MeyerFire
  • Blog
  • Forum
  • TOOLKIT
    • ALL TOOLS
    • BUY THE TOOLKIT
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ALL COURSES
    • JOIN THE UNIVERSITY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE PREP SERIES
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
    • TOOLKIT-ONLY LOGIN
    • UNIVERSITY LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT
Picture

Minimum Distance of Remote FDC from Building?

1/11/2022

15 Comments

 
For a fire department connection that is remote (freestanding) from the building, what is the minimum distance between the building and the remote fire department connection?

I've seen some authors recommend a distance equal to the building height, but others recommend half the building height.

Is there a code or standard reference that indicates this?

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
15 Comments
Alex
1/11/2022 07:42:14 am

Hi,

I would say that the more important question is how close does the FDC need to be to a hydrant? The further the FDC to the building, the more friction loss you will have to account for but that number is never too large (in the grand scheme of things).

You want the FDC to be close to a hydrant so when the first truck arrives on scene, they don't need to stretch hundreds feet of hose to connect to the building. NFPA 14 - 19' Edition states in 6.4.5.4 the the maximum distance is 100' between the FDC and the nearest fire hydrant unless allowed by the AHJ to be further.

Thanks,
Alex

Reply
Anthony
1/11/2022 08:13:22 am

Requirements are vague for this kind of this I think by design so as to give an AHJ as much flexibility as possible. Defiantly call a fire official for guidance on their preferences as they can vary widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.


I would recommend closer being better as Alex states due to friction loss especially in a residential commercial or urban applications. However, if you're looking at an industrial application or anywhere with explosive possibilities further might be better with a larger feed to a building. I thinking about an oil and gas or fertilizer plant.

Reply
Todd Wyatt
1/11/2022 08:16:48 am

Per IBC (the scoping Code) FDC shall comply with Section 912. 912.2 Location ststes FDC shall be "so located that fire apparatus and hose connected to supply the ssystem will not obstruct access to the building for other fire apparatus. The location of FDC shall be approved by the fire code official." 912.2 goes on to identify visibility requirements (912.2.1) and FDC signage on existing building where visbility is an issue. The IBC does not include prescriptive requirements regarding building height and FDC locations but it does include access requirements per 912.34 Access. (https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IBC2021P1/chapter-9-fire-protection-and-life-safety-systems#IBC2021P1_Ch09_Sec912)

Reply
Wes
1/11/2022 08:19:19 am

One of the reasons that a remote (freestanding) FDC is beneficial to firefighters is that it is distanced from the building, which protects firefighters from the radiant heat from the building but also keeps the FDC outside of the building collapse zone.

Some US Federal project requirements we've been involved with actually require the remote FDC to be at least 1.5 x the exterior building height, which effectively tries to keep the FDC outside of the building collapse zone.

Reply
Wes
1/11/2022 08:21:12 am

I'm not a fan of remote FDCs myself - they introduce a much higher potential for corrosion, freeze-ups, can get run over by vehicles, and are more expensive. But when jurisdictions have required them, that's the reasoning that I typically hear behind their use.

Reply
Wes
1/11/2022 08:22:22 am

... and that's 1.5 x the building height, "away from the building". So a 20-ft tall building exterior wall would require the FDC to be 30-ft away from the building.

Reply
JH
1/11/2022 08:30:24 am

The remote FDC must be located on the same side of the fire lane as the nearest fire hydrant to prevent obstruction of the fire lane by fire hoses. (NFPA 1:18.2.4.1, NFPA 24:5.9.5.2)

The fire hydrant must be 40+ ft. from the building. (NFPA 24:7.2.3)

Where a PIV is required, it must also be 40+ ft. from the building. (NFPA 24:6.2.9(1))

Backflow preventers must also be 40+ ft. from the building. (NFPA 24:6.2.9(4))

All of these requirements should result in an easily accessible remote fire lane with all required fire protection system appurtenances located conveniently in proximity to each other, with all required minimum spacing.

Reply
Dan Wilder
1/11/2022 08:56:07 am

The "collapse zone" is defined as 1.5X where X is the wall height so anything within this zone is subject to impact from debris and should be avoided if possible.

However, I can't say that the remote FDC location has ever been defined by this zone....it's typically put remote to keep the FDC-Hydrant distance within the required 100' (cheaper to add the new pipe than relocate/add a hydrant) or due to the backflow having the FDC on it and its location already being remote.

This isn't in the IBC/IFC to my knowledge, it's out of NFPA 1006 & 1500 but that only discusses operations in those zones, not actually putting the FDC outside of it (apparatus, equipment, and personnel are teh focus). This is more just an extremely forward looking approach.

Reply
Wes
1/11/2022 09:01:08 am

Agreed Dan. Where I've seen the 1.5x required, it has been written-into the project by RFP writers who were aware of their department needs. It has not come from model codes or standards.

Reply
Glenn Berger
1/11/2022 11:25:28 am

Back to the original question - I am not aware of any published requirement that provides a minimum (or maximum) distance from a building wall to a remote FDC.

Reply
John Culpepper
1/12/2022 02:53:01 pm

I am in the Fire Department and one of my City’s Site Plan Reviewers. In my city there are City Utility Guides Lines which says the "Siamese connections must be located within 50 feet of a dedicated hydrant." This is more stringent than the Fire Code, so I go by that guideline. It also says, "The dedicated hydrant is not credited toward external protection requirements." The 50' distance works good for commercial and residential sprinkler systems in my city because the only thing the Fire Codes talk about is the 100' distance for building with standpipe systems but nothing about buildings without standpipe systems. These two distances allow me to give the designer an extra couple of feet depending on the circumstances. If there is plenty of room around the building being constructed, I ask for a remote FDC and if building is in part of the city with no room or open area, a wall mount will do. The remote FDC keeps crews from hooking right at the building wall and helps protect the firefighters. If there is a collapse, it’s not going to make much of a difference because if you are using a wall mount and/or a remote FDC in the collapse zone it will probably be damaged or blocked. There are many locations you cannot put an FDC far enough from the building. I try and keep it far enough from the building when I can. The whole idea is to keep the FDC close to the fire hydrant.

Reply
Rob Neale
1/13/2022 08:06:21 am

Just a few thoughts:

1. Having a remote FDC allows the pumping apparatus to stay away from the building so other incoming vehicles have more likelihood of being able to maneuver freely around the building.

2. An aggressive ITM program will minimize the likelihood of a poorly maintained FDC.

3. If the building collapses, you're well beyond worrying about pumping the FDC; you'll be onto heavy stream appliances.

4. With large diameter hose, the distance from a hydrant to the FDC is almost moot unless no one likes draining and reloading 5-inch.

5. Can we even say "Siamese" anymore?

Reply
John Culpepper
1/13/2022 08:57:22 am

I agree with what you say, the remote protects apparatus and firefighters. Being a Fire Inspector, it is out job to confirm the fire codes are met during annual inspections and part of that is to confirm that the fire protection system has been inspected and passed all required inspections; it shall be maintained.
The fire code says . . .

901.6 Inspection, testing and maintenance.
To the extent that equipment, systems, devices, and safeguards, such as fire detection, alarm and extinguishing systems, which were provided and approved by the building official when constructed, shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times. And where such equipment, systems, devices, and safeguards are found not to be in an operative condition, the fire official shall order all such equipment to be rendered safe in accordance with the USBC.

912.7 Inspection, testing and maintenance.
Fire department connections shall be periodically inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with NFPA 25. Records of inspection, testing and maintenance shall be maintained.

Reply
Theresa Z
2/27/2023 11:26:36 pm

Is it an acceptable practice to access the fire hydrant directly across a semi-rural 2-lane 45mph roadway when the building is a mere 84ft from the hydrant?
Would the pub owner be required to install a private hydrant or water tank?

Reply
JH
3/9/2023 07:43:30 am

The answer has to do with traffic management. How many trips per day? Based on your info, I would say it's probably fine. Check your JD's P&Z requirements as well as the adopted fire code requirements.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    SUBMIT A QUESTION
    Picture
    Why Sponsor?

    ALL-ACCESS

    Picture
    GET ALL OUR TOOLS

    SUBSCRIBE

    Subscribe and learn something new each day:
    I'm Interested In:

    COMMUNITY

    Top May '25 Contributors
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    SEE LEADERBOARD

    YOUR POST

    SUBMIT A QUESTION

    PE EXAM

    Get 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
    SIGN ME UP!

    FILTERS

    All
    A1171
    ABA
    ADA
    ASCE 7
    ASME A17.1
    ASTM E1354
    Blog Thread
    Daily Discussion
    Design-documents
    EN 12845
    Explosion Protection
    Explosion-protection-prevention
    Fire Detection And Alarm Systems
    Fire Dynamics
    Flammable And Combustible Liquids
    Flammable-combustible-liquids
    FM Global
    Human-behavior
    IBC
    ICC 500
    IEBC
    IFC
    IMC
    IPC
    IRC
    ISO
    Means Of Egress
    NBC
    NFPA 1
    NFPA 10
    NFPA 101
    NFPA 11
    NFPA 110
    NFPA 1142
    NFPA 1221
    NFPA 13
    NFPA 13D
    NFPA 13R
    NFPA 14
    NFPA 15
    NFPA 16
    NFPA 17A
    NFPA 20
    NFPA 2001
    NFPA 214
    NFPA 22
    NFPA 220
    NFPA 24
    NFPA 241
    NFPA 25
    NFPA 291
    NFPA 30
    NFPA 307
    NFPA 30B
    NFPA 31
    NFPA 33
    NFPA 37
    NFPA 400
    NFPA 409
    NFPA 415
    NFPA 45
    NFPA 495
    NFPA 497
    NFPA 5000
    NFPA 502
    NFPA 54
    NFPA 55
    NFPA 654
    NFPA 68
    NFPA 70
    NFPA 701
    NFPA 72
    NFPA 75
    NFPA 770
    NFPA 82
    NFPA 855
    NFPA 90A
    NFPA 92
    NFPA 96
    NICET
    OBC
    OSHA
    Passive Building Systems
    PE Prep Guide
    PE Prep Series
    PE Sample Problems
    Poll
    Smoke Management
    Special Hazard Systems
    UFC 3-600-01
    UFC 4-021-01
    UFC 4-211-01
    UPC
    Updates
    Water Based Fire Suppression
    Weekly Exams


    ARCHIVES

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016


    PE PREP SERIES

    SEE LEADERBOARD

    RSS Feed

Picture
​Home
Our Cause
The Blog
The Forum
PE Exam Prep
The Toolkit

MeyerFire University
​Pricing
Login
​Support
Contact Us
Picture

MeyerFire.com is a startup community built to help fire protection professionals shine.
Our goal is to improve fire protection practices worldwide. We promote the industry by creating helpful tools and resources, and by bringing together industry professionals to share their expertise.

​MeyerFire, LLC is a NICET Recognized Training Provider and International Code Council Preferred Education Provider.

All text, images, and media ​Copyright © 2016-2025 MeyerFire, LLC

We respect your privacy and personal data. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. 
The views, opinions, and information found on this site represent solely the author and do not represent the opinions of any other party, nor does the presented material assume responsibility for its use. Fire protection and life safety systems constitute a critical component for public health and safety and you should consult with a licensed professional for proper design and code adherence.

Discussions are solely for the purpose of peer review and the exchange of ideas. All comments are reviewed. Comments which do not contribute, are not relevant, are spam, or are disrespectful in nature may be removed. Information presented and opinions expressed should not be relied upon as a replacement for consulting services. Some (not all) outbound links on this website, such as Amazon links, are affiliate-based where we receive a small commission for orders placed elsewhere.

  • Blog
  • Forum
  • TOOLKIT
    • ALL TOOLS
    • BUY THE TOOLKIT
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ALL COURSES
    • JOIN THE UNIVERSITY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE PREP SERIES
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
    • TOOLKIT-ONLY LOGIN
    • UNIVERSITY LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT