Chehalis City Council Strikes Down Controversial Sprinkler Mandate From New Building Code Updates

City Hall: Contractors Speak Out Against Proposed Measure They Say Would Needlessly Increase Costs

Posted

The Chehalis City Council voted Monday to advance a slew of state-mandated updates to the city’s building code while striking down a controversial section that would have required automatic sprinklers as part of nearly all new construction projects within city limits.

The council chambers were about as full as they’ve been in recent months, with a small number of construction stakeholders showing up in-person to voice opposition against the sprinkler clause.

The council voted unanimously, 7-0, to advance Ordinance No. 101B to a second reading without the optional proposal.

The optional proposal would have required the installation of fire sprinkler systems in new single-family and duplex buildings, as well as installation on any structure changes valued at 50% or greater of the building’s appraised value, adding additional costs to developers and builders and potentially boosting housing prices over the long term.

Tammy Baraconi, planning and building manager for the city of Chehalis, said the changes stem from larger revisions in the 2018 Washington State Energy Code that cities have been struggling to implement due to the more stringent energy efficiency requirements.

Baraconi said the latest revision in the state’s energy code represents a “big jump, and it’s one that is causing a lot of concern for a lot of people.”

“All of these things in concert are supposed to make our homes more energy efficient. The one recommendation tonight is the one that’s causing the most amount of controversy this evening,” Baraconi said.

Within the city of Chehalis, any triplex buildings or larger, including buildings larger than 4,000 square feet, are required to have an automatic sprinkler system to suppress indoor fires.

“It’s like a cannonball being shoved down our throat. We have no choice,” Mayor Dennis Dawes said of the revisions. “The other thing that we’re talking about is the idea of leaving out single-family residences and duplexes for requiring fire suppression, that’s the two different things. The residential code, we don’t have any choice.”

Councilor Daryl Lund said the cost of requiring builders to install sprinklers would have also raised the price of rentals and insurance policies since it’s considered a “detriment” to have them in a building.



Jason Gano, director of government affairs with Olympia Master Builders, told the council that fire deaths have continued to decline without state-mandated sprinkler systems in new homes.

He also noted that smoke alarms, firefighters, escapes, education and other variables have shown to be just as useful in preventing loss of life.

“The cost to home buyers is much more than just the price of materials and labor. Factors such as taxes, permits, inspections, as well as water hookup fees, can add thousands of dollars to the customer’s cost of the system,” Gano said.

The cost to install sprinkler systems in the area, Gano noted, is between $2,000 and $7,000, which would substantially affect the number of households in the area that qualify for a mortgage.

Steve Barnett, sales manager at Chehalis-based MDK Construction, said the cost with the energy code revisions, without the mandatory fire sprinklers, would be about $5,000 to $10,000 in extra costs for builders.

Add on increased demand for materials and labor, and Barnett said he thinks the actual increase over the long run will exceed current housing price projections.

“It’s definitely a burden, just as it is, for us to keep up with this. But the answer is we just don’t know what it will cost because it’s going to be a year from now before we get all those pieces figured out,” he said. “I think it will end up costing a lot more in the long run to meet that than they initially thought they had.”

Talking with The Chronicle after the meeting, Lund said he felt city staff was attempting to slip something past the council by not emphasizing enough the fact that the sprinkler clause was an optional part of the new energy code.

“When you don’t put something like that in the agenda, and they know that’s an issue with the council cause we talked about it three years ago, someone’s trying to pull something — or they’re just inept,” he said.

Lund said he would have liked to explain to stakeholders and the community the effects the new energy code would have on them.