RSS
Home
Texas home builders fight life safety
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
2005 multiple unit apartment fire with no sprinklers present. Courtesy South Milwaukee Fire Department
The Texas Association of Builders has demonstrated their only concern for homeowners is their choices. They managed to have included in the bill that waits on Governor Rick Perry’s desk a provision that would retroactively prohibit local communities from passing local codes that require residential sprinkler systems. This bill was originally meant to reform plumbing licenses.
Interesting how something as unrelated to licenses as a prohibition on sprinkler systems can be included into a piece of legislation.
I wrote in an earlier article about the push many state builders’ association have been making in banning the local government’s control of building codes.
And each time, each time these builders groups come to the legislative houses, they bring with them the load of fluff that they are looking to save homeowners money. REALLY?!?!
Again, the refutation of this information, when the total cost of ownership is considered, the cost of rebuilding a home following a fire, and the upgrade charges a building can charge for any change, addition or deletion of an item on the build list of a home, the builders associations’ claims are dishonest.
The average estimate for a residential sprinkler system is roughly figured at 10% of the cost of the home, not including the upgrades, flooring, lighting, painting, finishing, or other niceties, just the price of wood and sheathing. A home at $300,000 turn-key finished, will probably run around $120,000 for that which is necessary for it to be called a home. Take the 10% from that, and the cost is $12,000 for the system. This translates to $33 per month on a 30 year mortgage. This cost is fixed.
Homeowners insurance offers discounts of up to 15% per year for such safety systems. An annual policy runs near $600 per year, with 15%, or $90 discounted. This savings will only increase over time, as most insurance costs steadily rise over time. This is an increasing benefit.
"Sprinklers work to put out the fires, but smoke alarms save lives," said Scott Norman, executive director of the Texas Association of Builders. The one question I would love to ask this guy is what tree has he been sleeping under. Working smoke detectors or not, there have been fatal fires in homes with working smoke detectors, as well as in homes without them. There have been no fire related fatalities in any occupancy that had a functioning fire sprinkler system. If a fire cannot grow, it cannot increase in size to the point that it will threaten the structure, prohibiting the occupants from escaping. Mr. Norman is following a very predictable path in defending his income. No sprinklers mean larger rebuilding contracts, and consequently, larger sums of money into his organization.
Homebuilders refuse to consider the emotional impact of a fire on a family. If this were not the case, they would be busy pushing through any legislative assistance to REQUIRE residential sprinklers. I stand by the statement they are only concerned about their income. If a homebuilder were concerned about the safety of the families for whom they are building homes, they would DEMAND that residential sprinkler systems were standard equipment in all homes. However, they say that smoke detectors are what save lives, in the face of the mountain of data that indicates smoke detectors are a paltry second to the record of saved lives when compared to functioning fire sprinklers.
For these groups to claim they are simply looking to provide homeowners with the choice of whether or not to have this essential life safety system in their homes is without merit. To use this line of logic, it would be possible to remove smoke detectors, ground-fault interrupted circuits (GFCI), proper grounding of electrical circuits, proper venting of sewer gases, proper heating and ventilation systems, and any number of other building code requirements. All building codes have been developed and implemented over the course of many years based on experiences and a best practice to correct noted deficiencies, with the intent of protecting consumers. Take any one thing in your home, research how and why that particular system was develop and designed. The builders’ associations fail to meet the basic logic of argument development when they fight this issue. If it were left up to them, thatch roofs and mud bricks would be perfectly fine materials for all of us.
A builder makes more money when you change the plan. It is that simple. When I built my home, I read the contract before I signed. I made a list of items that would be changed, requested estimates and worked out the details. I then included this list with the contract as my addendum, and there were no charges. This is ten years ago, and I know that my little antics with the contract may have contributed to the push for changes to the statewide builders contract in use, but it worked. By my estimation, I saved over $1,000 in change fees—the money I would pay the builder to pay more to have my home built. A $10,000 sprinkler system with a 5% up-charge would be a nice $500 “gimme” to a builder who does nothing more than picks up a phone and calls the contractor.
Then it all boils down, the reason builders’ associations are against home fire sprinkler ordinances at the local level is simple, greed. I stand by my statements. Any person who has the power to save lives, but fights against it at every turn in such dramatic ways leaves more questions about their actions than answers.
If the claim is to save homeowners money, why charge more for a life safety feature every home should have. If choice is the claim, why stop with just this item, and not include all items required under code as a choice. If earning greater sums of money on a safety feature all homes should have then include in any legislation that takes away local code enactment rights a prohibition of any builder surcharges or change fees. In many states, the argument against the federal government is that big government is bad, so how does a state law prohibiting a local government’s right to make their own rules different from the federal government regulating the state?
All people need to contact their state elected officials and tell them to support the rights of municipalities to enact life safety codes. Texas residents need to contact Governor Perry and tell him to veto this bill. You have until June 21. Make your voice heard.
Stay fire safe and thanks for reading.
Related Articles:
Comments
