|
|
 |
Flashpoint blog: December 2008 |
|
Written by Peter Sells
|
Dec. 17, 2008 - Those of you who have been following this blog and the FlashPoint column (my sincere thanks to you all) will know that this writer and Fire Fighting in Canada are advocates of residential sprinklers.
So the news that the International Code Council (ICC) has rejected an appeal filed by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), which would have kept requirements for residential sprinklers out of the International Residential Code (IRC), is welcome news. One more domino has fallen.
The appeal was not based on the technical merits of sprinklers or their effects on the cost of housing, it was a procedural motion protesting that firefighters should not have been credentialed as voting governmental members of the ICC. Not being in that loop, I can’t comment on the validity of the appeal but I certainly have an opinion – big surprise – on whether firefighters should be considered stakeholders on this issue. After all, who is tasked with saving lives and protecting property in residential fires? Who risks life and limb crawling down hallways and hoping they don’t flash over before the child is found? Whose mission will become more effective and less hazardous when residential sprinklers are mandated?
Those aren’t my questions for you today. Those are too easy. My question is this:
“With the current economic downturn expected to get worse before it gets better, is this the right time to push for the inclusion of requirements for residential sprinklers in the IRC and other codes?”
Please feel free to answer that question and start a discussion on this blog. Here’s my answer:
According to the Canadian Real Estate Association, the average house price in the major markets in this country in October was down 10.9 per cent year-over-year compared to October 2007. Since 2002, this same housing price index has averaged an increase of 8.6 per cent each year.
The Home Fire Sprinkler Cost Assessment released in September by the Fire Protection Research Foundation determined an average cost of US$1.61 per square foot for sprinkler installations in nine representative communities across the U.S. and Canada. Some were higher, due to factors such as well-water systems, which would require upgrading. Some were much lower, including one community in "Caleefohnya" where sprinklers are already required and contractor costs have come down with the volume of work and competition.
So the economic argument would go like this: The impact on housing cost right now would be two per cent, maybe three per cent depending on the market in any given community. The market is down more than 10 per cent from last year. So the increase in cost would not even be visible to the buyer, the house would still be tens of thousands of dollars less expensive than before all this stuff hit the fan. So the timing is right. That, however, is not my complete answer. My complete answer is that now is the right time, last year was the right time and next year will be the right time.
The time is always right to do the right thing for the right reasons.
I wish the best of the season to all of you and a very safe and happy New Year.
A version of the Home Fire Sprinkler Cost Assessment released in September is available for download in PDF format:
FireSprinklerCostAssessment.pdf
Source: www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/
Research/FireSprinklerCostAssessment.pdf
|
Tony Porcaro
Written by Tony Porcaro on 2009-01-25 12:44:01
The sprinkler issue is becoming a political football (no surprise in Ontario); witness all of the resistance and excuses given in the Toronto Star Opinion page on the sprinkler system debate(following the recent retirement home deaths); and these are defenceless, vulnerable seniors, not urban or rural residents, who are apparently not important enough to deserve the protection provided by sprinklers! | Guest
Written by Guest on 2009-01-18 17:17:36
What was not said was the year before this passed, it was also up for a vote but the Homebuilders Association rallied and paid anyone's way who could vote on the change to the hearings if they voted against it. I personally saw the invitiation. Well they succeeded. This past hearing the fire service tried the same tactics with success, and now the Homebuilders are crying foul. We beat them at their own game and now they don't like it. We've won the battle but the war is just beginning. | Brian Walsh (OMFPOA Director)
Written by Brian Walsh (OMFPOA Director) on 2009-01-12 16:37:37
I'm a Director of the Ontario Municipal Fire Prevention Officers Association. This is an excerpt of an open letter to the Premier of Ontario, on the call for mandatory residential sprinklers to be mandated by our building code in all new residential buildings....
Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation studies and reports conducted over the past 25 yrs. identify the prohibitive cost per life saved implications of mandating residential sprinklers in multi-unit and single dwelling unit occupancies. These reports refer to “a public willingness to pay for safety threshold”, that in the case of residential sprinklers is far above what other previously mandated public safety provisions (e.g car seat belts, child clothing textile flammability requirements, etc) have cost, even though these same reports do estimate a further 38.5% reduction in the fire fatality rate could be realised.
Notwithstanding the additional costs of construction and maintenance of residential sprinklers, (previously identified as a barrier to implementing mandatory sprinklering requirements), the 1995 model National Building Code (mNBC) was altered to require residential sprinklers in all new residential construction over 3 storeys. This regulatory change, along with the similar harmonizing changes presently being proposed for the Ontario Building Code (OBC), demonstrates that currently there is a public and political will, and recognition of the importance and benefits residential sprinklers provide. These existing national requirements, and proposed provincial changes, while supported by all fire services across the country as finally going in the right direction, do not go far enough to ultimately address the fire risk to those occupancies that the fire loss statistics historically tell us suffer the highest rates of fire incidence, highest fire fatality and injury rates, and property loss percentages of value.
In January of this year, you yourself acknowledged that the province of Ontario is the last jurisdiction in the country (and in fact all of North America) to address the requirement for residential sprinklers in high-rise residential buildings. You identified Ontario as a laggard. The Ontario legislature has already shown it’s willingness to move forward with regulatory changes associated with the call for residential sprinklers as demonstrated by their previous support of MPP Linda Jeffrey’s private members bills, (Bill 141, the Home Fire Sprinkler Act, 2004 and Bill 2, Home Fire Sprinkler Act, 2005) over the past few years. The Province has also demonstrated that it is not uncommon for regulatory changes to be approved in the OBC that add costs to the price of construction. Mandating energy efficiency and environmental conservation requirements as well as accessibility requirements, have had an impact on the cost of all construction, but have been justified and accepted as being for the public good and for the good of the environment. Looking at the demographics of the population of Ontario we also see that we are facing an aging population of residents. As time passes, an ever increasing percentage of the population will fall into the higher risk category of older adults, a group more susceptible to suffering injury and death as a result of the dangers of fire.
If you believe we have been lagging behind the rest of the country and North America on the issue of residential sprinklers, now is the time to show that we can be a regulatory leader and extend these requirements to include all new residential construction.
With the above in mind, the Ontario Municipal Fire Prevention Officers Association (OMFPOA) call for the current consultation process on proposed OBC changes to require residential sprinklers in high-rise residential occupancies be expanded to include all new residential occupancies including single family dwellings. This call is consistent with and supported by the position papers and statements recently issued by, the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs, the Ontario Fire Marshal, Fire Safe Ontario, the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the US Fire Administrator, NFPA and other recognized organizations.
The above proposal could, above and beyond the obvious benefits of realizing further substantial reductions in the fire fatality rate and property loss values, also be shown to provide cost saving alternatives and/or trade-offs to construction requirements and methods, some of which are already reflected in the proposed amendments. Another example would be the benefit residential fire sprinklers bring as a solution to a structural sufficiency problem confirmed through recent National Research Council (NRC) testing results that show unprotected pre-engineered wood floor trusses, which are now being used extensively in new home construction, fail substantially quicker than solid wood floor trusses. Residential sprinklers could be seen as providing an alternative solution to the potential of costly drywall protection of wood truss members while at the same time providing property and contents protection for occupants, as well as responding firefighter safety. Considerations could also be given to the alternative solution residential sprinklers might present to the existing requirements for installation and maintenance of occupant hose cabinets in high-rise residential buildings.
Fire Sprinkler technology has demonstrated it’s effectiveness for over 125 years, and in all occupancy types. Their effectiveness and value have also been clearly demonstrated in the residential occupancy setting, for those municipalities like Vancouver and Scottsdale, which have passed Bylaws mandating their installation. A response to public calls for this important legislative change is certainly long overdue, with coroner jury recommendations such as the McNutt inquest dating back to 1994.
Even the most vocal opposition to this call for action, which generally comes from the Ontario Home Builder Associations, have voiced no major objections other than the cost implications, which we have seen can be overcome.
Recent amendments to the Manitoba Building Code, as a result of the death of two firefighters killed during a single family dwelling fire last year, now calls for a fire rated separation to be built between a house and its attached garage, with a garage mounted heat detector to be interconnected with the internal home smoke alarms. A fire in the garage activating the heat detector also causes the interior smoke alarms to sound. This interconnection is designed to provide occupant early warning with the fire separation providing time for the occupants to escape and quickly notify the local fire service. This is a positive code change in the interest of life and property protection, is supported by the Manitoba Home Builders Association and is estimated to cost an average of $2000 - $3000 per new home. Alternatively, here in Ontario for an average additional cost of only $1000 more, the new home could be fully sprinkler protected affording enhanced property and contents protection, life safety of both the occupants and responding fire crews.
All residential dwellings currently have the early detection and warning protection afforded by the mandatory need for smoke alarms on all storeys of the home. Newer homes require these smoke alarms to be electrically hard wired and interconnected so they all sound simultaneously. The next reasonable step in the pursuit of improved life, property and contents protection from fire (with the added advantage of increased firefighter safety) is the residential fire sprinklering of all new homes.
The contents found in an average home of today have also drastically changed the impact and consequences of a fire as compared to as few as 20 yrs ago. Interior finishes such as, upholsteries, carpets, laminates, and contents made of synthetic foams and plastics result in fires that burn hotter, quicker, and produce higher concentrations of toxic smoke, posing a higher risk to occupants and responding firefighters alike. 10 yrs ago the average estimated time for a safe evacuation from a home fire was 10 –
12 minutes. With today’s materials and interior finishes, that safe evacuation time is now down to 3 minutes so regardless of the quality or design of the home, it is the contents and the human behaviour that is the issue and residential sprinklers are a simple proven solution to these issues.
It is clear to the fire service, even more dramatically during this recent period when the fire fatality rate in Ontario has ballooned, that the time for mandatory residential fire sprinklers in all new homes has come.
We have the technology, we have the public and political will, we have the people and resources to make it happen; we also have the honourable rationale and justification of saving lives and protecting property. The only thing we don’t have, is a very good answer to the question…what are we waiting for?
| Written by Peter Sells on 2009-01-08 12:04:40
My thanks to Ken, Dan and the two anonymous Guests for your comments in support of residential sprinklers. To Lawrence, I can see that you are not one to stumble blindly into important career decisions. Good for you, keep doing your research. My gut feeling; and that is all that it is, so please don't rely solely on my opinion; is that there will be lots of work in sprinklers in Ontario that didn't exist before, then it will reach a peak and will level off. Sprinklers in residential highrise have already been mandatory everywhere else in Canada for some time, so the work will continue to wax and wane with the construction industry. The big money would be in getting your certification and eventually starting your own company down the road. Here is a great industry link for the Canadian Automatic Sprinkler Association's careers page...good luck to you - you will be saving lives as surely as those of us in uniform!
| R. NordickGuest
Written by R. NordickGuest on 2009-01-08 10:18:18
I agree with an eqarlier comment that installing residential sprinklers is a "no brainer"; more so now than ever. The type of construction in homes today, plus the average size of the homes increasing by three fold, the distance of large, new developments being created from a fire department and the density of soem of these developments coupled with the fact that when one acquires a mortgage what real difference does three or four thousand dollars make to monthly payments....hmmmm yes, a no brainer indeed. | Chief
Written by Chief on 2009-01-07 19:23:55
I could not agree more,it has always been time to make it mandatory to install sprinklers in new residential buildings,all buildings that have a fuel load should be sprinkled.It should become part of normal building practice,like windows,doors,or any other piece you can name.We have introduced so many toxic gas generators into modern buildings it should be a no brainer we use all the resources available to prevent that material from burning! | Mike Phares
Written by Mike Phares on 2009-01-07 18:49:32
If they don't think firefighters should have a say about residential sprinklers, wait until firefighters start dying from floors collapsing that were supported by engineered wood supports. In general -- and forgive my bluntness -- but the home building community puts profts first and safety second. | Dan Cook
Written by Dan Cook on 2009-01-07 16:46:27
After over 40 years serving as a volunteer, paid call, and the last 32 as a career firefighter I stand by residential sprinkler systems. I built a new house in in the mid-90s and had residential sprinklers installed, even though the code didn't call for it. My neighbour building at the same time put in exotic hardwood floors while I opted for maple that I installed myself. My costs of the floor and sprinklers were considerably cheaper then my neighbours costs for the floors alone. It's all about your priorities I guess. Mine would be the safety of my family and even 30 or 40 years down the road when I have sold the house, knowing that it may save a young firefighter from severe injury or death. Dan | Lawrence
Written by Lawrence on 2009-01-06 17:19:10
Hi, I am interested in fire protection and sprinkler system design. However, before I devote my entire time to study in this industry I need to know if there is potential jobs. If sprinklers systems will soon be mandatory in new condos and new homes, it will be worthwhile for me to study. Can anyone shine some light on this, please? My background is automation & robotics, currently working as a CAD operator with a tool design company. thanks. Lawrence | Ken Freiburger
Written by Ken Freiburger on 2009-01-06 06:35:01
It is always the right time to install residential sprinklers.In 2005 I built a 2800sq ft home in a rural setting and it cost about 10,000 dollars including up grades do to rural setting.With the cost savings in insurance it should take about 10yrs.I was in the fire service for 35yrs.and have been there and seen what flash over can do.The time is NOW.
The best
Ken Freiburger | Guest
Written by Guest on 2009-01-05 18:53:33
How much does it cost to put in new kitchen cabinets, or a lawn sprinkler system? Much less than the cost of a residential sprinkler system without the insurance break, and the built-in life safety factor. Come on guys and gals, it's a no brainer. | Written by Peter Sells on 2009-01-02 10:59:16
Residential sprinklers in a rural setting, or even a suburban setting, would make even more sense than in a dense urban environment. Your point about multi-family occupancies is well-taken, but most fire deaths occur in single-family homes. The longer response times and inherently complex water supply logistics associated with rural firefighting are also factors which scream out for sprinklers. As an example, the November 2008 fire in West Lincoln, Ontario which took the lives of a mother and seven children is probably more representative of the fire risk in the average Canadian community than is anything which happens in Toronto or Vancouver. Whether those lives could have been saved by an investment of a few thousand dollars is somewhat of a moot point, but preventing further tragedies is not.
The only reason I made mention of the well water supply was to illustrate the range of costs of sprinkler systems, not to alienate or exclude any communities. In fact, by making such mention I acknowledged that some communities would have higher costs, so I was recognizing that this is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Here is an excerpt from the Home Fire Sprinkler Cost Assessment:
"The high end of this cost range ($3.66/sprinklered SF) represents a Colorado house on well water and a system constructed with copper piping which utilized anti-freeze for freeze protection during the winter. These costs include all costs to the builder associated with the sprinkler system including design, installation, and other costs such as permits, additional equipment, and increased tap and water meter fees – to the extent that they apply."
| Denny
Written by Denny on 2009-01-01 07:29:44
Now that there building houses out of sawdust&glue the demand for sprinklers has never been greater, | Guest
Written by Guest on 2008-12-31 18:03:20
After 28 years as a volunteer fire fighter, and 10 as Deputy Fire Chief, I certainly won't argue with the value and benefits of residential sprinkler systems, I find it rather interesting how lightly those not impacted by it can brush off the issue of residences serviced by on-site wells as opposed to gravity fed central water systems. It is very easy for those with no understanding of this situation to underestimate its importance and the probable cost. To simply state they "will require some upgrade" with no further explanation is rather unfair to those who have no choice in this matter.
Can I suggest that rather than alienate or disadvantage a huge proportion of the North American population, the rural resident, which represents a very smsll part of the totsl fire problem, focus this effort on the multi-dwelling- unit structure where the actions of one resident can have dire consequences on all the other innocent residents. It seems to me that this would not only be much more productive in terms of fire injury and death reduction, but would also be much easier legislation to enforce and their long-term serviceability would be much easier to ensure. | Jim Phelan
Written by Jim Phelan on 2008-12-31 15:53:04
The Canadian Fire Service must never let up on the push to have Residential Sprinklers Systems made manditory. It's about saving lives. |
|
|
|
