|
FEMA asks state to strengthen building codes
By Scott Miller
Staff Writer
The state’s reluctance to adopt new international building codes could force homeowners in Berkeley and Charleston counties to pay more for flood insurance through the federal government.
An amendment to the state budget will delay implementation of the 2006 International Residential Code designed to make residential construction stronger in the face of hurricanes and earthquakes.
“This (code) will add $24,000 on average to the cost of a house,” said Mark Nix, executive director of the Home Builders Association of South Carolina. “The biggest hit is on affordable housing for entry-level (buyers) and the middle class. My problem is, I don’t think we’ve studied this enough if a house is going to cost that much more.”
Already adopted by the state House of Representatives, the amendment provides $100,000 for Clemson University and The Citadel to research the validity of wind and seismic residential building requirements prescribed by the 2006 code, which was set to take effect July 1.
To accommodate the study, the amendment delays implementation until June 30, 2009.
“I don’t have an issue with the code at all,” said state Rep. Chip Limehouse, R-Charleston, who proposed the amendment solely to study the validity of the new codes. “Ultimately our goal is to make homes safer.”
Cost vs. safety
Critics, however, say the amendment puts cost ahead of safety.
Architects, engineers, builders and others already studied the changes under the 2006 code, noted Ernie Dorsey, an underwriter for State Farm Insurance and a member of the S.C. Building Codes Council.
The council has the authority to adopt mandatory statewide building codes. The international building code serves as a guide, and the council already approved the 2006 International Residential Code, after amending several provisions. The state-funded study, if approved, could lead to more amendments.
“This would screw up all that two years of work,” Dorsey said. “The motivation is guided on the price of a home, rather than life safety. If that’s the cost to make the home safer, then we just have to do that.”
Still, the Federal Emergency Management Agency backs the 2006 international code, and not the code as amended by the S.C. Building Codes Council.
David Maurstad, director of FEMA’s mitigation division in Washington, D.C., sent a letter to the council in February asking the agency to reconsider those amendments and explaining the consequences of not doing so.
“FEMA believes in the importance of the adoption of the International Code without amendments that would weaken seismic, wind or flood-resistant provisions,” said FEMA spokeswoman Jody Cottrill in an e-mail.
As a result, the agency may downgrade the “Community Rating System” rankings of some South Carolina communities in the National Flood Insurance Program. The voluntary CRS program provides flood insurance discounts to communities that choose to participate.
Rankings are tied to the adoption of building codes, and insurance discounts range from 5% to 45%, depending on a state’s ranking.
Local communities that could drop to a 10% premium discount or less include Charleston County, which receives a 25% discount; the city of Charleston, 15%; Kiawah Island, 20%; Isle of Palms, 15%; North Charleston, 15%; and Seabrook Island, 20%.
Lowcountry earthquakes
The main disagreement stems from seismic maps that plot earthquake-prone areas that require more stringent building codes and the most sturdy construction materials.
“Along the (South Carolina) coast, you would have to build to the same standards as San Francisco,” Nix said, noting that the last major earthquake here was the Charleston Earthquake of 1886 and that many 19th-century homes survived.
If the $100,000 for the study is approved by the Senate and the governor, the Home Builders Association will assist Clemson and The Citadel.
Nix said his agency would receive no state funds for the study and that there is no conflict of interest. He said the association requested state dollars to keep private interest groups from funding a study.
“That’s why we’re doing this legislatively. We want to be an open book,” Nix said. “You can’t say home builders are holding on to research to say what we want it to.”
Dorsey, meanwhile, maintains that the studies have already been done.
Nix said several states are still working under the 2003 code, as South Carolina is now.
“North Carolina just adopted their 2003 code in January,” he said. “We haven’t fallen behind anybody.”
Scott Miller is a staff writer for the Business Journal. E-mail him at smiller@scbiznews.com.
|
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version