|
Costly ICC Code Changes Up for a Vote in Minneapolis
When the International Code Council (ICC) holds its annual meeting this September in Minneapolis, a large contingent of NAHB builder and staff members will be in attendance and paying close attention to the proceedings.
The two long weeks of convention activities include one week of grueling, 16-hour days of debate and votes on the content of the 2009 edition of the ICC model building codes. The approval of certain proposals could have a dramatic impact on residential construction.
The ICC, whose mission is to advocate for building safety and fire prevention, regularly develops and continuously updates a comprehensive set of model codes for residential and commercial buildings.
Most U.S. cities, counties and states choose these International Codes — building safety codes developed by the ICC — as blueprints for their own building codes, or they adopt them outright.
During the hearings, building officials, fire officials and other voting ICC members listen to testimony in support of or against almost 800 individual proposals on subjects as diverse as mechanical systems, framing, energy efficiency, fire safety, ventilation and electrical systems.
After listening to the testimony and studying supporting documentation, these members will decide whether to incorporate changes proposed to the International Residential Code, the International Energy Conservation Code or the other codes that govern construction of single-family homes, duplexes and townhouses in most jurisdictions.
NAHB representatives participated in the first round of hearings for the code development cycle, which involved 2,200 proposals and two weeks of testimony from Feb. 18 through March 1 in Palm Springs, Calif. Their efforts achieved many favorable results on behalf of the home building industry and home buyers — but many of these votes are scheduled to come up again at the final hearings.
Among the code change proposals:
- Fire Sprinklers in One- and Two-Family Homes. During the first round of hearings, Code Committee members rejected a proposal that would have moved requirements for residential fire sprinklers from the appendix to the International Residential Code — where they are now — to the main body of the code.
The move would have made the installation of fire sprinklers in one- and two-family homes a mandate — unless state or local governing bodies specifically voted to remove the requirements when they adopted the code. As long as the sprinkler requirements are in the appendix, they remain an option.
At the Palm Springs hearings, building officials and other voting members voiced concerns over the impact of fire sprinkler requirements on housing affordability. While fire sprinkler manufacturers and other proponents say sprinkler costs are minimal, in the experience of NAHB members they can cost as much as $3, $5 or even $7 per square foot to install, depending on the home.
NAHB also has identified concerns with a number of design and maintenance issues — including the availability of an adequate water supply for homes on well systems, damage from sprinkler heads accidentally discharging, the potential for freezing in colder climates, and the ability for home owners to properly maintain these systems.
NAHB also cited many existing code provisions that have dramatically improved the fire safety of new housing, including hard-wired smoke alarm systems.
New fire sprinkler mandates have been proposed for the final action hearings.
- Energy Code Changes. At the Palm Springs hearings, NAHB representatives successfully proposed cost-effective improvements to the energy-efficiency requirements for new housing.
Faced with a number of proposals that would arbitrarily increase the energy efficiency of all new housing by 30%, NAHB pushed for the adoption of only those changes that would provide a reasonable payback and not erode the affordability of new housing for the first-time home buyer.
In order to be considered cost-effective, NAHB policy affirms that proposals that would increase the energy efficiency of the building envelope, heating and air conditioning systems or other aspects of the code should demonstrate that they pay for themselves in 10 years. Some of the 30% proposals included paybacks of 40 years or more, and ICC members roundly rejected them.
The 30% proposals have been rewritten and resubmitted for the final action hearings.
“NAHB will serve as the voice of housing on the future regulations that will govern the industry as the hearings progress,” said NAHB Construction Codes and Standards Committee Chair Andy Anderson, a remodeler in South Carolina.
“This is the last opportunity for voting members to make changes to the International Residential Code and the other ICC model codes before the 2009 edition is published,” Anderson said. “We need to make sure that these building codes continue to help us keep new homes safer — at a price first-time home buyers can afford.”
Information about other code change proposals of significant interest will be available in upcoming issues of Nation’s Building News.
For more information, e-mail Calli Schmidt at NAHB, or call her at 800-368-5242 x8132.
|
