Loading...
04-13-10 Public Safety CommitteeMinutes Public Safety Committee Meeting April 13, 2010 Elected Officials Present: Council Member D. J. Wilson, Committee Chair Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Staff Present: Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon Fire Marshal John Westfall Public Works Director Noel Miller Public Present: Mr. Bruce Goodnight Mr. Eric Thuesen Mr. Tony Shapiro The meeting was called to order by Chair Wilson at 6:58 p.m. Items were rearranged by Committee Chair Wilson to accommodate police and guests. C. Snohomish Regional Drug Task Force, 2010-2011 Interlocal Agreement ACOP Gannon explained that Edmonds has participated in the Snohomish Regional Drug Task Force since 1988. The task force receives a majority of its funding from a federal grant. Participating municipalities, tribal agencies, Snohomish County and the State of Washington provide local matching funds. Edmonds' share of funding for July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 is $9,801, a $214 increase over last year. Mr. Wilson asked if this agreement was similar to what the Council approved in 2009. Other than the change in the financial assessment to Edmonds, the interlocal agreement is identical to last year's agreement. Action: Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve. D. South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force Interlocal Agreement. ACOP Gannon explained that the proposed interlocal agreement replaces a 1992 agreement signed by Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace. The mission of the task force is to target mid- and upper level drug traffickers in the three communities. Edmonds has one detective assigned to the task force and Public Safety Committee Meeting April 13, 2010 Page 1 of 4 contributes 1/3 of the salary of the task force sergeant. That arrangement would continue under the new agreement. The proposed interlocal changes the split of seized assets between the three jurisdictions. Lynnwood will receive 50% of seized assets, and Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace will receive 25% each. The reason for the revised split is that Lynnwood provides the majority of the personnel and infrastructure for the unit. The new agreement also provides clarification regarding the use of task force vehicles, damage to equipment, and liability for indemnification and defense from third party claims. Action: Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve. B. Discussion on Residential Sprinkler Requirements With approval by Councilmember Wilson, FM Westfall invited Edmonds community builders for both single- and multi -family development and invited their input as vital to a complete discussion. FM Westfall explained the International Code Council (ICC) adoption process. State of Washington amended International Residential Code (IRC) to consolidate residential sprinkler requirements into separate chapters, appendices R and S. Appendix R requires all residential sprinkler systems to be installed to an accepted standard. Appendix S offers community determination where the systems will be installed down to the level of one -family, two-family, and townhouses. Mr. Bruce Goodnight is an area multiple unit developer and has installed many multi -unit residential sprinkler systems. Spending dollars in a single-family dwelling is asking much of the citizens when the current times are slowing development. Sprinkler system costs and the expense of up -sizing water connections and meters are prohibitive. A sprinkler system will not add to the consumption of water and the costs for the larger meter and connection are out of proportion with the expense of the larger equipment. There is no reduction of expense for the purposes of installing a mandatory sprinkler system. He feels it is not important as he hasn't installed one in his home. Mr. Tony Shapiro is a local multiple unit designer/developer. Politics come into code development. Code -writers and legislators adopt requirements in an effort to removing all risk from living. The costs of protection is not affordable and should not be a part of additional government requirements. A separate example and recent mandate from the electrical code requires an arc -fault interrupter electrical outlet that costs $65 where previously a $3 outlet would be accepted. Starter homes will become unaffordable for many more. Mr. Eric Thuesen is a local single-family developer and asked where the historical need is for such a costly requirement? Implementing a blanket Public Safety Committee Meeting April 13, 2010 Page 2 of 4 requirement on all new construction will make a great impact on the cost of construction and people cannot afford it. The costs are such where a startup family cannot afford their own home. New home construction bears the brunt of the burden of the sprinkler expense when existing homes are not required the same upgrades. What is the requirement for remodeled homes? Mr. Thuesen is concerned with the costs that would be similar to traffic impact fees that are borne exclusively to new home construction. He believes the cost should be shared equally to all. FM Westfall discussed affordability. The costs for the system nationally average $1.61 per square foot of protected area. Residential sprinklers in single- and multi -unit applications are installed only in living spaces for the protection of life. Commercial sprinkler installations require protection in hidden spaces such as attic and garage. A life safety system can provide the unexpected consequence of protection to the property itself. Mr. Ken Robinson of Robinson Plumbing, an area sprinkler designer/installer, finds that most systems in the area can be installed at $1.25-$1.50 per square foot (s.f.), with a typical up -size one inch water connection. City and district water departments charge higher rates for bigger connections. Edmonds Water Department charges additional $1600 for an increase from %" to 1" meter, adding the system cost for a 3000 s.f. home (without garage) and sprinkler protection will cost $6100. Mr. Shapiro offered that water damage can become a risk. FM Westfall stated that insurance companies often provide up to 10% reduction in premium and no insurance company in the Home Fire Sprinkler Survey penalized a homeowner for water damage potential. FM Westfall said there is no serious rash of single-family residential fire deaths to point to identify a critical public safety alarm, but always a perennial fire death in non-sprinkered buildings. An Edmonds fire death in January would have a different outcome in a sprinklered home, however, smoke detectors may have helped the elderly woman also. Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace have suffered separate double -fatalities in multi -family residences. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said that smoke alarm operation may not be enough. The elderly population is protected by an active extinguishing system and alarms sounding assume those involved can act to escape their home. Her mother reacted to a smoke alarm by sitting down to wait for the fire department arrival. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas is interested in implementing residential sprinklers in the city with consideration to starter housing and the costs required there. Councilmember Wilson stated that sprinkler protection costs could be reasonable for the additional protection offered in larger and more expensive homes, 5000 s.f. Not acting on sprinkler requirements also is an option as the state has left it to the community. Mr. Wilson would like to see more statistics on other Public Safety Committee Meeting April 13, 2010 Page 3 of 4 Washington cities that are implementing and results of those that have implemented residential sprinkler system requirements. Statistics for the need of such systems will help council to make a sound decision. Councilmember Wilson asked FM Westfall to bring requested information for further discussion in the May Committee. The Development Services Committee should also be involved in the decision. Action: Councilmember Wilson asked FM Westfall to bring requested information for further discussion in the May Committee. The Development Services Committee should also be involved in the decision. A. Emergency Responder Radio Coverage FM Westfall discussed the adoption of International Fire Code (IFC 2009 edition) Section 510 mandates that new and existing building owners provide for sufficient public safety radio communications inside the buildings where emergencies occur. The new state-wide requirement provides no supportive information for these "communications booster" systems, where required, and no identifying minimum design, technical requirements, or acceptance test procedures are called out. IFC Appendix J provides these minimum design specifications, along with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) compliance, local permitting, and maintenance requirements for a booster system to always remain operable once installed. No buildings have been yet identified for enforcement action and will likely be discovered when police and fire find the blacked out areas. Often these will be metal buildings such as the new Lynnwood High School that is experiencing the problem. Council members agreed that this was an important feature for resolving emergencies. Council members also agreed this can be incorporated into the final adoption of the IFC when Chapter 19.25 FIRE CODE is presented for adoption. Action: Council members agreed that this was an important feature for resolving emergencies. Council members also agreed this can be incorporated into the final adoption of the IFC when Chapter 19.25 FIRE CODE is presented for adoption. The meeting adjourned at 2010 p.m. Public Safety Committee Meeting April 13, 2010 Page 4 of 4