LifeSafety interviews Donald Goosman, construction manager at Rolf Jensen & Associates, a nationwide fire-protection and security consultancy, on the role of fire- and life-safety engineers during renovation projects.
Q. Tell us the first steps you take to design the fire- and life-safety system for a building that is going to be renovated for a completely different use.
A. I think the most important step is understanding what the impact of changing the use will be, especially when you are changing the building for healthcare use. There can be substantial code implications.
In other cases, if a building owner is making a lot of changes, the occupancy of a building could be altered. The owner might think of it as just tearing out a wall here or there, but you really have to consider the big picture and understand the overall scope and magnitude of the project.
The other thing that is really a key — and unfortunately, it is not done enough because it is very simple, especially related to fire-protection systems — is giving the local building department and fire department a call. Ask them not only what major codes they follow, but what ordinances they’ve adopted that might vary a little bit from major codes. That’s one of biggest stumbling blocks I see when engineers are not brought in for a job.
For example, the City of Chicago has things they like to have done in a certain way. City officials even wrote their own code about it. But outside of the city, every municipality has little variations of things that they require based on their ordinances.
Q. At what point in the project are your services required?
A. We’re normally brought in during the planning or pre-design stages when building owners are still brainstorming the big picture. I think that is the most important time in the project. During the planning stages when you’re trying to pull budgets together, before you get to a detailed design, you have to develop the right concepts and define the general scope. This way, everyone understands what the project is going to entail from the very beginning.
During the design phase, everything is just words and lines on a piece of paper. Changing the general scope can be very simple. You have the time to go to the authorities and review the plans with them. That’s when we can be influential by explaining to the code authorities what the plan is and how we will meet code.
As long as the plan and the code align, we have a project that should be successful. If there are gaps somewhere, or if there’s some point where the two aren’t on the same page, the design phase is the best time to make corrections. All it might cost is a few clicks on a computer to change things around.
If those errors continue and they are caught during construction, or worse, after the building has been built, a fix that could have been a few dollars in the beginning is now a very substantial change-order in the construction process.
Q. Does the emergence of more national players in the building industry present a problem in complying with local codes?
A. I think so. We’ll see property management companies come in and because they manage all these big buildings, they will have a good understanding of the national codes, but not the local code. Even if you did it that way in XYZ city, it doesn’t mean you can necessarily do those things the same way in the local area. This is true especially in large markets like Chicago or New York. While it may parallel the national code, there may be a lot of minor changes, mainly because that is what the local trades have seen and that is what they are comfortable with.
Q. How does the design-build process affect your work?
A. Design-build is advantageous, especially for building owners because what you are doing, then, is you are getting an engineer involved early. An engineer helps the building owner or property manager define the expectations of the project.
Obviously, you start with the code as a minimum. But a lot of times, there are elements that building owners want: small upgrades that could have big property impacts, but low dollar impacts if incorporated into the specifications.
From there, the design-builder takes the job and runs with it. They are able to create some efficiencies because they know the requirements of the project. They know what the code says, and they know what the owner is looking for beyond code. But how they get the end-result is really up to them and how they take advantage of the efficiencies. All the time, energy and money that a design-build contractor can save on a job while still meeting the requirements of the project is money in their pocket. That means they’re going to do the best they can to deliver the best product, but in the most efficient, cost-effective manner. Design-build is a good way to go. It gives the owner the most cost-effective solution.
Q. A functional, cost-effective building is always the goal, right?
A. It really is. It’s about maintaining that balance. The nice thing about being involved with the design is that sometimes there is a big wish list that owners want. There is sometimes a misconception about what fire protection systems can and cannot do. By working with the owner early, we can make sure there are no misunderstandings about what the final product will be. Again, when it’s words and lines on a piece of paper, changes are easy and cheap. But if the contractor installs the system, and then the owner says, “I thought this was going to happen, and that has to happen,” well, it’s a little late in the ball game to realize that.
Tags: Code, Q&A, Renovation
Posted in Audible/Visible Notification, Building Codes, Commercial, Healthcare, Q & A : Ask the Expert, Spring 2006
To receive more information about the content within this issue, fill out this Online Response Card.