Editorial: Clubs must follow fire codes

 In response to a blaze in a Rhode Island nightclub that resulted in the deaths of 97 people this past February, parents of University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill students and city council members have called for Chapel Hill area clubs with occupancies over 100 people to increase safety by installing sprinkler systems. While safety precautions should be reevaluated in light of the Rhode Island disaster, officials should look into ensuring that current regulations are enforced before considering whether clubs must taken on additional expensive improvements that they cannot afford.

 It is obvious that having a sprinkler system will make a club's risk of catching fire drop dramatically. However, it is important to recognize that if owners adhere to existing fire codes, the susceptibility to fires will decrease significantly as well. The Rhode Island club caught fire so quickly and grew so fast because the owner had installed lyurethane foam--which experts say burns like gasoline--on the walls as a barrier to noise. A visiting band lighted several unapproved pyrotechnics during their set, which caused the foam to ignite. While sprinklers would likely have saved the lives of many of the victims, the fire would never have started if the owner and city officials had adhered to existing rules.

 The first step taken in Chapel Hill should be to evaluate clubs' current level of cooperation with fire codes, and punish violations harshly if they continue.

 The primary obstacle facing the implementation of sprinkler systems in these clubs is cost. Retro-fitting a building involves an extensive process of adding piping and tapping main water-lines, costing clubs between $30,000 to $75,000. Further, the clubs will lose money for every day that they are forced to remain closed for the renovations. This is a significant cost for small-business owners to incur, especially as most of the properties are leased. In addition, the proposed Chapel Hill ordinance will only apply to the four largest bars, meaning that the overall effect of the proposal will not be extensive.

  One club owner has already opted to close his establishment in Chapel Hill, and move to another location, because the cost of installing sprinklers is too high. This instance is alarming, due to the fact that the potential closure of larger clubs will drive students to swarm those places with capacities under 100, which are legally unaffected by the proposal. This will create an even greater hazard in those smaller venues.

  Officials and parents in Chapel Hill are right in demanding that clubs frequented by students be evaluated on the basis of fire safety. Existing fire codes are comprehensive, and if implemented properly, should serve to protect students. Forcing certain clubs to install sprinklers will place an unecessary financial burden on their owners. If a ordinance is passed, it should affect all clubs, and provisions must be made to subsidize the cost.