Will Fire Sprinklers Be Mandatory in New Homes in 2011?
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
At a recent meeting of the International Code Council a motion was approved to make fire sprinklers mandatory for homes in 2011, a scant 2 years away. The mandate will add the added expense to new home construction for 1 and 2 family homes to gain an additional layer of safety in the event of a fire.
Sounds noble, right?
But what the cost. A study shows the cost of installation of a sprinkler system will add another $1.61 per square foot of space, not to mention the cost on inspection and maintenance over the life of the system. And what happens when the roast starts smoking, will the sprinkler go off?
If the risk of water damage from a faulty system is added in, will insurance premiums spike? Or will the sprinkler system actually lower those premiums as fire damage will be reduced?
These question should be answered before another unfunded mandate is pushed by an anonymous regulatory agency on American homeowners.
Supporters of the code change say sprinklers increase the amount of time people have to get out their homes during a fire by preventing flashover, which occurs when the temperature in a room reaches a point where all combustible materials burst into flames. “This is just the most wonderful step forward because it’s going to ensure that more families have access to the one technology we know can save their lives in a devastating home fire,” says Meri-K Appy, president of the Home Safety Council, a nonprofit in Washington that promotes prevention of accidental home injuries.
But the National Association of Home Builders says there isn’t enough evidence to support making sprinklers mandatory, which will also increase the cost of the home and require maintenance by homeowners. “We disagree with this mandate, but our members will continue to advocate for cost-effective construction and life safety measures through the model code process,” NAHB President Sandra Dunn said in a statement. via WSJ.com
It probably is a really good time to buy real estate - monthly payments are about equal to market rents ...
The part about the inventory is right on but in my area they are mostly low end and beat up ...
I worked for this man, he is a great con man and has done this in more than States then ...
You're right. If you come from Central Jersey (as the Boss and I do), you go to Florida at some ...
Maybe it was kryptonite...
ECONOMIC REPORT
'Prolonged' recession, higher joblessness seen likely
NABE survey indicates most economists now believe U.S. recession's started
By Mike ...
I couldn't agree more.
The newspaper has always "stuck" it to the real estate agent with rates that were much higher ...
By the way, homeowners trying to get short sale approval should be aware that lenders are comparing the initial loan ...
Ouch! Thankfully I haven't come across anything like that yet. We normally don't have situations like that in ...
well, the guy was here illegally.
serves him right. 
BY USING FIRST CLAIM INSURANCE ADJUSTERS YOU WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT YOUR INSURANCE SETTLEMENT AND REALIZE FIRST ...
Comment by Maria Figueroa on 28 September 2008:
To comment on the following quote:
“And what happens when the roast starts smoking, will the sprinkler go off?”
The answer to your quetion is no. Sprinklers are activated by a high level of heat indicating a fire; they are not activated by smoke. So, while I hope that the smoking roast does not mean dinner is ruined, no need to worry about the sprinkler system activating over that smoking roast.
On another note, I just had my floors replaced with wood laminates at a cost of $4.00 sq ft. I think the cost factor in the sprinkler debate should be a moot point, since life safety is worth much more than the cost of a sprinkler system per square foot. Wouldn’t you agree?
Comment by Tom Royce on 28 September 2008:
Thanks for the comment Maria.
For those who do not know, Maria does have a dog in this fight as her bio states:
Figueroa will support fire prevention activities nationwide with a special focus on supporting NFPA’s work involving the adoption of residential sprinklers ordinances.
http://www.nfpa.org/newsReleaseDetails.asp?categoryid=488&itemId=40624&cookie%5Ftest=1
Comment by John on 29 September 2008:
That’s just what we need. More forced expenses for real estate investors, developers and builders. The problem is, it increases the prices of already overpriced new homes and cuts even more first-time homebuyers out of the running. It would be a great option for those willing to pay by why force it on everyone? I know http://www.uslandco.com has a petition against this measure.
Comment by Seanster on 2 October 2008:
Fire alarm system ( these is where fire sprinklers belong) is a very important gadget that a home should have. Aside from it saves your home it also save lives…
Comment by Robert Mahoney on 11 October 2008:
There has NEVER BEEN A LOSS OF LIFE DUE TO FIRE in a fully sprinklered building in which the system is maintained and fully operational. The figure given, of 1.61 per square foot, multiplied by 2,000 sq. ft. and amortized over 30 years at 6% interest is about $19 per month- a small price to pay for such effective insurance against fire death.
That said, I am strongly against government doing pretty much anything other than building roads, protecting property rights and delivering mail (slight exaggeration of position). While I feel residential sprinklers are a really good idea- even though their mandate would benefit myself greatly, as I own a fire sprinkler contracting firm (Applied Fire Safety, Inc., serving all of Southern California!)– Let the homeowner choose.