Mandatory as of January, 2011. I wrote about this a year or so ago but received a call today from a client who is trying to build a modest new home and was distressed to learn of the requirement. This article says such a system will add $5,000 to the cost of construction. I’ve heard estimates of $15,000. Everyone wants a safe home, but it’s one thing to mandate $15 smoke detectors – this new law is nuts.
“The fire survival rate in homes with working smoke detectors is 99.41 percent, according to the NFPA. Toss in a sprinkler, and the rate rises to 99.6 percent.”
Advertisement
Insane and one can only assume that the legislator that pushed this nonsense was related to a contractor. Local graft at its finest…
It is insane. Let people live their lives the way they wish. Period.
On top of it, the vast majority of the legislators that pass idiocy like this do not have to live by it. I’d better stop now; otherwise I might sink into bad-language mode…
And how much will they mandate that your homeowner’s insurance be reduced when you install this wonderful system?
…..crickets………
R. IB’er
read the d*m article and see where builders stand on this matter.
Hey duff,
Every builder… including one’s related to legislators? Moreover, been on the inside of stories too many times to trust what I read in the papers, but thanks for the suggestion none the less.
Ib’r, this is the new federal requirement, but it will be imposed on the states and localities.
What the NFPA actually said:
“Fire sprinkler opponents have been using a statistic of 99.45 percent to illustrate the effectiveness of smoke alarms in reducing home fire deaths. This NFPA statistic estimates the likelihood of surviving a home fire when a working smoke alarm is present. Taken completely out of context, a number like 99.45% sounds very high. But consider this:
• The total home fire death toll of roughly 3,000 deaths a year occurs in roughly 400,000
reported home fires a year. Therefore, the likelihood of surviving a home fire is over 99%
without regard to the presence of smoke alarms or any other fire safety provisions. Does
that mean 3,000 deaths are acceptable? Most people would say no.
• Back in 1977, the first year where we have comparable statistics, the annual home fire
death toll was nearly 6,000 per year and less than one home in four had smoke alarms,
but the survival rate from reported fires was 99.2%. Does that mean we should not have
bothered with smoke alarms either?”
http://www.ircfiresprinkler.org/docs/baltimorehearingdocs/nfpa_comments_on_RB53-RB57.pdf
“One issue that may ultimately shift the perspective of builders towards residential fire sprinklers is legal liability. Regardless of whether a state or locality chooses to amend fire sprinkler requirements out of the IRC, courts may well hold that it is incumbent upon builders to follow established standards of care for fire safety when they construct a new home. With EVERY national code now requiring EVERY new residential property to be equipped with fire sprinklers, that standard of care is clearly established and is now well known to the industry, especially given the high profile of HBA opposition to sprinklers. Accordingly, whenever a fire involving a post-2010 home is litigated, perhaps by a grieving family or by an insurance company seeking to recoup a payout for fire damage, a decision by a builder to not include sprinklers in a new home will be easily characterized as negligent, with a deliberate indifference towards life and property that yielded a defective home.”
http://www.ircfiresprinkler.org/
Pulled Up: probably, yes. As my friend Peg says, let people decide for themselves what to pay for safety. We’re not children, and don’t need the folks in Washington to dictate to us.
Current Shoreline Pool(?) trial not quite the same, but close enough.
Sorry perhaps I should have written “national” graft at its finest, but in my defense, I believe, like in real estate, all politics are local…
Have we gone absolutely mad? sprinklers belong in commercial & institutional structures and apartment buildings inexcess of 5 units or 3 stories in height.
Litigation for buildings post 2010 w/sprinklers? Thats insane. Surely I could look around my home and find products w/o absolutely every possible safety feature….I guess thats a gold rush I’m ignoring.
Of course, no one seems to be examing the consequences of forcing builders to include the expensive sprinkler system.
How many builders will be more likely to go under because of this requirement?
How many people might end up living in an older home that otherwise is far less safe than a new home because they cannot afford to purchase a new home?
If it is so critical that people be forced to have this system when they build a new home, then shouldn’t the government make it mandatory for everyone to have such a system installed?
Let individuals decide if this expense is worth the incremental addition of safety!! Our government is literally economically choking us to death with regulation.
Don’t forget about regular maintenance and testing of the sprinkler system! It’s not as easy (or as cheap) as changing batteries in the smoke detector.
Has anyone built a new house in Greenwich lately without a sprinkler system . . . on the outside? : )
Pingback: September 30 roundup
Pulled up in OG
I don’t think people have an issue with safety, but the cost of small increase in safety. Using the stats you provided, using smoke detectors resulted in a 0.4 increase in survivability at a moderate cost of $50 per household. Now consider the sprinklers increase the survability rate 0.2% (or 60 lives a year) for a cost of $5000 per house. Strikes me as a lot of money for such a small increase. Consider 45000 people in traffic accidents in the US each year and if we could reduce that 0.2% would result in 900 more lives being saved. While any death is an unfortunate and tragic event, the world cannot be death-proofed.
Just a few notes about sprinklers:
In 1986, the city of Scottsdale, Arizona, enacted a code requirement for installation of sprinkler systems in all new single-family houses. The city now has more than 45,000 single-family homes equipped with fire sprinklers.
Below are some of the findings of the 1997 Scottsdale study (examining 44 house fires that occurred between 1985 and 1996):
The average fire loss in a house with a sprinkler system was $1,544, compared to $11,624 for houses without automatic fire sprinklers (Less work for home builders in repairing fire damage); and, one or two activated sprinkler heads controlled or extinguished the blaze in 92 percent of fires.
The Scottsdale study also examined 38 fires to determine water usage. This study found that:
The average sprinkler used 357 gallons of water per incident to extinguish a fire;
Manual fire suppression operations under similar conditions would have equaled an average of 4,884 gallons of water per incident to extinguish these same 38 fires; and,
Smaller amounts of water distributed earlier in the fire incident by automatic sprinklers had a positive effect on the extent of fire and water damage experienced in the buildings studied.
***Consider for a moment some Homebuilders also performe fire restoration work boast average profits for the restoration side of their business from $10 Million to $110 Million… Could it be that fewer burned homes would mean fewer restored or rebuilt homes meaning less profit for home builders??? Consider on average $7.5 billion in property damage due to fires in the U.S. Thats over $7.5 BILLION in REBUILDING. How will sprinklers hurt their bottom line?
The Scottsdale study referenced above also addressed the cost issue.
• The National Association of Home Builders’ (NAHB) study, which was conducted solely by NAHB for its members, shows median costs for sprinkler installation at $2.45 to $2.94 per square foot, depending on what overhead and profit was included.
• The Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF) report that was conducted two years later with a broad-based review panel including NAHB, insurers and other entities, shows home sprinkler costs ranged from $0.38 to $3.66 per square foot, depending on the type of system and geographic location, with an average cost of $1.61 per square foot.
• In Scottsdale, a reduction in installation costs was noted from $1.14 per square foot to $0.59 per square foot over the 10-year study period.
Multi-purpose residential fire sprinkler systems are potable water systems. Since the sprinklers in this type of system are part of the potable water system, their components have to meet code requirements for potable water systems in addition to those for sprinklers (the same as sinks, toliets, showers, etc.). Multipurpose systems, which combine plumbing and sprinklers into one piping network with a continuous flow of circulating water, are relatively low maintenance. They do require visual checks for leaks, and a water flow test about once a year. The Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition offers instructions for conducting a water flow test and indicates that the test can be performed by the homeowner.
Consider this:
Signal lights and headlights are safety devices REQUIRED BY LAW. So if you were in an auto accident that killed your loved one because someone wasn’t using or did not have the Safety Device Required By Law I would imagine you would be pretty upset. What if they were not required? When you buy a new car, a portion of the price is the seat belts that are required by law. It is estimated 4,200 lives could be saved each year if 90% of the U.S. population wore seat belts. Is that worth the extra you pay for the car? Smoke detectors are required by law in all new homes and rental properties. In 1976, prior to this requirment, over 6,000 deaths occured annually due to fires, now that number is around 3,000 per year. Is that worth it?
A few more facts to consider:
The death rate in homes are 45% lower when one working smoke detector is present.
46% of the occupants that lived through a fire thought their smoke detectors were working at the time.
The four most common reasons for non-working smoke detectors.
1. Disconnected batteries to prevent nuisance alarms
2. Dead batteries
3. Debris build up/obstruction
4. Component failure due to age
Sprinkler systems do not require batteries and most do not require any electrical power to operate. As long as there is water connected to the home the sprinklers will operate.
Most Americans are not aware that a smoke detector must be replaced according manufacturers recommendations. The ionization type smoke detector, which is the most common type, has a useful life of 10 years and then it is recommended that the unit(s) should be replaced.
Sprinkler systems, once installed, never have to be replaced.
One and two family dwellings are where 79% of all home 2,670 fire deaths occurred.
I am remodeling an old farm house. The lawn sprinkler system estimate for my home is $2970. The fire sprinkler system estimate for my home is $1,962. It will cost me $1000 less to protect my family from fire than it does to protect my yard from drought.
Just thoughts to consider.