Lines being drawn in building codes battle.

In a City Council Committee hearing this week, two factions of the construction industry vied for the passage of two separate building codes.

The Committee on Housing and Buildings, chaired by Council Member Madeline Provenzano, held the hearing to explore adopting a Model Building Code for the City. There will be another hearing in the near future. The date has yet to be announced.

It seems that some subcontractors, like those in the plumbing and steamfitting industries, would like to see the National Fire Protection Association NFPA 5000 Building Construction and Safety Code adopted, whereas those in the architectural design and construction management industries are backing the International Building Code.

The International Code Counsel that created the IBC says its mission is "to provide the highest quality codes, standards, products, and services for all concerned with the safety and performance of the built environment." The NFPA's mission, it says, is "to reduce the worldwide burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by developing and advocating scientifically based consensus codes and standards, research, training, and education."

Building Commissioner Patricia Lancaster voiced her opinion on both codes.

"The IBC is patterned on three legacy codes whose development is based on a combined 190 years of experience throughout the nation," Lancaster said to the committee. "It is so widely accepted that the IBC is used in 44 states, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. It is utilized by the federal Departments of Defense, State and Commerce as well as FEMA and other federal agencies."

"By contrast, the NFPA 5000 is a new code that was only recently published and it does not have the IBC's history," she continued. "It was modeled on Disney's Code for the construction of Epcot Center. Unlike the IBC's broad acceptance, the NFPA is only used in two jurisdictions (Pasadena, Texas and Pittsfield, Maine) in the United States, both of which are much smaller than New York."

However, hundreds of professionals from the plumbing and steamfitting trades showed up to stand behind their choice of the NFPA 5000. Although those contacted did not return phone calls to Real Estate Weekly.

David Mandl, president of Meltzer and Mandle Architects P.C., like many other professionals who support the IBC, didn't get to voice his opinion at the hearing.

"The architects and the engineers have to work with the code on a daily basis and have to interpret the code," he said. "We feel that the IBC is a much more user-friendly code. The present code was written in 1968 and is a fairly convoluted code and it took me as a practicing architect probably ten years to have a good working knowledge of it."

Many were surprised at the amount of the support for the NFPA code.

"In the hearing I was sitting in a sea of plumbers. They filled the entire floor and the balcony above," said Mandl. "It was a little unsettling to watch the process unfold, because the people that are making decisions about the laws really don't know anything about the technical end of the laws. I did feel though by the end of the day that the council members were asking the right questions and they were starting to get a handle on what this was all about. In my opinion they will make the right decision."

Two years ago, a Mayor's Advisory Commission on the Adoption of a Model Building Code was formed and was comprised of 15 members including representatives of government (including the Council), labor and the public and private sectors. It reviewed numerous technical provisions of the different codes, heard presentations from both the International Code Council and the National Fire Protection Association, and conducted a public forum.

This Commission assessed both the ICC and the NFPA model codes in ten categories, and in May 2003, the Commission released its report, concluding the ICC code was superior to the NFPA in every way.

Michele Medaglia, president of ACC Construction, believes the city's process in assessing the two codes should be respected.

"I'm for the IBC," she said. "I trust the technical committees. You have the best of the best in those committees. These are the experts. These are the people to go to. Logically it sounds right."

In the end the code that will adopted by the city will be blending of the current code, the IBC and perhaps the NFPA, said Lou Coletti, president of the Building Trades Employers Association, who gave a presentation at the hearing. "I think there are very strong feelings on both sides of the code. What's unfortunate is there seems to be a focus on deciding one of the other," Coletti said. "We recommend the IBC be adopted. Then in Phase II of the process we can make amendments and address those issues."

The advisory board is not recommending that the IBC be adopted as is, he said.

"It will be a hybrid of both the New York City Building Code and the IBC," he said. "IBC was very broad and did not address many of the issues the NYCBC addressed. Everybody wants to maintain the quality of the New York City Building Code." Labor leader, Edward Malloy, president of the Building & Construction Trades Council of Greater New York, is also backing the IBC.

"The IBC is the most comprehensive building code in use today," said Malloy, who was to speak at the hearing, but did not attend. "It has been developed over sixty-five years and is used in nearly all of the United States with good results. There is no reason to believe it will not be a success in New York City. In fact, there is every reason to believe it will improve our current situation, which is functionally unworkable and inconsistent with modern technologies.

"It will furthermore allow us to be more responsive to the safety challenges of densely populated urban centers."