Interests at loggerheads over building codes process
A 19-member, little-known panel controls whether Pennsylvania's building codes are adopted every three years. At a Tuesday hearing on proposed changes to the commission's process, one state lawmaker called it "broken."
A 2011 law shifted the panel's burden, making it easier to reject updates (like electrical efficiency and safety requirements) than to accept them. Following that, the latest round of suggested code updates was rejected en masse.
The wholesale rejection has prompted an outcry from code officials, safety experts, and manufacturers, who say regular code updates mean safer buildings and are a boon to the safety-assurance industry.
"You just can't just say we're never going to adopt the new codes," said Rep. Bill Keller (D-Philadelphia). "And that's the way it looks like it's going.
But builders often equate code updates with additional costs. Frank Thompson is a residential builder himself and chairman of the Review and Advisory Commission that considers updating building codes in Pennsylvania. He told the House Labor and Industry Committee he wouldn't like to see the panel reject all code updates again - but he thinks the adversarial stance to updated codes is appropriate.
"I think we've seen the pendulum swing to both extremes," Thompson said, "and what I'd like to see in 2015 is probably not adopt everything and probably adopt a lot of things."
It's not clear how the differing interests here will strike a balance. Builders are pushing for less frequent consideration of code updates. Code experts say technology is advancing too quickly for such an approach, and manufacturers agree, adding that frequent and regular dialogue on code updates is important.
The proposal the jump-started the conversation about code updates appears to be dead on arrival. There's broad consensus that the bill to change the approval process for different parts of the building codes would lead to massive confusion, because of the way different pieces of the codes fit together.
Source: witf.org
For building code updates, a look to past practice
Building construction codes are coming under scrutiny by state lawmakers in an upcoming hearing. The state's approach to adopting updates to the codes has changed under the Corbett administration, leading a state commission to reject all of the most recent internationally-provided model updates.
A proposal by Rep. Pat Harkins (D-Erie) would restore some of the ease of accepting updated codes for commercial buildings.
"The commercial buildings support public use," Harkins said, "so naturally I think that the duty is to ensure that all buildings are in the best possible shape and practical for public inhabitants and use day in and day out."
Residential building codes are left out of Harkins' bill - meaning the default position for such codes would favor not adopting suggested updates. Residential builders have fought past efforts to update codes that add safety and energy efficiency requirements, saying such measures would hike their costs by as much as $15,000, on average, for each home built.
Critics say Harkins' proposal would be tricky to implement and say there's no reason commercial buildings should be safer than homes.
Shari Shapiro, a lawyer with Cozen O'Connor, lobbies for manufacturers, code organizations and energy efficiency companies -- groups that have an interest in seeing building codes updated regularly. She said if Pennsylvania isn't updating its codes as the new models are available, the state isn't benefiting from the experience of those who have studied building disasters.
"So for example, after 9/11, later versions of the code after that incorporated different requirements for fire safety and exists and so forth in high rise buildings," Shapiro said. "However, if the choice is between not updating any codes and at least updating some of them, that addresses one of the issues."
Harkins introduced his bill months before the June 5 collapse of a building (used for both commercial and residential purposes) in Philadelphia during a demolition, but he said it's still prompting lawmakers to think about what could be done to prevent such incidents.
"What we're trying to do is just make sure that all the commercial buildings are safe," Harkins said. "And I don't think anybody is neglecting or straying away from or intimidated by the lobbying industry for the residential. It's just that at this time, this is on the front burner."
Source: witf.org
No comments:
Post a Comment