Sprinkler bill would ban extra connection fees

The Post and Courier
Thursday, December 6, 2007


On the Web

Continuing coverage of the tragic fire that took the lives of nine firefighters.

Water companies would be banned from charging extra fees to connect new fire sprinkler systems, and the state would encourage businesses to install sprinklers through a combination of tax credits and insurance discounts, under legislation proposed Wednesday in the state Senate.

Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell introduced the bill. His Charleston district includes the section of West Ashley where nine city firefighters were killed in June while fighting a blaze at the Sofa Super Store.

McConnell learned in the weeks following the fire, from reports in The Post and Courier, that it was the Charleston Water System's policy to charge as much as $116,700 to connect a new sprinkler system to the utility's waterlines. That's when he first announced he would consider banning connection charges related to sprinkler systems, which are also levied by utilities in Summerville, Columbia, Greenville and other cities.

The Charleston Water System eliminated all up-front fees for new sprinkler systems in July, following the newspaper's reports, but said there was no reason to believe the fees had kept the Sofa Super

Store from installing sprinklers.

An analysis by The Post and Courier found that more than 90 percent of commercial and industrial buildings in the Charleston Water System service area lacked sprinklers.

Charleston Mayor Joe Riley said in September that the city would like to make sprinkler systems a requirement in some, if not all, public buildings. He called upon state lawmakers to give municipalities the authority to require the installation of sprinklers in some existing businesses.

McConnell's legislation would not do that. Instead, McConnell's bill would offer limited incentives for installing sprinklers, a state income tax credit equal to 5 percent of the actual installation cost, up to a maximum credit of $5,000, and mandatory insurance discounts, with a minimum amount to be set by the state Department of Insurance.

McConnell has opposed mandates for sprinkler installation, including an effort to mandate sprinklers in hotels following a 2004 fire at a Greenville Comfort Inn that killed six people. In 2005, McConnell said he would oppose any bill that required sprinklers in existing hotels.

Sen. David Thomas, R-Seneca, was a leader in the fight to require sprinklers in hotels, and said Wednesday that the Charleston fire highlighted the need for the Legislature to get measures in place.

"What it tells us is tragedies are going to happen; go ahead and deal with the problem right now," Thomas said.

As chairman of the Banking and Insurance Committee, Thomas said that as soon as lawmakers return to Columbia next month he will be investigating legislation that would require commercial and industrial buildings to be retrofitted with sprinkler systems.

Thomas said his committee is going to take testimony from firefighters, commercial building owners and taxpayers. He said any bill requiring sprinklers in existing buildings could include incentives, and possibly exceptions for historic buildings.

Reach David Slade at 937-5552 or dslade@postandcourier.com.

Share this story:
E-mail this story E-mail this story  Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version  

Copy and paste the link:

Comments

wainwris (anonymous) says...

The barn doors were shut before the nine horses could get out.

December 6, 2007 at 9:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KidYendor (anonymous) says...

I also remember reading about a monthly water bill for sprinkler service, whether water was used or not, approaching $250.00. This unjust charge must be eliminated too. Water charges must be based on meter readings and not building safety improvements.

December 6, 2007 at 10:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

gencon1 (anonymous) says...

It would be unfair to require businesses to install sprinklers in existing buildings. The way the laws are written, a building must meet the codes that were in place when the building was constructed. The only time that a building must be brought up to current codes is during a substantial improvement to the building.

This is a reasonable way to manage building codes and should not be changed in a knee jerk fashion.

Requiring a business to retrofit a sprinkler system could easily put them out of business.

December 6, 2007 at 12:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

rrhgc (anonymous) says...

It's about time this change was made. Tragically, it took the deaths of nine brave firefighters...

December 6, 2007 at 1:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

fireguy (anonymous) says...

I am a fire sprinkler contractor.
The fees imposed by CPW are nothing compared to other things that happen around the state. Mt. Pleasant requires steel pipe that costs 3 times to install as plastic pipe does, with no justification. Greenville water charges monthly fees to maintain the water supply to fire sprinkler systems. Ribault Island fire marshal requires a type of system, without a code basis, that costs at least 2.5 times what the code requires. All of these requirements force the owners and developers to figure out a way to build the buildings in a way that does not require sprinklers. In a commercial building, the sprinkler systems costs in the neighborhood of 1 to 2 months rent on the building depending on lease rates. There is enough competition in Charleston to keep prices relatively low compared to other parts of the country. The legislaters want us all to believe they have our best interest in mind and the media wants us to watch their news and advertising, they do not care about what the public thinks. The bottom line is that existing hotels should be sprinklered. Existing commercial spaces should not, even though they are easier to do. Peoples lives are at risk in a hotel and someone's money is at risk in a commercial space. The fire department should have a policy not to enter into an unsprinklered commercial building that is on fire and after they burn down 1 at a time, the new buildings will get sprinklers.

December 18, 2007 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Notice about comments:

Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.

Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!

Full terms and conditions can be read here.




.Link.