Arlington staff propose multiple Title 15 fire-code changes including requiring sprinklers in new single-family homes

Arlington City staff presented a package of proposed amendments to Title 15 of the municipal code at the council workshop, including a change to name the building official as the fire-code official, new authority to force cleanup of fire‑damaged buildings, reciprocal acceptance of prior inspections for food trucks, and a proposal to require NFPA 13D residential sprinkler systems in newly constructed single‑ and two‑family homes.

City staff said the change of the fire‑code official title is to match the International Fire Code practice: “the International Fire Code actually requires the building official to be the fire code official because they're the authority having jurisdiction,” Mark said during the presentation. He told council the draft ordinance updates long-standing language that had dated from when the city maintained its own fire department staff.

The draft adds a section allowing the city to require immediate barricading of fire‑damaged buildings and to order property cleanup within 30 days; if the owner fails to comply the city may contract for cleanup and place a lien on the property. Mark used a damaged commercial building in Smoky Point as an example of the problem the proposed section is intended to address.

On mobile food vendors, staff proposed accepting a prior fire inspection from another jurisdiction when a truck has already been permitted elsewhere, limiting the local review to compliance with the National Fire Code. “This is different because this isn't with the Board of Health. This is only for fire related,” Mark said when answering council questions about cross‑jurisdiction inspections.

The most contested change was the proposal to require NFPA 13D residential sprinkler systems in all new one‑ and two‑family residential construction. Staff said the measure would raise the jurisdiction's ISO rating over time and reduce insurance costs across the city, and argued the incremental construction cost is modest. Mark described installation for a typical 2,400 square‑foot house as about $3,400 and amortized over a 30‑year mortgage as roughly $108 per year. He also said the system can work with a 3/4‑inch meter and that many costs are already incurred in new construction.

Council members asked for comparisons, insurance and safety data, and for outreach to affected stakeholders. Several councilmembers asked staff to consult the fire‑service partner listed in recent memos before final action; Mark said he had not yet discussed the change of fire‑code official with the partner fire official, Chief Kraske, but would. Public comment from Joe Russell of the Master Builders association urged more time for builders to analyze cost estimates and urged delaying any final vote.

No formal vote was taken at the workshop; staff indicated some Title 15 changes could be separated so the council could act on non‑sprinkler items sooner while reserving the sprinkler requirement for additional review.

Councilmembers asked staff to provide comparative cost data, demonstrations of insurance or ISO changes, and clarification of which remodels or additions (for example attached accessory dwelling units) would trigger retrofits.

If the council places the sprinkler requirement on a future ordinance schedule, staff said the effective date would apply to building permits submitted after adoption and that pre‑filed permit applications would not be retroactively changed. The council did not adopt any ordinance at the workshop.