Sstrhsrtj

I am finishing up renovating my pool and I changed the configuration of the barrier fence I previously had. I now use my house itself as the 4th side to keep the pool deck open (since our kids are grown). The county/state code indicates I must install door alarms on all doors that allow access to the pool (I have 7 due to big sliding doors opening at various points).

While I don't agree with being forced to install these alarms in MY house where no children live, I must do so to pass the inspection. I am a do-it-your-selfer and heavily into home automation. I have my existing home security system, motion and existing door/window open sensors integrated into my home automation system, so I wanted to use this same automation system to meet the pool alarm requirements. I want use a RaspberryPi or ESP8266 Wireless module to handle the override button presses next to each door. Ideally rather than a blaring alarm, I would like a notification sent to my phone or watch. I could setup a blaring alarm just to pass the inspection.

Has anybody had any luck getting their local government/county inspectors to budge on this archaic building code? (By archaic, I mean there are more modern ways to get your attention other than an obnoxious 85dB alarm -- like mobile phone, watch, etc)

I am trying to avoid purchasing seven $50 "official devices" for each door just to pass the inspection. If my DIY system meets the regulations, but is not a UL certified alarm device, will that pass inspection?

The specification I found is listed below:

The relevant parts are from http://www.floridahealth.gov/environmental-health/swimming-pools/_documents/cpsc-safety-barriers.pdf

All doors that allow access to a swimming pool should be equipped with
an audible alarm that sounds when the door and/or screen are opened.
Alarms should meet the requirements of UL 2017, General-Purpose
Signaling Devices and Systems, Section 77, and have the following
features:

• The alarm sound should last for 30 seconds or more and start within 7 seconds after the door is opened.




• The alarm should be loud: at least 85 dB (decibels), when measured 10 feet away from the alarm mechanism.




• The alarm sound should be distinct from other sounds in the house, such as the telephone, doorbell, and smoke alarm.




• The alarm should have an automatic reset feature to deactivate the alarm temporarily for up to 15 seconds, to allow adults to pass
  through house doors without setting off the alarm. The deactivation
  switch could be a touchpad (keypad), or a manual switch, and should be
  located at least 54 inches above the threshold and out of the reach of
  children.

Not the answer you are looking for, but:

Loud Alarms are What You Really NEED

Assuming that the premise is a sound one, that people need to be warned of unexpected/unauthorized entrance to the pool area, a loud alarm is the right answer, not an electronic notification. A few examples:

• It is all too easy to ignore texts/notifications/etc. "If my boss/spouse/buddy texts me one more time about that project/trip/party, I'm gonna scream" followed by ignoring the next 30 minutes of little beeps by just swiping them away to look at "later". Kid wanders out...disaster.




• A new cleaning crew comes in the day before your big pool party. One of them asks, "can I bring my 3 year old, I'll keep an eye on her, she's a really quiet kid" and you say "sure". You go out to pick up munchies. The cleaning person starts vacuuming in the living room. The kid wanders through the door (left closed but unlocked because the crew is cleaning "everywhere")...disaster.




• You are out at the pool having fun. You hear a honk and go out front to greet the guests. He has the radio on in his car and you decide to listen to the last 2 minutes of the big game, radio blaring, watches/phones ignored (my day off, I'm ignoring texts), kid who was watching TV inside wanders out to the pool to find you...disaster.

You can argue whether any alarm is needed. But once an alarm is needed, an App won't substitute. Not when accident to disaster = 3 minutes in the water.

Ask your insurer and defense lawyer

Lawyering on whether this rule is really a mandate is probably a waste of time. It's a "best practice" and one easily implemented. Which will create civil and criminal liability for you if you don't implement it.

"I'm willing to lump the risk", does your insurance company also agree to lump the risk? I bet they don't. "I don't need no steenkin' insurance", how does your mortgage lender feel about that? You live in a connected society, and you don't get to enjoy the rather enormous benefits whilst shirking the responsibilities. Your pool is an attractive nuisance and Code has laid out a way to deal with that. Ignore it at your peril.

Life Safety systems need to be safety rated

Speaking of connected society, you propose to use Arduinos, Wifi routers and smart phones to implement a life safety system. Have you checked with Arduino, Cisco, Google/Samsung, T-Mobile, Comcast and others whose licensed products Will be involved?

You can bet they have a very direct and very loud opinion about using their products in life safety systems. Fair chance it is already in their Terms of Service. So involving phones, Arduino or the Internet in the baseline safety solution is out of the question. Again, blatant disregard of those companies' ToS and warnings will only further prejudice a jury in a manslaughter trial, as well as being potentially sued by those companies.

Auxiliary/supervisory is fine

They can, however, serve an auxiliary purpose, example being the Ring doorbell type features, where it notifies you of approachers and lets you see them.

Unrated home-automation gadgets can also be used for "beyond requirements" purposes. For instance if you have an inner gate which must be protected to Code, and an outer gate which does not, you can do anything you please to defend the outer gate.

Doing safety-rated isn't that hard

Safety rated systems hardly need to be ugly. Certainly many suppliers will cheerfully take your money for a no-brain, ugly bolt-on fits-all solution that satisfies statute. But that is not your only option. As long as you do the electrical work to standards, you can certainly apply your industry to a bespoke wiring/installation solution which is concealed and attractive. This is a DIY forum, after all. It certainly won't be any harder than the bespoke home automation solution you are proposing, it will just use different crafts.

Generally safety-rated systems just use hardwiring, Underwriter's Laboratories (UL) listed devices instead of Chinese Excrement (CE) junk off Amazon, proper installation methods, and other gold-standard practices. Sticking to gold standard is a liability shield.

If you're so smart, why is Code in your way?

The last thought I have is the number of people we get in here who fancy themselves "too smart for Code", and yet, for some reason Code is an impediment to them.

I cannot point to one single project I couldn't do because of Code. It's nothing more than a speedbump to me.

Just do good work that complies. Nothing more to it.

Have you read the relevant county/state code? Have you actually spoken to the inspector about you doors and the required alarms?

The document you cite, "cspc-safety-barriers", is a citizen advisory and not a regulation of any kind. Is "cspc-safety-barriers" cited in the relevant county/state code? Did your inspector tell you to follow that advisory?

Make sure you understand what you are being told to do before you decide on the best way to do it.

I doubt you'll get any latitude on the code as written. The code is written very clearly. It isn't within the code enforcement official's discretion to set it aside upon request. If there is ever any accident that may have been prevented by alarms per the code, they'd be responsible ethically and legally.

I personally think relying on app notifications generated by a home brewed Raspberry Pi based system for anything life safety related is a terrible idea, it just isn't a robust and reliable solution. The Pi is fine for hobby and educational purposes, but not critical applications.

I'd recommend reading the actual code carefully and citing the code when discussing the matter with inspectors. Most inspectors are receptive to reasonable, researched discussion.