Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Safety Sprinkler topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineers recommend full replacement of middle‑school sprinkler system; base bid estimated at $885,750, board to seek bids
Summary
Consultants from CHA reported the school’s limited‑area dry sprinkler system is corroded and the fire pump is non‑functional. CHA recommended replacing piping and pumps, adding nitrogen injection to limit corrosion, and installing a new generator; the base bid estimate is roughly $885,750 with alternates for tank and pump replacement.
Consultants from CHA Consulting told the Northwestern Lehigh School District board that the middle‑school limited‑area sprinkler system requires replacement and that the district should go to bid for a full replacement package.
CHA engineers said the middle school currently has sprinkler coverage only in the two‑story attic/upper portion of the facility; the system dates to the school’s 1992 construction and is a dry (air‑charged) limited system with an external 15,000‑gallon buried storage tank and a vertical turbine fire pump. CHA reported multiple piping leaks and that the existing fire pump is not functioning. The consultants also noted the system lacks a secondary power source that modern code now requires.
CHA’s recommendation was a full replacement of the limited‑area dry sprinkler piping and heads, a new control panel and communications, and a nitrogen injection system to reduce future corrosion in the dry piping. CHA recommended removal of the existing pump so the tank’s interior condition can be inspected, and advised replacing the generator with an appropriately sized unit and automatic transfer switch so the pump and other life‑safety systems have standby power. If, after pump removal, the tank or pump proves irreparable, CHA listed replacement of the tank and the vertical turbine pump as alternates.
CHA provided a base‑bid budget estimate of $885,750 for the sprinkler replacement and associated permitting, inspection allowance, contingency and a generator. The firm said alternates would cover replacement of the storage tank and the vertical turbine pump; final figures for alternates will be established after the pump/tank inspection and during design.
CHA and district staff discussed schedule and occupancy. Consultants said most interior piping and attic work could be completed before the 2025 school year if construction occurs in the June–August window, but lead times for a fire pump or generator could extend into the school year; the consultants advised planning mitigation (for example purchasing a pump early) if lead times risked school‑year occupancy. The district said it has been operating with the existing limited system for decades, but that code changes and ongoing corrosion now make replacement the prudent course.
Board members asked about access and disruption. CHA said the sprinkler piping is routed through attic/truss spaces, so sprinkler heads do not protrude into classroom ceilings; the project will require localized ceiling access (two primary access points were described) but not wholesale ceiling removal across the building. Consultants also summarized code analysis, noting that compartmentalization to eliminate the sprinkler requirement was examined but would be more costly and less practical than replacement.
District staff said they will return to the board with contract documents and a bid package and asked the board to authorize the district to go out to bid. The board agreed to bring the bid authorization forward in the next business meeting cycle so members absent from the workshop could review the presentation and ask additional questions. CHA representatives said they will be available at that meeting to present again and answer technical questions.
