Did you agree with President Obama's decision on Thursday to waive the No Child Left Behind requirements in 10 states, including Georgia?
Total Votes:
Published Friday, March 19, 2010 in Local
By Walter C. Jones
Morris News Service
ATLANTA – Georgia home builders are pushing legislation to prohibit local governments from requiring that new houses have fire sprinklers.
To counter them, firefighter groups hauled a modified house trailer to the front of the Capitol Thursday to demonstrate for reporters how quickly automatic sprinklers can extinguish cotton curtains and prevent the whole home from blazing up.
The day before, a House committee approved the legislation they want to stop, House Bill 1196 by Rep. Terry England, R-Auburn.
"You're taking away the private individual's choice," he said.
Georgia had 3,000 residential fires in 2009 resulting in 85 deaths.
The debate comes at a time when home builders are struggling to make money. They fear that customers will be discouraged by the added $1.65-1.75 per square foot the Georgia Fire Sprinkler Association estimates a system would add to the cost of an average home, or $3,500 for a 2,000-square-foot house.
"We've done everything in the world to reduce costs for residential sprinklers," said the association's executive director, Billy Wood.
Commercial structures are already required to have more robust sprinkler systems than homes would need, and 95 percent of fires are quenched with just one or two sprinkler heads activating, he said.
Not only do the sprinklers begin fighting the fire when it is still small and well before fire fighters can arrive, but they also use less water to do it. At an apartment fire earlier that morning a few miles from the Capitol, one sprinkler head doused a stove fire, and workers merely mopped up the water and replaced the stove without the tenants having to lose their home, Wood said.
England's bill would thwart efforts by fire-fighting associations to have the Georgia Department of Community Affairs include mandatory residential sprinklers in the state's model building code next year for implementation in 2012.
"It's just a special-interest group that more or less wants to shut the door down and take the tools away from the community and the fire service and even the Department of Community Affairs," said Cartersville Fire Chief Scott Carter, vice president of the Georgia State Firefighters Association.
England, who also opposes mandatory seat-belt laws, argues individuals would still be able to specify sprinklers in houses they buy or have built.
"We're not doing anything to encumber the individual. They would have to make that decision on their own," he said. "If they want to put it in their homes, it doesn't do anything to stop them."
The bill is likely to come up for a vote in the full House next week.
Times-Herald.com does not necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Responsibility of comments rests solely with the writer. Comments posted in ALL CAPS will be deleted.
Submission of a comment does not guarantee publication. Comments will be posted by a moderator after being scanned for abusive language, relevance, etc. See our Comments FAQ for more details.
I don't see a big deal here.Where were all of you when the gestapo commission was making all the rules about how big your home has to be and how much land you have to have just to build? No trailers,no signs,keep your grass cut,no automobiles w/o a tag and on and on!Now they don't even want to here your comments at the meetings because they don't care what you think!
Posted by BRIAN at 6:49 PM
Pretty much, "Whose Bull is being gored." I read once that child car seats save 50 children a year. At how many million $'s a year? Since I've spent a couple a hundred on seats over the last 25 yrs... No accidents. Never had to live thru a hse fire but I do carry insurance. Are not GA homebuilders mostly Republicans?
Posted by Windowpane at 12:25 AM
very robust argument ongoing, but it still should be an individual choice. the 85 deaths stated dont mention whether the homes had active, working smoke detectors or not, but i guess most did not. and the damage caused by sprinklers going off can exceed that of a fire (just ask your homeowners insurance company).
Posted by builder at 10:34 AM
I think the firemen and whomever else pushed this through on the national level of the Intnl Code Council ought to focus their efforts on automobile deaths than on the small percentage of deaths in home fires. if sprinklers become mandatory are the insurance companies ready for payouts due to accidnetal triggering and the costs of repairs? not every repair will be just mopping up as the article implies.
Posted by Zing at 10:18 AM
So if we put sprinklers in all the homes can we not have firefighters?
Posted by ME at 1:51 AM
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it, Thomas Jefferson.
Posted by Wayne Witherspoon at 11:53 PM
Do the research - the law, as written, would do more than prohibit adopting code requiring residential sprinklers. It will prohibit counties and cities, and even the State, from adopting ANY NEW CODES relative to construction. I'm for less gov't. but the proposed law is poorly written.
Posted by Code Guy at 4:19 PM
wrong tangent
3/23/2010
Link To This Comment
Brian, those things you point out are on the local level. The Intnl Code Council decided this on a national level so whomever adopts the new code as the standard will have to comply with the spinklers.
Posted by Zing at 10:01 AM