Sprinkler action is a mandate for waste

In 2011, Arlington Heights Trustees rejected a residential fire sprinkler mandate 8-0. Recently, Palatine approved a similar mandate 4-2.

Research shows that most fire deaths occur in rundown housing; not newly constructed homes with hard-wired, interconnected smoke alarms and upgraded electrical systems. Even then, fire deaths are extremely rare. Of the 200,000 people that die in accidents each year, only 1,000 die in homes with working smoke alarms. That's just half of 1 percent and hardly a level demanding costly government regulation.

Arlington Heights had just one such death over 30 years and theoretical analysis showed that homeowners would have had to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to (possibly) prevent it. A Palatine analysis would probably yield similar results.

Fire sprinklers are far costlier than "village officials" project. A new home will likely be 3,000 square feet (including basement). At $3.50 per square foot (an industry recommendation), the basic cost is $10,500. But fire sprinkler systems require a much larger water service (which often involves expensive excavation), more plumbing chases, more coordination, added inspections and increased maintenance. This could easily add another $10,000.

Financed for 30 years the $20,500 doubles to $40,000. On the other hand, $20,500 invested for 30 years could grow to over $186,000. The difference between spending $40,000 and saving $186,000 is $226,000. That's nowhere near the $3,500 cost officials project.

This unnecessary mandate will make new housing less affordable for your children and grandchildren, and may very well impact everyone.

Village council members should reconsider, ask more questions, and vote again. If I was a village homeowner, I would demand it.

Bob Ruffatto

Arlington Heights