To the Editor:

Following the Edgewater fire, I wasn’t immediately curious about lightweight wood construction until I read a list of talking points developed by a public relations firm hired by AvalonBay that were not only used by AvalonBay, but also forwarded to state and local officials, some of whom then used them when speaking publicly about the fire. The apparent lockstep between developer and government officials piqued my interest.

It took little effort to discover that fire fighters have long known that lightweight construction burns hotter and collapses faster than other types of construction, posing increased risk to fire fighters and occupant safety. For years fire fighter associations have been calling for more stringent construction and fire codes in light weight wood structures. Unfortunately their efforts have been thwarted by construction lobbies. From a 2009 National Fire Prevention Association publication: “What is most disturbing … is the movement by states, influenced by the builder community, to … prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting a sprinkler requirement.” Some think that sprinklers alone don’t go far enough to ensure safety; in the same article: “fire safety in this area needs to be [fully] reconsidered.”

On the heels of the Edgewater fire and with AvalonBay Princeton construction plans currently under review by the Department of Community Affairs, it’s not surprising that AvalonBay is now willing to increase the number of sprinklers and add fire walls to the Princeton design. But we should not count on the largesse of development and construction companies to maximally protect the lives and property of those who live in their developments or the larger communities in which they are built. AvalonBay sees the tightening of fire and safety codes as a financial risk: “Lower revenue growth or unanticipated expenditures may result from our need to comply with changes to building codes and fire and life-safety codes.” (AvalonBay 10K report 2013).

But what about the financial and lethal risk to occupants, taxpayers, and towns touched by fire in buildings that burn hotter and collapse faster? The Borough of Edgewater spent $230,000 fighting the recent fire. Edgewater Council set aside $230,000 to pay for expenses from the apartment complex fire, and AvalonBay “donate[d] $20,000 to the borough’s official gofundme account.” Can occupants, taxpayers, and towns shoulder the financial burden of catastrophic fires when whole industries are lobbying against safety standards that would make them less likely? The dollars corporations save go into their pockets, the dollars spent after such events come out of yours. Your life may be lost — likely not theirs. If you care about safety and sound investment in your community, support a rigorous and thorough review of all relevant construction and fire codes and until the code review is finished, a moratorium on the approval of new lightweight construction in New Jersey.

Susan Jefferies

Jefferson Road