| Author |
Message |
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA
Senior Member
Username: Bunzick
Post Number: 119
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 04:01 pm: |    |
For those who may not have heard the news, California has adopted the NFPA 5000 building code instead of the IBC. I, for one, am very disappointed. Read what each organization has to say:
ICC press release
NFPA press release |
Jim Brittell, AIA, CSI (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 04:50 pm: | |
Looks like we're gonna need another recall..... |
Richard Howard
New member
Username: Rick_howard
Post Number: 2
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 05:16 pm: | |
48 states go one way and California goes another. |
Curt Norton, CSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: Curtn
Post Number: 22
Registered: 06-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 05:24 pm: | |
Between beach erosion and earthquakes, they just might go the "other" way! |
Jim Brittell, AIA, CSI (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 05:59 pm: | |
Richard,
Every agency, department and interested party wanted to go one way, but the Building Standards Commission went the other way. I understand the meeting was so contentious that the California Highway Patrol was called to maintain order (must have been a slow day for pursuits...). |
Ralph Liebing
Senior Member
Username: Rliebing
Post Number: 28
Registered: 02-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 07:01 am: | |
FYI from a California source close to the "action"--
posted Thu, 31 July 03 08:28
The link attached provides a brief overview of the action taken by the California Building Standards Commission on July 29, 2003.
CALBO Review of CBSC Action
Building and fire officials throughout California do not intend to give up in getting the best codes adopted for our citizens. NFPA wasted no time in inaccurately broadcasting that California has adopted their codes. THIS IS NOT TRUE! The Commission simply stated that they intend to base the next edition of the California codes on NFPA 5000, NFPA 1/UFC and the building provisions of the IRC.
California is in the midst of a gubernatorial recall which may improve our ability to clean up the Commission action.
Please, those of you outside California, DO NOT GIVE UP ON US and succumb to NFPA's untruthful marketing strategies. Stick to what is right for your citizens.
Thank you.
GGBO
|
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA
Senior Member
Username: Bunzick
Post Number: 120
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 09:04 am: | |
Well, since NFPA has not been adopted anywhere else, it seems to me that NFPA 5000 and the California code will end up pretty much being one and the same thing, no? I'm sure that NFPA's next update will make it conform more closely to what the CBSC wants, though CSBC will no doubt make their own edits, as is custom in most states.
As to the stated preference for the "consesnsus" process--as if there is no consensus on the IBC, and yes I know about the ANSI process--I'm not sure that I'm all that comfortable with manufacturers and certain other organizations having a major seat at the table. While they can and should work to convince building officials that their products are effective, it is a much more intimate step to have them making code more directly. A manufacturer's interest is always economic. This should not be the basis of determining codes. Our recent history should remind us that corporations will put self-interest above all else. Anyway, I should think manufacturers would be happier with a single code nationwide (even if it is tinkered with when adopted.)
There is also much more work to be done, nationwide, in getting fire services and building standards agencies to work more closely. Although we have one mandated statewide code in Massachusetts, there are still continuing skirmishes between fire departments and building departments.
Good luck to all the organizations and groups in the beautiful and fascinating state of California who are involved in this battle. |
Ralph Liebing
Senior Member
Username: Rliebing
Post Number: 29
Registered: 02-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 03:57 pm: | |
Here an AIA press release--
California Commission Votes to Support
Use of NFPA Codes
by David S. Collins, FAIA
Codes Consultant, AIA Government Affairs
Despite overwhelming testimony from agencies and members of the construction industry in opposition to the move, the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) voted 8-2 on July 29 to support the use of the National Fire Protection Association’s NFPA 5000 Building Code, NFPA 1 Fire Code, along with the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Official’s IAPMO Plumbing and Mechanical Code. The CBSC also voted to support the use of the International Residential Code, but without the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing divisions.
The vote from the commission requires the agencies that oversee the construction of state facilities—such as schools, health-care facilities, and housing—to use these codes for enforcement. These same agencies testified in support of the adoption of the International Code Council (ICC) family of codes because of the ease with which they can make the necessary changes to the codes.
The debate over adoption of either the ICC or NFPA family of codes continues across the country. ICC’s International Building Code (IBC) has been adopted and is or will be in use in 32 states. The most recent jurisdictions adopting the IBC include West Virginia; Nebraska; Louisiana; Washington; and Scottsdale, Ariz. Thirteen states have also adopted the companion International Fire Code. One small Texas city near Houston (Pasadena) has adopted the NFPA Building Code. Nine additional states have statewide building codes and continue to use one of the three previous model codes. In addition to California, New Mexico and the City of Phoenix are actively considering which codes to adopt. Phoenix currently is considering NFPA 5000, albeit a highly modified version significantly different from the model document.
Challenges ahead
California State Architect Stephan Castellanos, FAIA, testified that his staff estimated it will take at least three times the review time to bring NFPA 5000 online for school construction. Given the budget crunch the state is currently experiencing, that means either the work by his staff on school construction in California will be delayed or the work to prepare the new codes will be delayed until 2006 or later. Testimony from the public and industry overwhelming opposed the use of NFPA 5000. Similar sentiments were expressed by construction industry representatives, including architects, building owners, Silicon Valley industries, contractors, unions, structural engineers, the league of cities, building officials, and fire protection officials who nearly unanimously favored the ICC Codes.
Only California’s fire chiefs’ organizations, firefighters, a few fire protection consultants, the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), and several disabilities rights representatives spoke on behalf of the NFPA codes. These groups in general indicated that the NFPA codes provided greater protection to firefighters and that the NFPA code-development process was more open and inclusive and provided ANSI-approved consensus.
Steven R. Winkel, FAIA, a governor-appointed member of the 11-person California Building Standards Commission who also serves on the commission’s code change committee, reports that not all the firefighters groups are in favor of adopting the NFPA codes. “The fire services are quite split; I think every fire chief in California belongs to a different fire chiefs umbrella organization,” Winkel says. “We heard testimony from too many chief's groups to count, split between NFPA and ICC.”
Representatives from NFPA staff and ICC gave summary statements prior to the final vote by the CBSC. Both organizations indicated their commitment to the state and promised development of educational tools and staff to provide support for the agencies as they progress through the adoption process.
Next steps
The CSBC vote is mandatory for the state agencies affected. According to the State Architect’s office, these agencies will now work to develop a timeline for preparing a package of amendments that revise the current building codes (which have not been updated since 1998) to align them with the CBSC recommendations. During this process, the amendments will be offered for public comment. Eventually, the CBSC will be asked to adopt and approve these changes. The new regulations will take effect after their publication.
|
John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: John_regener
Post Number: 96
Registered: 04-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 04:17 am: | |
Just wait until the Great Earthquake and everything East of California falls into the Atlantic Ocean and then we'll see who has the last laugh!
Looks like the California Building Standards Commission has increased the workload for specifiers. All those spec masters to be rewritten. Looks like full employment for specifiers for many years to come. |
Helaine K. Robinson CCS
Advanced Member
Username: Hollyrob
Post Number: 6
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 11:11 am: | |
Guess what? ICC vs NFPA has jumped to Houston!
>From the August 22, 2003 print edition of the Houston Business Journal
>
>Adoption of new fire codes raises steam in some circles
>Jenna Colley
>Houston Business Journal
>
>http://www.bizjournals.com/industries/real_estate/construction/2003/08/25/houston_story7.html?f=et178
>
>
>Helaine K. (Holly) Robinson CCS CCCA
>BHDP Architecture |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 01:00 pm: | |
not able to open - not a subscriber. Any way you coudl cut and paste the article and repost? |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 01:11 pm: | |
From the August 22, 2003 print edition of the Houston Business Journal
Adoption of new fire codes raises steam in some circles
Jenna Colley, Houston Business Journal
Efforts to streamline the city building permitting process by taking on an updated fire code has set off controversy between local labor groups and city of Houston decision-makers.
The seemingly routine adoption of a new fire code by city officials has local union members criticizing the city's lack of due diligence in exploring other options with what the labor groups characterize as a stricter, and therefore better, set of rules.
But defenders of the newly adopted code say unions favor the labor-intensive alternative because it translates into more work, and subsequently more dollars, for their members.
On Aug. 6, Houston City Council voted to adopt the International Fire Code, a set of regulations relating to the construction of buildings and facilities that was written by the International Code Council, an organization formed through the consolidation of three former code-making organizations.
Currently, two major code-making organizations exist: The Falls Church, Va., International Code Council and the National Fire Protection Association.
Each organization has its own set of codes, advocates and lobbyists battling it out city by city, nationwide in an attempt to become the standard set of rules.
On a local level, the city of Houston's recent adoption of the International Fire Code has been seen as a snub to local unions, most of which support the rival group's set of codes.
Representatives from the local electrical workers union say the group charged with formulating the code is primarily made up of building officials, not workers with technical expertise.
"It's kind of like putting the fox in charge of the hen house," says Bob Allison, a spokesman for the local chapter of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, a national union with members in the utility, construction, telecommunications, broadcasting, manufacturing, railroad and government industries. "You're allowing building officials to pick and choose what they want to choose to adopt, and these people are lobbied all the time."
The electricians union is not alone in its criticism of the new code.
On Aug. 4, Rick Lord of the Plumbers Local Union No. 68 appeared before City Council claiming that plumbers in Houston had applied numerous times to be a part of the code-choosing process.
Lord contends that the issue is not one of unions vs. non-unions. Instead, he argues that lack of inclusion of laborers in the decision-making process has allowed a less-regulated set of codes to prevail.
"We are fearful that there is no oversight," Lord says. "The city isn't going to do that, and the building inspectors are going to do what the (builders) say because of their political might."
Lord claims that city building officials have inflated the cost of adopting the NFPA code.
According to numbers presented to councilmembers, the cost of implementing the International Fire Code was $64,983: $46,358 in employee man-hours spent reviewing the code and $18,625 for books.
City officials said that the cost to adopt the NFPA code would be $139,076.
But Lord doesn't buy those estimates.
"NFPA had offered to give updates and books for no cost," Lord says. "At a time when there are new budget crunches and people getting laid off, why change for the sake of change? We think they embellished the numbers."
Not up to code
Before adopting the new fire code two weeks ago, the city had been operating with two separate and incompatible codes. This caused problems among property managers as they worked to move tenants into buildings, says Cliff Harrington, president of the Houston Building Owners and Managers Association, a group that advocates the recently adopted code.
"When you deal with codes that are not written to reference each other it can cause problems in the permitting process," Harrington says. "Property managers were having problems."
Harrington says tenants that had leased building space and were ready to move in within 60 days oftentimes couldn't because the permitting process got bogged down for two months or more. This blocked tenants from being able to complete build-out work on their space.
Some of the parties involved say the differing codes also were costly.
"It's extraordinarily expensive because an architect or engineer has to consult multiple documents if a city has adopted a diverse set of codes," says Jim Tidwell, national director of fire service activity for the International Code Council. "They have to find conflicts within the documents and then take those to building officials and the fire marshall and figure out how to resolve them."
Another holdup for building permit seekers has been a lack of city personnel to process the information in the first place.
Earlier this year, City Council increased permitting fees in an effort to raise $2.5 million the municipality says is needed to hire new inspection personnel to deal with the backlog. The increased fees will go into effect on Jan. 12, 2004.
Structural fees will increase from 4 cents to 5 cents per square foot of floor space for new construction and $4 to $4.50 per $1,000 valuation for remodel construction. Mechanical permit fees will increase from $25 to $30; electrical permit fees will rise from $10 to $15; plumbing permit fees will increase from $10 to $15 and structural permit fees will go up from $30 to $35.
jcolley@bizjournals.com • 713-960-5932 |
Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA
Intermediate Member
Username: Specman
Post Number: 5
Registered: 03-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 12:05 pm: | |
Ralph, the article from the AIA Press is incorrect. The City of Scottsdale has adopted the 2003 IBC. It's the City of Phoenix that is progressing towards the adoption of the NFPA 5000. I say "progressing" because we, too, are fighting tooth and nail to stop the adoption process. Unfortunately, this news out of California, whether they eventually adopt it or not, will do considerable harm to our position.
The entire situation is based on political motives and has nothing to do with the health and welfare of the public. And I feel the same influences are what's driving the CBSC. |
|
4specs.com Home Page
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page