sprinkler systems

Started by BonnieG1 • 15 replies • 1625 views

💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Does anyone know when the state of Nebraska required buildings to have sprinkler systems. We are a senior community that was established in 1984. We plan on having a vote at our Feb 2015 annual meeting so that we can place ourselves under the authority of the laws for condominiums that were built after 1984.

The Board wants our members to have plenty of time to consider this and we have asked our lawyer to give us the pros and cons of abiding by the newer laws.

When I mentioned this at our Friday (social and informational) meeting, A former President mentioned a concern that we would have to go to the expense of putting in a sprinkler system if we updated our documents. I responded that we should see what the lawyer says about this.

But if the requirement for sprinklers in a building was not until after 1984, then I think this gentleman's mind will be more at ease and he won't undermine the process of updating our documents.

This was the President that had an "illegal" vote to break away form a management entity. Long story.

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836

Posted:

Three good resources to ask: Fire Marshall, Insurance company (Maybe not your own), and building code department. They would have the answer.

Former HOA President

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By MelissaP1 on 09/12/2014 8:21 AM
Three good resources to ask: Fire Marshall, Insurance company (Maybe not your own), and building code department. They would have the answer.

Thanks. will do

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

So, Bonnie, I'm pretty sure you're talking about sprinklers in your units to put out fires, yes?

Melissa makes sense. Call your fire marshal.

But, at least here, the fire marshal conducts a physical inspection of our condo towers every year. And he definitely has required us to pay for new components that were pretty expensive. Does the fire marshal never inspect your building, Bonnie?? If so, what do those reports say???

Here, at least, the requirements for a indoor sprinkling system would add up to a lot. We have an emergency generator, for instance, that's required not only for an electrical outage, but also to run the (expensive) pumping mechanism that permits water to spray into our units and common areas. In addition, there needs to be a place to store the water, a "fire tank." And where could that go?

For you own peace of mind, have the fire marshall come ASAP. I'd hope that the marshal would not require your HOA to completely comply with today's standards. Make sure you have the marshal's report in writing.

JohnB26 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,001

Posted:

Y'all mean:

water supplied automatic fire suppression system

or

a sprinkler system to irrigate your flowers ?

if y'all don't even know the proper name y'all are REALLY at the mercy of your vendor(s) and probably have said: 'but that's what the contractor gave me'

I believe, however, that what Bonnie is talking about is the newer HOA law which would govern an HOA formed after 1984, NOT the building and fire codes.

Jabberwocky, as usual

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnB26 on 09/12/2014 11:35 AM
Y'all mean:

water supplied automatic fire suppression system

or

a sprinkler system to irrigate your flowers ?

if y'all don't even know the proper name y'all are REALLY at the mercy of your vendor(s) and probably have said: 'but that's what the contractor gave me'

I believe, however, that what Bonnie is talking about is the newer HOA law which would govern an HOA formed after 1984, NOT the building and fire codes.

Jabberwocky, as usual

Yes I am talking about the newer HOA law which would govern an HOA formed after 1984 not the fire building codes. It was a former President who mentioned a concern about having to put in an automatic fire suppression system if we voted to go with the new laws. This man thinks he knows so much and basically put down our PM today when our PM was trying to explain that we would probably not have to put in the fire suppression system. This former President made some weeks ago a statement that he could find no reference to units being allocated a certain percentage.

I want to put this "fire" out before this former President gets our older owners concerned that voting to go with the newer laws will be very expensive and undermine our ability to update our documents.

JohnB26 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,001

Posted:

It was a former President who mentioned a concern about having to put in an automatic fire suppression system if we voted to go with the new laws.

'Tis better to remain quiet and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

show the above saying to the mentioned person

BruceF1 (Connecticut)
Posts: 2,535

Posted:

Nebraska's CIOA is similar to ours here in Connecticut, since both are based on the UCIOA. I don't recall ever seeing anything in that law that deals with sprinkler systems. I would think that answer can best be found in your local, county, and state building codes. I would check with the fire marshal and local building code office/building inspector for the answer.

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnB26 on 09/12/2014 1:32 PM

It was a former President who mentioned a concern about having to put in an automatic fire suppression system if we voted to go with the new laws.

'Tis better to remain quiet and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

show the above saying to the mentioned person

I am certain it wouldn't do any good to show him this saying because according to him he knows more than I know and would just trying applying it to me.

He is the President who got people (including myself) all excited shortly after I moved here.
He has told me a person can only be a Board member for 6 years. I can not find that limitation anywhere in our documents. It might have been a "Board decision" when he was on the Board just like it was a "Board decision"to permanently lower the age to 50. The Board was making decisions they had no authority to make when he was on the Board. But I didn't mention that this morning as that is past history but it has hurt our Association.

Next year will be my 5th year and if I decide to run after that he and I just might lock horns

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Bonnie, the fire marshal needs to contacted--forget your past prez! We've had some stinkers here too--just move forward.

Doesn't the marshal do a regular inspection?

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Bonnie

I would want to be damn sure that updating/accepting the new laws does mean all aspects which could/might require install a sprinkler/fire suppression system.

The old President raised a valid question.

I would want answers before I agree to such.

Also, what advantages do you see in updating?

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 09/12/2014 5:36 PM
Bonnie

I would want to be damn sure that updating/accepting the new laws does mean all aspects which could/might require install a sprinkler/fire suppression system.

The old President raised a valid question.

I would want answers before I agree to such.

Also, what advantages do you see in updating?

Our annual meeting will be in February. This should give us plenty of time to get answers to questions like this man has raised. I think the law to require building to have fire sprinkler systems may have been made after 1984. I trying to find the date, but so far no luck. If the law was passed after 1984 our building should still be considered to be grandfathered in.
I don't remember reading anything about sprinkler systems in either the older condominium laws or the newer condominium laws. Of course I haven't read all the newer laws yet only about 90% if them. I plan on re reading after I have completed my first reading of the laws.

I see many advantages in updating our documents. Among them
1. No question that the "declarant" has no authority whatsoever such as having the right of first refusal. This
is a long story. The way our current document reads the "declarant" still has some privileges.
2. The members need to ratify an annual budget that the Board presents each year. Currently the budget and any
fee increase is at the sole discretion of the Board. If members don't ratify we have to work on the old
budget. This I admit could be a con. It might involve needing special assessments.
3. We need to mail notice of the annual meeting not less than 10 days or more than 50 days before the date of the
meeting. This gives us a 40 day window as opposed to not less than 14 days or more than 30 days which gives us
a 16 day window to get materials prepared for the annual meeting. In the past I have taken time off work to
get prepared for the annual meeting. And I started preparing well in advance, but lost some material from the
computer.
4. A person does not have to be an owner to be on the Board. Currently all Board members must also be owners.
the new laws only require that a majority of the Board members be owners. Some of our well qualified renters c
could be on the board and Board positions may not be as hard to fill as they have been in the past.

On another note I had to admit it but you were correct. We can not limit leasing by requiring an owner to live in a unit for a year before leasing the unit.

Although I have read about 90% of the new laws, I have not read them all. There may more more items I like.

LarryB13 (Arizona)
Posts: 4,099

Posted:

The governing documents describe how the various owners of the commonly-owned real estate will interact with each other. I fail to see how a revision of contractual obligations would permit a government agency to require a modification of the real estate.

Has the former president cited any authorities for his assertion that amending the governing documents requires the installation of fire sprinklers?

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

I agree with you. Larry! Bonnie's former prez is missing apple & oranges.

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By LarryB13 on 09/12/2014 7:21 PM
The governing documents describe how the various owners of the commonly-owned real estate will interact with each other. I fail to see how a revision of contractual obligations would permit a government agency to require a modification of the real estate.

Has the former president cited any authorities for his assertion that amending the governing documents requires the installation of fire sprinklers?

The former President has not cited any authorities for his assertion that amending the governing documents requires the installation of fire sprinklers.

But I want to put our older owners' minds at ease if at all possible. This former President is great at stirring up the nest. Shortly after we had an illegal vote to pull away from management at the time, this President resigned by simply posting a resignation letter on the bulletin Board. It stated that the then new President would be the manager and he couldn't be on the Board with such a conflict of interest. Hmm, he was the one who basically caused such a situation to begin with by stirring up the nest.

BonnieG1 (Nebraska)
Posts: 1,186

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By KerryL1 on 09/12/2014 4:15 PM
Bonnie, the fire marshal needs to contacted--forget your past prez! We've had some stinkers here too--just move forward.

Doesn't the marshal do a regular inspection?

We do have a fire safety inspection every year, but the fire marshal doesn't do it to my knowledge.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

✓ Ask follow-up questions
✓ Share your experience
✓ Get expert advice
✓ Access 350,000 discussions

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here