Publication Date: Friday, March 19, 2004

City faces higher costs, more delays with new state building code

New building codes approved by the California Building Standards Commission (BSC), but now delayed, could cost California cities, developers and consumers millions of dollars if implemented, Pleasanton's Chief Building Official and Safety Official George Thomas has warned.

Both of the new codes replace the 1997 Uniformed Building Code, the standard that was first adopted on a national basis in 1925 and updated every three years since then. With the new I-Code in place, the 1997 code has been allowed to lapse as other states base their own state building codes on the new international agreement.

But the California commission, with the support of plumbers, mechanical and electrical workers unions in the state, voted instead to adopt NFPA 5000, which was co-written by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. That organization, which previously had written the Uniform Mechanical Code, will also be the organization that prints, sells and distributes its new code. The code also has the support of the Western Fire Chiefs Association, the other co-writer which wrote NFPA-1 that is part of the new code. That organization also will receive a percentage of the sales of both code books to city, county, state building departments and inspectors and building contractors.

Thomas said the BSC's adoption of NFPA 5000 was "the wrong way to go" for a state that is in need of more business and housing.

"Economically, NFPA could cause California billions of dollars in lost trade because we would be doing things differently," he said. "Everything we build or remodel will have to be designed differently, people aren't going to be familiar with this code that is written in a very different format to what we're used to using and local governments are going to have difficulty training our staffs to even understand it."

He said all other states rejected the NFPA code because it is too complicated and restrictive. With California, and one other location, the city of Pasadena, Texas, as the only places using it, and all other states and cities using the I-Code, building products and procedures will have to be rewritten by outside suppliers and contractors to meet California's new and different standards.

He said the NFPA codes references 300 separate standards that suppliers would need to review to make sure their products comply, from specifically-prescribed engineering standards for each products to the types and quality of everything from plastic pipe to wiring. Products and standards allowed in the I-Code in the other states would no longer automatically qualify for use here.

"It's a real mess," he said. "It means that we would have a whole new concept for construction. Products and procedures in the building industry change rapidly as technological breakthroughs are brought to the trade. NFPA, if enforced, would slow that process down and raise costs."

"No one is saying that the NFPA 5000 standards are worse or better than the I-Code requirements, but clearly NFPA will cost Californian's a lot more money and construction delays to achieve the same end results," he added. "That's why other states voted to adopt the I-Code."

For example, the American Institute of Architects conducted its own independent study of both codes. Its architects agreed that both codes provided fire and construction safety standards acceptable by them and the building industry. But the architects required 16 percent more time to design structures that met the NFPA code, compared to the time it took for the same work on an identical project using the I-Code requirements.

Another independent study by an organization representing contractors determined that it would cost builders 15 to 20 percent more for products under the NFPA standards, resulting in a 5 to 10 percent increase in actual construction costs.

The city of San Jose had similar results in its studies. Plan reviewers, who are hired to double-check building plans took 10 to 15 percent more time to conduct their analyses of similar projects.

"Here in Pleasanton where we pay our outside plan (or peer) review consultants to look at most major projects, we would have to raise our rates by that same 10 to 15 percent," Thomas said. "You know that those costs will be passed along to the buyer."

And, it's not just new commercial building or home construction that would face higher costs and more delays under NFPA guidelines. Thomas said simpler, more common projects, such as homeowners wanting to add sun rooms in the back of their houses, would encounter major increases in costs and design delays if out-of-state suppliers would even continue selling in California.

The NFPA standards also would add to the costs and delays in Green Building projects, which a new Pleasanton ordinance mandates for most commercial building projects. Applied Biosystems, which utilized green building designs and products in constructing the first two of its new research facilities on Sunol Boulevard, used shredded old Levis for wall insulation. Under NFPA, that would not be allowed without an approved standard, which would be costly to write and require months, if not several years to review and approve.

"It's likely that the company would have used conventional insulation materials rather than go through all of that, and the shredded denims would have gone to the garbage dump," Thomas said.

Thomas said there's a silver lining that could reverse the state's Building Standards Commission ruling to adopt the NFPA 5000 standards. Since the BSC's action, there has been an outpouring of criticism across the state, including from Pleasanton where Mayor Tom Pico, City Manager Deborah McKeehan and Thomas, in collaboration with Chief Stewart Gary of the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department and his team, have sought delays in implementing NFPA awaiting another review. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger issued an executive order last Nov. 17 directing state agencies to conduct a new review of all new regulations adopted since Jan. 6, 1999, which will include the BSC decision.

Even the BSC, recognizing that the NFPA 5000 code is more complex and complicated that its own reviewers initially thought, has put off implementing the new code until 2006 or 2007. That will give time for Schwarzenegger also to consider new appointments to the BSC who might vote to change the commission's early decision. The terms of all but two of the commissioners expire before 2007, with five due to step down or seek reappointments this year and next.

Even so, with contractors and building officials like Thomas still relying on the old, out-of-date 2001 California Building Code that is based on the now-defunct 1997 International Uniformed Building Code, the state is in a sort of limbo when it comes to building standards.

The Insurance Service Organization (ISO) that rates cities for insurance underwriters has already graded cities downward because they are relying on old code standards. On ISO's scale of 1 to 10, with No. 1 being the best in terms of meeting building codes standard, Thomas had hoped to move Pleasanton from a 4 to a 2 because of improvements made here in the past year. Instead, he was lucky to hold off ISO's decision to lower Pleasanton to a 7 by showing that the city has better enforcement and building policies along the lines of the I-Code requirements. That saved a property owner with a $1,500 homeowner's insurance policy about $100 in increased annual premiums.

"But the ISO decision is a year-to-year consideration, so it could change any time," Thomas said. "That's why it is important for the BSC to take another look at its decision to adopt NFPA and turn it around in favor of the I-Code. This would put us in lock-step with the rest of the country, which would be good for all Californians."