Early word from the hearings indicates that the case for keeping sprinklers as a voluntary option in new homes was strong and successful.

In light of the improved safety features of new construction, the high costs of sprinkler installation and maintenance, numerous questions about the systems themselves that still need to be addressed, and the demonstrated effectiveness of smoke alarms for saving lives, advocates for mandated sprinklers were unable to get the votes necessary to overturn an earlier ICC decision to keep sprinklers out of the main body of the residential code. This is a significant win for housing affordability and consumer choice in home safety decisions. Had our efforts been unsuccessful at the Rochester code hearings, fire sprinklers would have been required in all new one- and two-family homes and townhouses wherever the IRC was adopted – something that would raise the cost of building a typical single-family home by as much as $6 per square foot or more and raise the threshold for homeownership significantly. With this decision, fire sprinklers will remain in the appendix of the IRC, where local jurisdictions can still adopt them if they so choose, and certainly home buyers will always have the option of choosing to have fire sprinklers installed in their new homes, as is appropriate.

While the battle to maintain fire sprinklers as optional rather than mandated equipment in new homes can be expected to continue in subsequent code development cycles, that does not diminish the great accomplishment that our NVPs, EOs HBAs, members and staff achieved in explaining our concerns about mandates to building code officials so that they could understand the many questions and potential problems surrounding this issue. Ultimately, their input convinced voting code officials to make the most appropriate and balanced decision on fire sprinklers. Going forward, those who helped with our campaign are strongly encouraged to build upon the good working relationships that they developed with code officials through this effort, so that we can keep the channels of communication open and foster even greater understanding among all parties involved in the code development process.

Apart from the sprinklers issue, news from the Final Action Hearings in Rochester was still coming in as of press time for this report – see the next NBN Online for the latest details. But we do know that NAHB was successful in opposing several proposals that would have mandated carbon monoxide alarms in the IRC and that NAHB prevailed on its proposal to allow the wind exposure category for new homes built in a housing development to be based on the exposure that will exist a year after the start of construction rather than the more restrictive value that exists at the start of construction. Another positive development was the elimination of onerous anchorage requirements at the top of basement foundation walls – something that had been approved in the last round of code hearings despite NAHB's opposition.

NAHB Member Benefit:NAHB's representation of our builder members at the code development hearings will collectively translate to the most appropriate, cost-effective building codes that you build by every day to provide for occupants' safety and health, while keeping consumer choice and affordability concerns in mind.