Information received shortly after a meeting of a committee of the Board of Housing and Community Development;
Virginia's code process moves forward, and in a meeting of a committee of the Board of Housing and Community Development (the regulatory agency tasked with promulgating the codes) residential sprinklers took a significant kick in the teeth. While overall not a surprising move, I was very disappointed at the timing of the committee's actions (very early in the code adoption process) and for several comments that were made in that meeting.
First, this committee chair made opening comments that "no public comment" would be permitted, and no comments or input was solicited from the fire service or homebuilders present in the audience. This wasn't surprising, but sets the stage for what comes later.
Second, the Virginia Association of Home Builders had submitted two code changes, one outright deletes IRC section 313, the other adds language "where installed" and a reference to NFPA 13D and P2409. The result of which removes any requirement for sprinklering town homes or single family houses in either case.
Third, in committee discussions no less than 5 members (of a 10 member committee) publicly, and another member in a phone conversation later in the day indicated they had questions, did not understand these systems, wanted more information about mold issues, maintenance, and other issues, and one quote of "I need more information to make a decision". Completely disregarding the fact that this committee clearly had questions or did not understand the IRC sprinkler provisions, and without public input, discussion or debate, this committee accepted the VAHB's change that added the "where installed" language and moved the change into what will likely become the Proposed Regulations for the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code.
This is further disturbing when several other code changes that had been submitted as consensus items, where even the most insignificant questions or clarification were needed by just one committee member, it was pulled from the proposed regulations. This is the glaring contrast that leaves me baffled.
While this is not the end by any means, it became clear to me in that meeting that this board has made up their mind and will not tolerate discussion debate or public input on this issue in a formal open forum, and the public hearings scheduled for July 27 just prior to the full board adopting the proposed regulations will be either the final blow or the only opportunity we have to maintain the IRC sprinkler provisions. This however is not a formal process, it is a free-for-all with no agenda, schedule or order of hearing.