Obviously Wisconsin is it's own little island relative to fire codes but at the level of the bigger picture in IBC states (presuming no diminished standards during the adoption process) we're covered for three units and above. As to the new IRC most of us have been focusing on the SFD and duplex paragraph, at least in my circle of friends (limited for sure). The townhouses have been kind of the sleepers but in the Washington fight to ensure adoption of the full IRC next year a point just came up. Unit separation walls have been reduced in townhomes from two-hour to one-hour. This is a straight-up statement not couched in some term like you can reduce IF you provide sprinklers. It is simply a proviso--one-hour separation walls--because there is no choice as to sprinklering or not. The presumption is there SHALL be sprinklers so there SHALL be that added exposure protection so passive protection has been reduced. One of those trade-offs/trade-ups if you will. If the anti-sprinkler lobby in any state manages to have the sprinkler requirement removed for townhomes without having the separation proviso also addressed we end up with "modern, fire-proof homes," with no sprinklers, no lot separation and no firewall. So now sprinklers are no longer just the owner's choice with the following question--Do I want a system that will help save my life and the lives of my family or do I want a fancy countertop or carpet? but rather--Do I have the right to endanger my neighbor's life by not providing proper exposure protection? I think if a state manages to let this go through the first next door crispy critter's survivors ought to be suing their state building code council, the state legislature that allowed the code change,the NAHB, BIA and it's local chapters and anybody else that said it costs too much.
On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 4:20 AM, John Drucker <john.druc...@verizon.net> wrote: > > Wisconsin High Court Douses Builders' Sprinkler Suit > > SEAN RYAN > The Daily Reporter (Milwaukee, WI) 05-01-2009 > > > > > In the aftermath of its failed lawsuit, the Wisconsin Builders Association > is debating whether to keep fighting state rules requiring fire sprinklers > in apartment buildings. > The Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected a WBA appeal in a lawsuit challenging > Wisconsin Department of Commerce rules requiring sprinklers in residential > buildings with more than three units. The state since March 2008 has > required sprinklers in buildings with more than eight units, but smaller > projects with eight or fewer apartments or condos will be hit hardest, said > Brad Boycks, WBA director of government and political affairs. > The rules will not affect buildings with fewer than eight units until 2011. > "Those smaller units were really the ones that we wanted (to exempt)," > Boycks said. "When you require four-plexes and eight-plexes to be > sprinklered, especially in rural communities and small communities, you are > going to make a big difference in the price. " > The association estimated in late 2006 requiring sprinklers in a three- or > four-unit building could add between $14,000 and $50,000 to the cost of the > building. > But fire-prevention associations argue the increase is tempered by savings > in other parts of the building, said Dan Gengler, north central regional > manager of the National Fire Sprinkler Association. Sprinklers reduce the > expense caused by fires, he said, such as environmental damage from smoke > and the cost of constructing new buildings. > "If a building burns to the point where it can't be occupied," he said, "it > gets torn down. " > Cost questions aside, it's worth the price to protect building residents and > firefighters, said Gengler, a retired department chief of the Milwaukee Fire > Department. He offered, as an example, a fire that hit a four-unit building > at the corner of 44th Street and North Avenue in Milwaukee on Dec. 24, 1994. > The building did not have sprinklers, and firefighter Lionel Hoffer died > when he got trapped in the building basement after the first and second > floors collapsed. > "It's not as simple as, 'Hey, it costs too much,'" Gengler said. "It's not > that simple. I understand that argument and respect that argument, but if > somebody had a cure for cancer, would you pay?" > The WBA's leadership will meet Thursday to consider its next move, which > might be to ask the state Legislature to reverse Commerce's rules, said WBA > President Douglas Scott, president of Amwood Homes Inc. and Advantage Homes > Inc., both based in Janesville. Any lobbying attempt would face opposition > from the governor's office and fire-prevention associations, he said. > But the WBA lawsuit was about more than just sprinkler rules, Scott said. > The lawsuit also challenged Commerce's ability to change state rules covered > in statutes, he said. > "There is a pattern that the Department of Commerce is changing laws with > rules and that's why the WBA pursued this," Scott said. "We do not feel the > Department of Commerce should change what the laws have been. " > The WBA has the same concern about Commerce's new rules, unveiled March 2, > requiring contractors to get state certified by July 1, Scott said. But the > Wisconsin Supreme Court decision on sprinklers does not bode well for the > potential to challenge the certification rules, he said. > "The Supreme Court would probably also think that (Commerce) could implement > contractor licenses," Scott said. "There are other implications for what the > outcome of the sprinkler decision was. " > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: techsupp...@firesprinkler.org > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman at home.... _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: techsupp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
