ATTACHMENT 5

 

Chapel Hill Fire Department

Staff Report on Issues Raised at March 24, 2003 Public Hearing

 

Following are issues raised at the March 24, 2003 public hearing on proposed requirements for installation of fire sprinkler systems in certain public assembly occupancies and staff responses to those comments.

 

 

1.                  Comment:  This regulation is harmful to the affected businesses and should be put off for a year before consideration.

 

Staff Response:  The revised occupancy limits and revised application definitions restricting the targeted occupancy to those we believe represent the greatest risk would substantially reduce the number of businesses affected.  New issues are not normally considered by the Legislative in “short” sessions such as the one scheduled next year.  Therefore, a delay would result in postponing consideration until 2005.

 

2.                  Comment:  Open flames and flammable decorations should be banned inside the identified occupancies.

 

Staff Response: Open flames and flammable decorations inside places of public assembly are already banned under North Carolina Fire Codes which we enforce in Chapel Hill.

 

3.                  Comment:  Small restaurants that have plenty of exits, prohibit smoking, low alcohol sales and that close in the evening pose very little risk and should be excluded.

 

Staff Response: We agree that the type of occupancy described is one of lower risk and we have removed restaurants from the recommended fire sprinkler requirement.

 

4.                  Comment:  All public buildings should be required to meet newer codes in order to avert tragic fires.

 

Staff Response: Existing buildings have not traditionally been required to upgrade to meet newly enacted codes due to the costs involved.  The number of such buildings having large places of assembly and serving alcoholic beverages is limited.

 

5.                  Comment:  Fire sprinklers and electrical equipment such as microphones and electric guitars create electrocution hazards; therefore, sprinklers should not placed in clubs.  Instead, fire extinguishers should be required beside stages and open flames should be banned.

 

Staff Response: We are not aware of anyone ever being electrocuted in fire sprinkler activation.  Fire extinguishers are required and open flames banned under current North Carolina Fire Code which we enforce in Chapel Hill.

 

6.                  Comment: This regulation would create a lot of vacant businesses in the downtown if enacted.  The responsibility for installation, if required, should be placed on the property owner, not the business.

 

Staff Response: We believe the property owner would be responsible for compliance with an ordinance adopted by the Council.  However, a property owner likely would increase rents to pay for installation of sprinkler systems.

 

7.                  Comment:  The proposed occupancy threshold of 50 is too low.  Raise the threshold to 100 and eliminate restaurants.

 

Staff Response:  The revised proposal raises the occupancy thresholds to 150 or 200, based on specific conditions.  The revised proposal also eliminates restaurants from the requirements.

 

8.                  Comment:  Increase the frequency of fire code inspections.

 

Staff Response:  Increasing the frequency of inspections would necessitate consideration of increasing staffing in the Fire Department’s Life Safety Division.  The number of additional staff needed would depend upon the frequency of inspections desired.  Increased inspections do not always translate into increased safety if the business operators are not conscientious about maintaining the required or suggested safety improvements.  Inspections are most effective when the inspector is actually present in the occupancy, because changed conditions can occur at any time after the inspector leaves.

 

9.                  Comment:  In addition to fire sprinklers, clubs should also be required to employ crowd managers.

 

Staff Response:  We agree that adequate staffing (if trained to handle emergencies) in clubs would be helpful and contribute to a safer environment.  We believe that fire sprinklers afford the greatest level of protection from fire.

 

10.              Comment:  This level of protection is not warranted for restaurants. Clubs and restaurants represent different levels of risk.  Use the North Carolina Alcohol Beverage Commission classifications to differentiate occupancies required to install fire sprinklers.

 

Staff Response: The revised proposal limits application to private clubs and establishments licensed for retail on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages, utilizing the North Carolina Alcohol Beverage Commission classifications.