If you're buying a home built before 1978, you must know that your new home may very well have paint that contains lead (lead-based paint).  This type of paint can be hazardous to your health -- especially if paint chips are ingested, or if dust from lead-based paint is breathed.  Lead-based paint is more dangerous for children than adults because they are more likely to put their hands in their mouths, their bodies absorb more lead, and because their brains and nervous systems are more sensitive to the damaging effects of lead.

So, what's a buyer to do?

I have worked with buyer clients who decided not to buy a home built before 1978 because they didn't want to live with the possibility that lead might exist in the paint.  If you see this issue in that way, it's probably not worthwhile to even go look at potential homes if they are built prior to 1978.

Other clients that I have worked with are comfortable buying a home built before 1978, but thoroughly educate themselves on the risks and the precautions they should take.

The principal fact to remember is that if you are engaging in renovations or remodeling that will disturb the paint (chipping, scraping, sanding), then you need to take precautions to protect yourself and your family. 

But what about the contract?

An astute home buyer will realize that the sales contract allows them to test for lead.  I haven't had a buyer engage in this testing, so I'm not too familiar with the process, but if you're buying a 1950's home, it wouldn't seem to me that you'd need to do testing to determine whether lead-based paint was present in the home. 

Additional Resources

Here are some additional resources from the EPA that may be helpful for you.

• Lead in Your Home: A Parent's Reference Guide
• Testing Your Home for Lead in Paint, Dust, and Soil
• Protect Your Family From Lead in Your Home
• The Lead-Based Paint Pre-Renovation Education Rule: A Handbook for Contractors, Property Mangers, and Maintenance Personnel
• Lead Paint Safety: A Field Guide for Painting, Home Maintenance, and Renovation Work

My brother-in-law works for the Harrisonburg City Police, which makes me feel safe, but let's check another source....

Sperling's Best Places ranks cities and towns on factors such as cost of living, schools, crime, climate, and more.  In the fifth annual report, Harrisonburg ranks #8 for small towns (less than 150,000 residents)!

How is this all determined? 

According to BestPlaces.net...  "The rankings took into consideration crime statistics, extreme weather, risk of natural disasters, environmental hazards, terrorism threats, air quality, life expectancy and job loss numbers in 379 U.S. municipalities."

OK --- so the typical smoke alarm isn't all that visually obtrusive --- but it is when compared to Kidde's Silhouette smoke alarm! 

This low-profile smoke alarm protrudes less than half an inch from the ceiling, blending in much more nicely than a traditionally shaped smoke alarm.  Furthermore, it uses a rechargeable battery that will last the life of the alarm!  No more changing the batteries when the alarm starts beeping!

Yesterday, I wrote an article that talked about the costs and challenges of residential fire sprinklers, given that they may soon be required on all new single family homes and townhomes. Some of the data that I provided was provided by the National Association of Home Builders, who are not in favor of residential code requiring the installation of fire sprinklers.

Today, I received from feedback from two individuals who are advocating for mandatory residential fire sprinklers:

• Ryan Ankrom (email)
  www.IRCFireSprinkler.org
  Report that Ryan provided
  
  
• Ryan Smith (email)
  www.residentialfiresprinklers.com
  Report available on web site
  

These two residential fire sprinkler advocates offer some good perspectives on the great sprinkler debate, such as:

• Fire sprinklers go to work immediately to reduce danger, as opposed to a smoke detector which relies upon human factors.
  
  
• Many people assume a sprinkler system would douse an entire home with water, when in fact only the sprinkler(s) in areas affected by fire would be activated in the event of a fire.
  
  
• Most structure fires in the U.S. take place in residential properties, yet residential properties don't require sprinkler systems.
  

Yet with all of the information that both Ryans provided (strange that they share a name), I have not yet received from either of them some feedback on whether the issues that I raised have merit.  Specifically....

• Is it true that installing a residential fire sprinkler would require different water (more expensive) water lines and water meters?
  
  
• Is it true that it is difficult (or impossible) to use a water softener in tandem with a residential fire sprinkler system without having to add a second incoming water line and water meter?
  

Hopefully we'll get some more feedback from the Ryans --- but I would also be interested in my other blog readers' feedback on residential fire sprinklers:

• Cost aside, would you want them in your home?
  
  
• If they were optional in a new home, would you be willing to pay to have them included?
  

In its September meeting, the International Code Council will be considering a change to the International Residential Code which would mandate the installation of sprinklers in all new single family homes and townhouses.

At first you might think "why not mandate sprinklers, if they'd make our families and our homes safer!?"

But before we encourage our local building inspectors to vote for this change to the IRC, let's take a look at some of the technical and cost issues involved:

1. Water Supply
   The typical domestic water supply does not provide adequate water flow rate for a residential fire sprinkler system. A larger incoming water line will have to be installed, and the water meter and pressure regulator will likely need to be modified as well.
   
   
2. Water Softeners
   Typical residential water softeners are designed for low flow rates, and the drop in water pressure as it passes through the water softener would cause most fire sprinkler systems not to function.
   
   
3. Malfunctioning Systems
   The fire sprinkler piping is always full of water in a "wet" system, which if the pipes freeze can cause significant damage. The alternatives to wet systems (multi-function, dry) have limitations relative to cost, approval by the IRC, and dependency on electricity.
   
   
4. Increased Cost To Home Buyers
   In 2007, a survey was conducted of residential builders to gauge the cost of adding a residential sprinkler system. The media cost of a fire sprinkler system with a public water source was between $3500 and $5000. On a private water source, the media cost was between $8000 and $9000.

With all of these issues, could homeowners really want sprinklers in their home?

• According to a national poll conducted by sprinkler advocates, 63 percent of those surveyed indicated that they were aware that residential sprinkler systems are available, but the number of homes built annually that are equipped with sprinklers continue to be less than 2 percent, many of which are required by local ordinance and not as an option elected by the home buyer.
  
  
• When asked in a 2007 survey of 800 likely voters by Public Opinion Strategies if fire sprinklers should be required in new homes, an overwhelming 89 percent of consumers said that smoke detectors already do an adequate job of protecting them in their homes and 28 percent would not want sprinklers at all, even if they were provided free of charge. Survey results show that only 15 percent of consumers in the sample were willing to pay $4,800 or more for a residential fire sprinkler system.
  

Mandating sprinkler systems in single family homes / townhomes seems like a bad idea to me.

What do you think?

As I work with buyers to prepare contracts to purchase, we spend some time reviewing the 30 paragraphs of the standard Virginia purchase contract. If you will be buying a home in the next year, it is o.k. to wait to review the majority of the contract until the time at which we are ready to submit an offer --- except, perhaps, paragraph 23.

Paragraph 23 of Virginia's standard purchase contract states:

If you wait to review that paragraph until we are getting ready to sign an offer to purchase, you don't leave yourself much time to conduct any due diligence, because this paragraph does not say:

If it is important to you to buy a home in an area where there are not a high number of sexual offenders (currently) living, you ought to do your research before we start looking at homes for sale.

The good news is that the Virginia State Police web site is a fantastic resource for learning about sexual offenders in our community. You can search by zip code, county, city, name, or map. And once you get to the search results you can view the names, addresses, crimes and photos of registered sex offenders. You will also find some great frequently asked questions on the VSP site.

If you haven't already figured it out, the image at the top of this post is the map search result for Harrisonburg --- each red balloon shows the home address of a registered sex offender.

Again -- if it is important to you to buy a home in an area where there are not a high number of sexual offenders (currently) living, you ought to do your research before we start looking at homes for sale.