4 ms·

No, building codes are fine. Building codes exist for a reason, and just because you don't know that reason doesn't make them less valid. If you have a particul

No, building codes are fine. Building codes exist for a reason, and just because you don't know that reason doesn't make them less valid. If you have a particular code example that you think is ridiculous i'd invite discussion on it, you may be surprised how many experts on the subject are floating around.

spullara 4y ago
There are many, but this is an example in CA: All new tenants and new occupancies hereafter constructed, which exceeds 3,600 square feet shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout.
- idiotsecant 4y ago
  fire sprinklers are the hill you're going to die on here?
  - mikeg8 4y ago
    Great response to someone who answered your invitation for a specific example. But I'll die on this hill. I can totally understand requiring them in multi-family or town-homes where there are shared walls - but not in single family homes. A residential fire suppression system for a ~2,500 Sqft home can cost anywhere from $10-25k to include on a new build in northern CA (I know from recent bids). That isn't a negligible cost and mandating them for smaller dwellings (in my county it's anything over 1,000 sqft) is a fine example of regulation that has "great" intentions but is making affordable housing un-afforable.
    - 8note 4y ago
      Are single family homes what's being considered affordable housing?
    - mlyle 4y ago
      It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings, and also questionable whether the property damage they prevent from fires is larger than the property damage they cause through inadvertent activation/leaks/etc.
      - m0llusk 4y ago
        Actually, the statistics are rather stark. Without sprinklers people may be seriously injured or killed by fire. With sprinklers present and functioning risk of injury or death from fire becomes negligible.
        pclmulqdq 4y ago
        Is this true in single family dwellings or only in apartment complexes? I would believe that sprinklers have a lot of value in apartment complexes but less value in single family homes. Not to mention that people who buy single family homes are a lot more likely to have more expensive furniture that would be ruined by a flood.
        andbberger 4y ago
        your assumption that only poor people live in apartments is troubling and very american
        mlyle 4y ago
        I do think it's probably a fair assumption that people in apartments have less expensive furnishings than people in houses.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        They specifically wrote “a lot more likely” so they clearly do not believe ONLY poor people live in apartments.
        mlyle 4y ago
        > > It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings > Actually, the statistics are rather stark. AFAIK, this is all information about multi-family dwellings and has not been demonstrated in single family homes. The benefit of sprinklers is certainly more obvious in large buildings with multiple residences inside, in slowing fires from reaching new dwelling units. I find plenty of factsheets about residential sprinklers, that cite numbers of 80% reduction in death... which then ends up relying upon benefits seen in apartments... and which mostly evaporates when controlling for income.
- amluto 4y ago
  The problem here isn’t the sprinklers — it’s the cost to install the sprinklers. The cost of a few hundred feet of CPVC or PEX pipe is low. The cost of an off-the-shelf sprinkler riser, pre-assembled, is a couple hundred dollars. The amount a Northern CA contractor will charge to install the parts is insane. (There is a problem with too little code. NFPA 13R and 13D do not clearly specify backflow protection requirements, and the California Plumbing Code, which follows UPC, only specifies it by reference to a subjective hazard level as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. This means that different local jurisdictions disagree, which creates both added complexity when designing a system and a significant risk of an actual hazardous condition existing. Situations like this are why codes exist, and IMO the code authors thoroughly dropped the ball on determining the extent to which the water in non-passively-purged fire sprinkler system is hazardous and how to prevent it from getting into drinking water. If an actual standard existed, then there could be an off the shelf compliant system, and time and money would be saved.
epistasis 4y ago
It's more the zoning than the codes. Though there are some that make apartments more expensive, like requiring two staircases. This also significantly reduces the pleasantness of the resulting apartments, and typically means that you can't open windows on both sides of the building and get cross flow.
asdfadsfgfdda 4y ago
There are many in CA that are ridiculous. Most are not related to safety, but likely due to lobbying from some industry. Fire sprinklers are required in single family homes. The very small incremental safety benefit is far outweighed by the initial cost, maintenance cost, and potential failures (more plumbing to leak). If you really wanted to improve fire safety, make it cheaper to replace 1950s-era houses with new construction! Solar panels are required for new homes, which ironically adds a small amount of fire risk (like all electrical devices). This is required in areas with cloudy conditions, or houses that are shaded by trees. The cost per watt is ridiculous compared to how cost-efficient utility scale solar has become. Not to mention the safety risk to solar workers on a second-story house. Just in plumbing code, there are several ridiculous restrictions. Some jurisdictions allow air admittance valves, others do not at all. ABS pipe is illegal for commercial buildings, but just fine for residential. IPC allows 1.5" vents for toilets, but UPC requires 2".
- andbberger 4y ago
  sprinklers are not an incremental safety benefit. they're probably the single most effective bit of fire safety mandated by codes. mandates to install them in single family homes is overkill though. sprinklers are so effective that single means of egress + sprinklers should be the new building standard
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    > probably the single most effective bit of fire safety mandated by codes. Surely smoke alarms are more effective? (Obviously so on a per-dollar basis, but I’d wager on a per-unit basis as well. If you gave me a choice of a smoke alarm xor a sprinkler, I’ll take the smoke alarms every time.)
    - andbberger 4y ago
      silly contrived comparison you're always going to have both. knowing there's a fire doesn't do much for you if it flashes over before you can leave. sprinklers are ridiculously effective.
enragedcacti 4y ago
As just one example, Most of the USA's building codes mandate double staircases in buildings over 3 stories for outdated fire concerns which increases cost per unit mainly by reducing the number of units that fit in a given site and the arrangement of those units. https://www.treehugger.com/single-stair-buildings-united-states-5197036 https://www.treehugger.com/single-stair-buildings-united-sta... https://twitter.com/holz_bau/status/1384670822351048707?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw https://twitter.com/holz_bau/status/1384670822351048707?ref_...
- 8note 4y ago
  The Grenfell fire comes to mind for the benefits of multiple stair cases

spullara 4y ago

There are many, but this is an example in CA: All new tenants and new occupancies hereafter constructed, which exceeds 3,600 square feet shall have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed throughout.

idiotsecant 4y ago
fire sprinklers are the hill you're going to die on here?
- mikeg8 4y ago
  Great response to someone who answered your invitation for a specific example. But I'll die on this hill. I can totally understand requiring them in multi-family or town-homes where there are shared walls - but not in single family homes. A residential fire suppression system for a ~2,500 Sqft home can cost anywhere from $10-25k to include on a new build in northern CA (I know from recent bids). That isn't a negligible cost and mandating them for smaller dwellings (in my county it's anything over 1,000 sqft) is a fine example of regulation that has "great" intentions but is making affordable housing un-afforable.
  - 8note 4y ago
    Are single family homes what's being considered affordable housing?
  - mlyle 4y ago
    It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings, and also questionable whether the property damage they prevent from fires is larger than the property damage they cause through inadvertent activation/leaks/etc.
    - m0llusk 4y ago
      Actually, the statistics are rather stark. Without sprinklers people may be seriously injured or killed by fire. With sprinklers present and functioning risk of injury or death from fire becomes negligible.
      - pclmulqdq 4y ago
        Is this true in single family dwellings or only in apartment complexes? I would believe that sprinklers have a lot of value in apartment complexes but less value in single family homes. Not to mention that people who buy single family homes are a lot more likely to have more expensive furniture that would be ruined by a flood.
        andbberger 4y ago
        your assumption that only poor people live in apartments is troubling and very american
        mlyle 4y ago
        I do think it's probably a fair assumption that people in apartments have less expensive furnishings than people in houses.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        They specifically wrote “a lot more likely” so they clearly do not believe ONLY poor people live in apartments.
      - mlyle 4y ago
        > > It's also questionable if they save lives in single family dwellings > Actually, the statistics are rather stark. AFAIK, this is all information about multi-family dwellings and has not been demonstrated in single family homes. The benefit of sprinklers is certainly more obvious in large buildings with multiple residences inside, in slowing fires from reaching new dwelling units. I find plenty of factsheets about residential sprinklers, that cite numbers of 80% reduction in death... which then ends up relying upon benefits seen in apartments... and which mostly evaporates when controlling for income.
amluto 4y ago
The problem here isn’t the sprinklers — it’s the cost to install the sprinklers. The cost of a few hundred feet of CPVC or PEX pipe is low. The cost of an off-the-shelf sprinkler riser, pre-assembled, is a couple hundred dollars. The amount a Northern CA contractor will charge to install the parts is insane. (There is a problem with too little code. NFPA 13R and 13D do not clearly specify backflow protection requirements, and the California Plumbing Code, which follows UPC, only specifies it by reference to a subjective hazard level as determined by the authority having jurisdiction. This means that different local jurisdictions disagree, which creates both added complexity when designing a system and a significant risk of an actual hazardous condition existing. Situations like this are why codes exist, and IMO the code authors thoroughly dropped the ball on determining the extent to which the water in non-passively-purged fire sprinkler system is hazardous and how to prevent it from getting into drinking water. If an actual standard existed, then there could be an off the shelf compliant system, and time and money would be saved.

epistasis 4y ago

It's more the zoning than the codes. Though there are some that make apartments more expensive, like requiring two staircases. This also significantly reduces the pleasantness of the resulting apartments, and typically means that you can't open windows on both sides of the building and get cross flow.

asdfadsfgfdda 4y ago

There are many in CA that are ridiculous. Most are not related to safety, but likely due to lobbying from some industry. Fire sprinklers are required in single family homes. The very small incremental safety benefit is far outweighed by the initial cost, maintenance cost, and potential failures (more plumbing to leak). If you really wanted to improve fire safety, make it cheaper to replace 1950s-era houses with new construction! Solar panels are required for new homes, which ironically adds a small amount of fire risk (like all electrical devices). This is required in areas with cloudy conditions, or houses that are shaded by trees. The cost per watt is ridiculous compared to how cost-efficient utility scale solar has become. Not to mention the safety risk to solar workers on a second-story house. Just in plumbing code, there are several ridiculous restrictions. Some jurisdictions allow air admittance valves, others do not at all. ABS pipe is illegal for commercial buildings, but just fine for residential. IPC allows 1.5" vents for toilets, but UPC requires 2".

andbberger 4y ago
sprinklers are not an incremental safety benefit. they're probably the single most effective bit of fire safety mandated by codes. mandates to install them in single family homes is overkill though. sprinklers are so effective that single means of egress + sprinklers should be the new building standard
- sokoloff 4y ago
  > probably the single most effective bit of fire safety mandated by codes. Surely smoke alarms are more effective? (Obviously so on a per-dollar basis, but I’d wager on a per-unit basis as well. If you gave me a choice of a smoke alarm xor a sprinkler, I’ll take the smoke alarms every time.)
  - andbberger 4y ago
    silly contrived comparison you're always going to have both. knowing there's a fire doesn't do much for you if it flashes over before you can leave. sprinklers are ridiculously effective.

enragedcacti 4y ago

As just one example, Most of the USA's building codes mandate double staircases in buildings over 3 stories for outdated fire concerns which increases cost per unit mainly by reducing the number of units that fit in a given site and the arrangement of those units. https://www.treehugger.com/single-stair-buildings-united-states-5197036 https://www.treehugger.com/single-stair-buildings-united-sta... https://twitter.com/holz_bau/status/1384670822351048707?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw https://twitter.com/holz_bau/status/1384670822351048707?ref_...

8note 4y ago
The Grenfell fire comes to mind for the benefits of multiple stair cases