• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Do I have bases to seu?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Novoross

Junior Member
I am going to build a house in California. When I first submitted documents for the plan check Fire Inspector requested August 20, 2015 to install fire sprinklers system.

At the second round of the plan check other Fire Inspector requested November 24, 2015 to upgrade existing street and existing fire hydrant.

At third round of plan check the Fire Inspector February 11, 2016 withdrew the request of upgrading the street but left the request to upgrade the hydrant.

I found a code that says that existing hydrant is available for my project but Fire Department avoided to comment on it.

Fire Department approved in July 2015 my neighbors project to build an addition with no upgrading to the street, hydrant. Deputy Chief commented that:

“ Records* indicate that the home was originally constructed in 1936* and has been remodeled.* Existing homes that undergo* remodels are not subject to the same requirements as new* dwellings for fire flow”

But California Fire Code has the same requirements to new construction and to construction an addition.

2013 California Fire Code

507.5.1 Where required. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or build- ing, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official.

Fire Prevention Bureau required installation of hydrant within 600 feet from proposed house. But the Fire Code requires of installation a new hydrant only if a SFR project located more then 600 feet from existing hydrant. The code does not have any limits to existing hydrant like model or fire flow. Basically it says that existing hydrant is available.

Here is definition of fire hydrant.

Definition.
Hydrant: A valved connection that on a water supply/storage system, having at list one 2 1/2 inch outlet, with male American National Fire Hose Screw threads(NH) used to supply fire apparatus and hoses with water.

That definition says that existing hydrant is a hydrant that makes it available.

Here is another California Fire Code

California Code of Regulations Section C 104
Consideration of Existing Fire hydrant:
Existing fire hydrants on public streets are allowed to be considered as available.

The reasons I feel discriminated:

Fire Department offered me unequal opportunities.

Most of my emails were ignored.

Plan Checker has not given written explanation on his decision to change requirements.

Deputy Chief refused in writing to give me clear explanations on his comment.

Chief has not kept his promise to comment on neighbors situation.

What should I do?
 


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
I am going to build a house in California. When I first submitted documents for the plan check Fire Inspector requested August 20, 2015 to install fire sprinklers system.

At the second round of the plan check other Fire Inspector requested November 24, 2015 to upgrade existing street and existing fire hydrant.

At third round of plan check the Fire Inspector February 11, 2016 withdrew the request of upgrading the street but left the request to upgrade the hydrant.

I found a code that says that existing hydrant is available for my project but Fire Department avoided to comment on it.

Fire Department approved in July 2015 my neighbors project to build an addition with no upgrading to the street, hydrant. Deputy Chief commented that:

“ Records* indicate that the home was originally constructed in 1936* and has been remodeled.* Existing homes that undergo* remodels are not subject to the same requirements as new* dwellings for fire flow”

But California Fire Code has the same requirements to new construction and to construction an addition.

2013 California Fire Code

507.5.1 Where required. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or build- ing, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official.

Fire Prevention Bureau required installation of hydrant within 600 feet from proposed house. But the Fire Code requires of installation a new hydrant only if a SFR project located more then 600 feet from existing hydrant. The code does not have any limits to existing hydrant like model or fire flow. Basically it says that existing hydrant is available.

Here is definition of fire hydrant.

Definition.
Hydrant: A valved connection that on a water supply/storage system, having at list one 2 1/2 inch outlet, with male American National Fire Hose Screw threads(NH) used to supply fire apparatus and hoses with water.

That definition says that existing hydrant is a hydrant that makes it available.

Here is another California Fire Code

California Code of Regulations Section C 104
Consideration of Existing Fire hydrant:
Existing fire hydrants on public streets are allowed to be considered as available.

The reasons I feel discriminated:

Fire Department offered me unequal opportunities.

Most of my emails were ignored.

Plan Checker has not given written explanation on his decision to change requirements.

Deputy Chief refused in writing to give me clear explanations on his comment.

Chief has not kept his promise to comment on neighbors situation.

What should I do?
I'd factor in the cost of upgrading the hydrant.
 

tranquility

Senior Member
The reasons I feel discriminated:

Fire Department offered me unequal opportunities.

Most of my emails were ignored.

Plan Checker has not given written explanation on his decision to change requirements.

Deputy Chief refused in writing to give me clear explanations on his comment.

Chief has not kept his promise to comment on neighbors situation.

What should I do?
From the title of the thread, this post was not what I suspected. But, you don't have any avenue to sue. All of this does not rise to the level of a tort and you would not fall under any portion of a torts claim act allowing you to sue the government. Your only real option is political pressure. Talk to your town council member.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top