From ICC ePARTNERS Volume III, Issue 5 May 2007
Sprinkler Requirements Remain in IRC Appendix
More than 600 proposed code changes were debated during the Final Action
Hearings in Rochester, New York, including the proposal to include
sprinkler
requirements for one- and two-family dwellings in the IRC. Requirements
for
sprinklers to be included in the International Residential Code (IRC) will
remain in the code's appendix. During Final Action Hearings last week in
Rochester, New York, voting members of the Code Council voted not to
include
sprinkler requirements for one- and two-family dwellings in the code.
First,
voting members overturned a committee recommendation to deny a change that
would have required sprinklers in all housing built under the IRC. That
resulted in a motion to include requirements for sprinklers in the code.
The
vote, which needed a two-thirds majority to pass, received only 56 percent
of the votes cast supporting the measure.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George
Church
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:40 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Bid to Require Fire Sprinklers Defeated at Code Hearings
From Nations Building News, NAHB, Week of May 28, 2007:
Bid to Require Fire Sprinklers Defeated at Code Hearings
During final hearings in Rochester, N.Y. last week for proposed changes to
the International Residential Code, affordable housing advocates pushed
back
an effort to include requirements for fire sprinklers.
Proponents of mandating fire sprinklers for one- and two-family homes were
unable to muster the two-thirds majority vote they needed. The May 22 vote
was 476 to 375.
Contained in the code's appendix, fire sprinkler requirements will remain
a
local jurisdictional choice, which is exactly as it should be according to
representatives from NAHB state and local home builders associations who
spoke at the code hearings.
Building officials, nevertheless, are finding the arguments of
fire-sprinkler advocates increasingly persuasive, putting the onus on home
builders to continue to emphasize the effectiveness of the safety measures
being incorporated into today's homes and the importance of working smoke
alarms and fire safety education to prevent fires.
In California, "more than 95% of fire fatalities were in homes built 20
years ago. That's a tragedy," said Bob Raymer, technical director for the
California Building Industry Association, before a packed hearing room.
"But
the fact is, the code changes we have made over the past 20 years are
working," making homes safer than ever, he said.
"The cost of sprinklers is $10,000 to $15,000 in my community," said a
representative from Utah. "How many of you could afford to buy your house
again where you live, and then add on the price of a sprinkler system? We
need to have a balance."
Lee Schwartz, executive vice president for government relations for the
Michigan Association of Home Builders, testified that Habitat for Humanity
officials in his state voted unanimously to oppose moving fire sprinkler
requirements from the appendix to the main body of the code because of
affordability and maintenance issues.
"Many of our affiliates find they need to conduct several sessions of
maintenance classes for some of our home owners to understand even basic
home upkeep, such as changing filters on furnaces and cleaning out
gutters,
to say nothing of the original cost [of fire sprinklers] to the family,"
Habitat for Humanity of Michigan President and CEO Kenneth W. Bensen said
in
a letter to code officials.
"By raising the cost of the home and setting forth another barrier in the
way of those in the greatest need to afford a home, this requirement would
harm our mission of increasing the capacity to building simple, decent
homes
in Michigan," Bensen said.
Once it was demonstrated that smoke alarm system technology worked
reliably,
home builder association members in his state threw their support behind
measures to require the alarms in all existing homes, Schwartz added.
Home builders and code officials opposed to mandating residential fire
sprinklers have too many unanswered questions about their reliability,
installation requirements, maintenance, inspection procedures and
long-term
functionality to be able to support them, speakers said at the hearing.
Having installed fire sprinklers in a 17-home development, Don Pratt, a
Michigan builder and code official, said that "fire suppression systems
are
not ready to be installed in single-family dwellings" because of the lack
of
appropriate technology. "I plead with you; we need more time to figure out
the best system."
Other speakers said that emphasizing safety in existing homes is what's
needed to combat fire fatalities.
"Making the house safer for middle- and upper-income people [who can
afford
new homes] is not going to help low-income people" in substandard housing
or
who don't understand the importance of working smoke alarms, said a
Shreveport, La. building official. "We need to solve the problem where the
fire is. We haven't had a fire death in a year and a half because we have
a
fire chief who supports public education" on fire safety, he said.
NAHB members also emphasized that the association does not oppose fire
sprinklers and that it has asked the International Code Council to convene
an ad hoc committee to develop lower-cost alternatives to the systems that
are currently available.
NAHB also supports efforts to increase the effectiveness of smoke alarms.
"We request that ICC join NAHB in a joint working group to propose
solutions
that both our organizations could embrace and pursue to end this needless
loss of life, perhaps as part of the ICC Foundation efforts to promote
building safety," said Eric S. Borsting, NAHB Construction, Codes &
Standards Committee chair, in an April 6 letter to ICC President Wally
Bailey.
Association leaders who worked to get the home builders' pro-smoke alarm
message heard said they were pleased with the results of the vote.
"Reasonable minds have spoken," said Borsting, who attended the hearings
in
Rochester. "When our members talk to their local building officials, it
becomes very clear that there are still too many unanswered questions on
metering, plumbing, backflow - many, many issues.
"The recurring theme I heard was that building officials want a choice,
and
keeping residential fire sprinklers optional maintains that choice,"
Borsting said. "The hearing showed that home builders and code officials,
working together, are a powerful voice on behalf of new home buyers, who
overwhelmingly choose not to install fire sprinklers. We will continue to
emphasize our message of safety and affordability and the importance of
maintaining that balance."
For more information, e-mail Calli Schmidt at NAHB, or call her at
800-368-5242 x8132.
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
