Home fire sprinkler debate: Should the market drive changes to safety codes?

Pantagraph.com reports that in January, Bloomington, IL aldermen rejected mandatory sprinkler installation, instead opting for the “mandatory option,” pushed by the Bloomington-Normal Area Home Builders Association.

Guy DiCiaula, project manager for Kaisner Homes, claims that customers are turned off by the extra cost and that they don’t see the value. Mark Huber, Bloomington’s director of Planning and Code Enforcement, said he doesn’t think homebuilders are working very hard to market sprinkler systems but are pushing other amenities, like granite countertops.

Should fire sprinklers systems, included in all minimum fire, life safety and construction national model codes be sold as an amenity like granite countertops? Di Caula says that features like granite countertops are driven by the market and that customers want them, no matter the cost.

Bill Wetzel, chairman of the Construction Board of Contruction said; “it’s clear the market must drive any change to city codes but…the mandatory option could help change the market.”

What do you think? Should safety codes be market driven? Why? Why not? The debate continues and this issue will come up again. Are you prepared to make the case either way? Share your comments here with us.

Maria Figueroa

Comments

[Robby Dawson]

This is an interesting debate. Let's look back at how all the other safety components of buildings got included in the code and how many of those were "market driven"? My guess is none, but I could be wrong.

Now look at how many neighborhoods have requirements for lawn sprinklers, brick exteriors, specific landscaping, custom roofing materials.... I haven't seen many builders saying those things should be market driven.

My guess is the margins on those items make them more lucrative for the builder where sprinkler systems can't get the same margins (profit) for the builder.

If they really want a market driving building code, builders should be singing the same song for energy conservation, wall bracing, structural strength, plumbing fixtures, electrical service . . . .

[Pat Coughlin]

Market research from the Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition has indicated that 25 percent of people are interested in getting residential sprinklers. If sprinklers were marketed correctly to home buyers, home builders should see some results.

To my knowledge, home builders using the mandated option have had no success at all. Over the years, firefighters who have approached home builders and realtors in model homes report that the sales personnel had no positive information about sprinklers and quoted egregiously high estimates.

There is a way to "sell" sprinklers, but the sales staff must first be knowledgeable about the subject and be motivated to promote the product.

The plumbing industry has a sales advantage that sprinkler contractors lack. They can offer sprinklers as a plumbing "upgrade," similar to how countertop and other upgrades are offered. Motivated home builders could offer home buyers better plumbing at lower prices and increase their profits. Sadly, they remain focused on fighting residential sprinklers instead of learning how to market them.

[Don Lucas]

Has the insurance industry taking an official stand on this issue? My understanding is that insurance companies are concerned about leaks and freeze damage from the installations, therefore, they are not offering discounts to owners who install sprinklers. Supposedly, any potential savings in fire damage are offset by an increase in water damage from leaks or freeze ups. If annual premium discounts were available to homeowners, this would appear to be a much easier "sale"

[Maria Figueroa]

Mr. Lucas,
The insurance industry has taken an official position on this. They will provide discounts (which vary between companies) to the fire portion of a home insurance policy if there are fire sprinklers present. On the contrary, when cities do not adopt the minimum residential code requiring fire sprinklers in all new homes, everyone's insurance rates my increase.

Fire damage is more extensive and the water damage is also greater with no fire sprinklers. Sprinklers decrease fire property damage by about 70% when activated during a fire. Water used during a fire is reduced by 90%, due to sprinkler flows of 26-28 gallons per minute (gpm) vs. firefighter hoses delivering an average of 250 gpm.

I encourage you to visit the resources section of this site to read numerous studies pointing to the same conclusion; fire sprinkler requirements offer many benefits for people and communities. Most importantly, they save lives.