Indoor sprinkler (fire protection) systems? (Raleigh: homeowners insurance, house, neighborhoods) - Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary - North Carolina (NC) -The Triangle Area - City-Data Forum

bunnyrider · 05-02-2007, 07:07 AM

Hi, wondering what's the scoop with indoor sprinkler systems in new construction in the Raleigh area? None of the builders/developments we've visited have this included.

Up here it is either state or town (I'm not sure) law for all new construction to have house-wide sprinkler systems set up. I've built my last 2 homes in 2 different towns and both have had the sprinkler systems - no extra charge or anything as it's the law.

It's just a nice protection to have to know that if something happens in one room of a house (heaven forbid) that the system will kick in and take care of it so it limits damage.

Is this just not done at all in the Raleigh area? Will some builders do it? Does anyone know about pricing?

Thanks.

rfb · 05-02-2007, 08:52 AM

I've never seen a sprinkler system in a private home in Raleigh. Doesn't mean it hasn't been done, though. If you custom build, then the builder will do anything you want, within reason. Exactly what something like this would cost, I haven't got a clue.

gastric · 05-02-2007, 08:57 AM

I've read some pretty convincing articles on in-home sprinkler systems. Supposedly $3K or so to install, reduces your homeowners insurance, and more importantly protects against fire well. One article highlighted the water damage from firemen VS in-house sprinkler. It was a striking difference of like 15,000 gallons of water being pumped into your house VS 800 gallons or something like that. That was the key point they had - less water damage, thus less overall damage and easier cleanup.

Obviously you're paying for a feature that will hopefully never get used and as such I'd consider like any other insurance policy. You're gambling/betting against future tragedy with a fairly large amount of cash.

Desdemona123 · 05-02-2007, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gastric

I've read some pretty convincing articles on in-home sprinkler systems. Supposedly $3K or so to install, reduces your homeowners insurance, and more importantly protects against fire well. One article highlighted the water damage from firemen VS in-house sprinkler. It was a striking difference of like 15,000 gallons of water being pumped into your house VS 800 gallons or something like that. That was the key point they had - less water damage, thus less overall damage and easier cleanup.

Obviously you're paying for a feature that will hopefully never get used and as such I'd consider like any other insurance policy. You're gambling/betting against future tragedy with a fairly large amount of cash.

I can see it's use...but wow...burn some toast and there is going to be a fairly large amount of water damage when it goes off!

bunnyrider · 05-02-2007, 10:05 AM

Actually, they work pretty well. They are tied into the smoke detectors but don't just "go off" with burnt toast or anything else. You have to have the elements of a real fire (flames and heat that melt the covers of the sprayers) for it to go off.

For example, our fire alarm system throughout our house has gone off a couple of times because of a bug getting stuck in the smoke detector right on top of the sensor. Yup, a lady bug sitting on the sensor light and not moving. All the detectors go off and a very loud siren. But it's only happened twice in 4 years and I actually like the fact that I know it's there.

The other nice thing is that it contains the issue - if you did indeed have a fire, say, in the kitchen, then only the kitchen sprinkler goes off. It doesn't trip water to start coming out in the bedrooms or anything.

In the two neighborhoods I've lived in where the sprinklers were mandatory, there were a total of about 300 homes, and never in 8 years an incident of them going off for "no reason." It's definitely a good insurance policy.

gastric · 05-02-2007, 12:42 PM

I'm personally all for the in-house sprinkler system. It makes total sense to me.

On the flip side I wouldn't *not* buy a house because it lacked one. Nor would I probably spend $3000 of my own money to install one unless my homeowners insurance was going to go down significantly so I had some hope of recouping the cost. Otherwise it's money down the tubes in my mind as you're paying up front for protection you'll likely never ever need.