mark handler
SAWHORSE
Firefighters back tighter sprinkler code in Massachusetts
http://www.gazettenet.com/print/351180
By Dan Crowley
01/04/2012 - 6:00am
Fire sprinklers save lives and contain property damage.
That's the message area fire chiefs are spreading as they join chiefs and firefighters across the state who are protesting a building code in Massachusetts that does not require sprinklers for new one- and two-family homes.
Greenfield Fire Chief Michael Winn said the technology is available and should be required, while others say the safety benefits far outweigh the costs.
"It's a one-time cost to homeowners and it will pay off big in the end if there is ever a fire," Winn said. "The cost of not requiring sprinklers ends up being much more than people imagine when there's a fire."
Winn said sprinklers, in most cases, put a fire out before it has a chance to spread.
"There is a popular misconception that when there is a fire, sprinklers will go off throughout the entire building and cause a lot of damage," he said. "That's not true. It is only in the area of the fire that the sprinklers will turn on."
Amherst Fire Chief Tim Nelson agrees and says sprinkler systems have improved significantly in recent years.
"Sprinkler systems nowadays are quite reliable," he said. "You don't have the mishaps you had many years ago."
Nelson cited a fire at Butternut Apartments in Amherst in November that firefighters quickly contained and extinguished with the help of a sprinkler system.
"It just makes good safety sense," he said.
In a letter of support for residential sprinkler systems, Northampton Fire Chief Brian Duggan told the state Board of Building Regulations and Standards that he installed a residential sprinkler in his own new home seven years ago as an example to others and as a reflection of his belief that sprinklers save lives.
Despite the close proximity of emergency responders to his home, "only the presence of a residential sprinkler system could immediately contain a fire and allow my family to escape before fire and products of combustion produce an untenable atmosphere," he wrote.
A sprinkler system, Duggan said, is almost like having a firefighter at the early stages of a fire. He also noted that there's discussion of a local option that could give municipalities the ability to require residential sprinkler systems.
"It's a new level of life safety protection that is unparalleled," Duggan said.
Long overdue
Easthampton Fire Chief David Mottor said residential sprinkler systems are "long overdue" in the state building code. He said residential fires burn hotter and are more toxic than ever because of the types of products people have in their homes today, which is one reason he supports a residential sprinkler requirement despite the added costs.
"While the costs may be more than a hardwood floor, a hardwood floor doesn't determine whether you're going to live or die," he said.
Officials from every major fire service organization in the state, including representatives from Fire Chiefs Association of Massachusetts, Fire Prevention Association of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Call-Volunteer Firefighters Association, and the Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts, gathered in Boston recently to protest the new building code.
The Board of Building Regulations and Standards announced a building code for the state in August that omitted the provision carried in some other states to require home fire sprinklers.
Charles McDonald, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, which oversees the board, said the DPH has no comment at this time about why home fire sprinklers were omitted from the new rules and regulations. He said DPH does not want to discuss the matter during the public comment period, which is still going on. More than 400 communities across the nation currently require home sprinklers in new construction. California, Maryland and South Carolina have adopted the provision statewide.
Winn said he'd like to see Massachusetts added to that list.
So would Alden Dreyer of Shelburne.
He said if nothing else, a sprinkler buys time until the fire department gets there, and, it gives residents more time to get out.
"The square footage of each room determines how many you need in each room," he said. "The cost is probably, for an average home, 2 to 3 percent more (on top of) the cost of construction.
James M. Shannon, National Fire Prevention Association president, told the Board of Building Regulations and Standards that in the last decade, there have been more than 54,000 fires in one- and two-family homes in Massachusetts, and more than 2,300 firefighters and 1,500 civilians have been injured.
Shannon said 40 percent of all firefighter injuries occur in one- and two-family homes. State Fire Marshal Stephen Coan said in 2009, there were close to 6,000 fires in one- and two-family homes in Massachusetts, which caused 23 civilian deaths, 152 civilian injuries and 207 fire service injuries.
Coan said those 6,000 fires cost an estimated $80 million in property damage.
Reports about other states that have omitted the residential sprinkler requirements say some of the reasons are that boards believe the added cost would worsen an already struggling housing market, the move would be unfair to consumers, there could be damage done to homes from accidental discharge from sprinklers, pipes could freeze, causing more financial burden to the homeowner, and some states and towns worry about the availability of water.
The cost
Winn said costs for fire sprinkler systems will vary depending on whether the home is one story or multiple stories, and on the square footage of the home.
According to the Fire Protection Research Foundation in Quincy, systems can cost between $2,400 and $16,000, or between 38 cents and $3.66 per square foot covered, an average of about $1.61 per square foot covered.
The foundation says the cost will also depend on the design of the sprinkler system, where sprinklers are installed and on permitting expenses. The good news is that there are discounts offered to homeowners who install the systems, including insurance premium discounts that can add up to $25 or more a year, or a few hundred dollars over time.
"Each time we debate the issue of residential sprinklers, the issue of construction cost dominates the discussion," Coan said. "Let's remember that there is also a cost to not requiring fire sprinklers. A significant burn injury can cost thousands, or even millions, of dollars in medical bills."
Coan said there are also high costs associated with finding alternative housing, rebuilding, losing wages, and the cost to already strained municipal budgets when firefighters suffer serious injuries.
Daily Hampshire Gazette © 2011 All rights reserved
http://www.gazettenet.com/print/351180
By Dan Crowley
01/04/2012 - 6:00am
Fire sprinklers save lives and contain property damage.
That's the message area fire chiefs are spreading as they join chiefs and firefighters across the state who are protesting a building code in Massachusetts that does not require sprinklers for new one- and two-family homes.
Greenfield Fire Chief Michael Winn said the technology is available and should be required, while others say the safety benefits far outweigh the costs.
"It's a one-time cost to homeowners and it will pay off big in the end if there is ever a fire," Winn said. "The cost of not requiring sprinklers ends up being much more than people imagine when there's a fire."
Winn said sprinklers, in most cases, put a fire out before it has a chance to spread.
"There is a popular misconception that when there is a fire, sprinklers will go off throughout the entire building and cause a lot of damage," he said. "That's not true. It is only in the area of the fire that the sprinklers will turn on."
Amherst Fire Chief Tim Nelson agrees and says sprinkler systems have improved significantly in recent years.
"Sprinkler systems nowadays are quite reliable," he said. "You don't have the mishaps you had many years ago."
Nelson cited a fire at Butternut Apartments in Amherst in November that firefighters quickly contained and extinguished with the help of a sprinkler system.
"It just makes good safety sense," he said.
In a letter of support for residential sprinkler systems, Northampton Fire Chief Brian Duggan told the state Board of Building Regulations and Standards that he installed a residential sprinkler in his own new home seven years ago as an example to others and as a reflection of his belief that sprinklers save lives.
Despite the close proximity of emergency responders to his home, "only the presence of a residential sprinkler system could immediately contain a fire and allow my family to escape before fire and products of combustion produce an untenable atmosphere," he wrote.
A sprinkler system, Duggan said, is almost like having a firefighter at the early stages of a fire. He also noted that there's discussion of a local option that could give municipalities the ability to require residential sprinkler systems.
"It's a new level of life safety protection that is unparalleled," Duggan said.
Long overdue
Easthampton Fire Chief David Mottor said residential sprinkler systems are "long overdue" in the state building code. He said residential fires burn hotter and are more toxic than ever because of the types of products people have in their homes today, which is one reason he supports a residential sprinkler requirement despite the added costs.
"While the costs may be more than a hardwood floor, a hardwood floor doesn't determine whether you're going to live or die," he said.
Officials from every major fire service organization in the state, including representatives from Fire Chiefs Association of Massachusetts, Fire Prevention Association of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Call-Volunteer Firefighters Association, and the Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts, gathered in Boston recently to protest the new building code.
The Board of Building Regulations and Standards announced a building code for the state in August that omitted the provision carried in some other states to require home fire sprinklers.
Charles McDonald, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, which oversees the board, said the DPH has no comment at this time about why home fire sprinklers were omitted from the new rules and regulations. He said DPH does not want to discuss the matter during the public comment period, which is still going on. More than 400 communities across the nation currently require home sprinklers in new construction. California, Maryland and South Carolina have adopted the provision statewide.
Winn said he'd like to see Massachusetts added to that list.
So would Alden Dreyer of Shelburne.
He said if nothing else, a sprinkler buys time until the fire department gets there, and, it gives residents more time to get out.
"The square footage of each room determines how many you need in each room," he said. "The cost is probably, for an average home, 2 to 3 percent more (on top of) the cost of construction.
James M. Shannon, National Fire Prevention Association president, told the Board of Building Regulations and Standards that in the last decade, there have been more than 54,000 fires in one- and two-family homes in Massachusetts, and more than 2,300 firefighters and 1,500 civilians have been injured.
Shannon said 40 percent of all firefighter injuries occur in one- and two-family homes. State Fire Marshal Stephen Coan said in 2009, there were close to 6,000 fires in one- and two-family homes in Massachusetts, which caused 23 civilian deaths, 152 civilian injuries and 207 fire service injuries.
Coan said those 6,000 fires cost an estimated $80 million in property damage.
Reports about other states that have omitted the residential sprinkler requirements say some of the reasons are that boards believe the added cost would worsen an already struggling housing market, the move would be unfair to consumers, there could be damage done to homes from accidental discharge from sprinklers, pipes could freeze, causing more financial burden to the homeowner, and some states and towns worry about the availability of water.
The cost
Winn said costs for fire sprinkler systems will vary depending on whether the home is one story or multiple stories, and on the square footage of the home.
According to the Fire Protection Research Foundation in Quincy, systems can cost between $2,400 and $16,000, or between 38 cents and $3.66 per square foot covered, an average of about $1.61 per square foot covered.
The foundation says the cost will also depend on the design of the sprinkler system, where sprinklers are installed and on permitting expenses. The good news is that there are discounts offered to homeowners who install the systems, including insurance premium discounts that can add up to $25 or more a year, or a few hundred dollars over time.
"Each time we debate the issue of residential sprinklers, the issue of construction cost dominates the discussion," Coan said. "Let's remember that there is also a cost to not requiring fire sprinklers. A significant burn injury can cost thousands, or even millions, of dollars in medical bills."
Coan said there are also high costs associated with finding alternative housing, rebuilding, losing wages, and the cost to already strained municipal budgets when firefighters suffer serious injuries.
Daily Hampshire Gazette © 2011 All rights reserved
