missing. It should be clearly identified as a sprinkler FDC, a standpipe FDC, or a combination system FDC, it really should be identified as either a wet system or dry system FDC. I think it might be more difficult to make the sign standout against that mural wall than for fire department personnel to recognize that it is an FDC.

  • M.Christopher Shay January 4, 2012, 9:49 am

    This is a bit different. Yes it looks functional but if the Engine Company M.P.O. does not know his district, it’s useless. What about a sign? horn’strobe? If this is something that needed to be covered I would make sure it goes to the Fire Marshal’s Office for a review.

  • Robert Williams January 4, 2012, 10:03 am

    In this case, everyone is totally correct! At O dark 30 a firefighter needs to be able to see these type of devices without any delays. Now in reality I am sure that the propriety owner did not allow this but it is their responsibility to see that devices like this is maintained and free and clear of all obstruction at all times.
    In addition, when was the last sprinkler system inspection done on the system. Did the system inspector missed this or was it noted on his report as a deficiency?

  • Tom Jacobs January 4, 2012, 10:08 am

    Anyone remember 1976 and paint your hydrant for the centennial?

    I think the FDC needs a better paint job and some signage, but the sock puppet does not affect operation…if you know your district.

  • Don Collick January 4, 2012, 10:29 am

    I agree with needing a H/S above and signage but with is the difference with communities that “Adopt a Hydrant” that residents paint them with art? It looks like it is operational.

  • Susan Martinez January 4, 2012, 12:22 pm

    I would not allow it in my jurisdiction. We actually have the stem painted glossy red with the address numbers stenciled in white on the stem of the FDC of the building it serves. Consistency is alot more easier to enforce than the old “how come they can do it but I can’t” because if it’s done in one spot, how many others will you “have” to allow?

  • Robert Allard January 5, 2012, 8:42 pm

    It maybe cute, but it could hide it at night , as the owner or the AHJ not to cover it.

  • Glen Doan January 8, 2012, 10:35 am

    It blends to much to the building for me. I would not allow in my jurisdiction.

  • Ken Prichard January 9, 2012, 4:03 pm

    I don`t think this would meet the “Visible from the street requirement” beside the signage issue etc. , does the monkeys arms move? Would not be allowed even if it did work.

  • Marcus Robinson January 31, 2012, 10:21 am

    No,but It is truly unforgettable!!

  • Brian Dove February 6, 2012, 6:32 am

    I think I picked her up in a bar in college but the memory is pretty vague…:+)

  • Michael April 2, 2012, 6:31 pm

    Yes it’s cute but I would write a violation plus its an eyesore to the community.

  • Deje August 1, 2012, 1:06 pm

    It’s a violation. Period

Leave a Comment