Landlord group opposes porch couch ban that fails to hold apartment residents responsible
After the April fire on the edge of the University of Michigan campus that cost the life of a student, the Washtenaw Area Apartment Association wrote letters to the city, the university and other potentially interested parties expressing our interest in working with them on an ordinance that would eliminate the potential for another couch to burst into flames on a porch and cost another life in Ann Arbor. Our letters and our insistence to be a part of the process were ignored until after city legal staff had already drafted the ordinance that was put before council on Aug. 5 for first reading.
As a result, the Apartment Association is now forced to oppose the ordinance because, as drafted, it does not help solve the problem.
\As drafted, the ordinance ignores the persons responsible for creating the hazard and instead focuses on punishing the property owners. We fully support an ordinance to ban couches on porches within the city limits of Ann Arbor. We do not however support an ordinance that does not hold those that place couches on the porches accountable. This is, in fact, the exact position we held years ago when a similar ordinance failed.
As landlords in this city, we expect appropriate behavior from our residents and work with them, many times as educators for the “first time away from home” experience, to ensure that our homes are safe. Most of us have clauses in our leases that do not allow couches on our porches and were anxious for the city’s support in this effort. The ordinance the city proposes falls short of helping in this effort.
In its current form, this ordinance puts the city in the indefensible position of caring more about money and the collection of fines and fees than it does about the safety of its citizens.
This ordinance fails to direct the punishment toward the resident that actually put the couch on the porch. Paragraph 6 should simply read…. “Violation of this section shall be punishable by a civil fine of up to $1000, plus costs and all other remedies.” While it is certainly easier for the city to simply mail a citation to the registered agent of the landlord than to identify and cite the person(s) creating the fire hazard, the goal should be to reduce the risk of fire, not generate citations.
We truly want and support a ban on couches on porches for the benefit of the city, the residents in these homes, and those that are residing around them. We urge the city to go back to the drawing table with interested stakeholders and craft an ordinance that will change behavior, not just punish property owners.
Melissa G. Seitz, president Washtenaw Area Apartment Association
Comments
Mousedeva
Thu, Sep 9, 2010 : 11:16 a.m.
Hear Hear!
Mick52
Mon, Sep 6, 2010 : 10:17 p.m.
Another knee jerk bad ordinance. No person should ever receive a citation or be arrested for something someone else did. I might be okay with this if it included that the current tenants received a warning to remove the offending furniture and issued a citation for non compliance if they did not comply. I suppose this might result in "pass the couch" to the porch of the next door neighbor but at least it is directed to the people responsible for the act.
Milton Shift
Mon, Sep 6, 2010 : 4 p.m.
Ban bags of charcoal, trash cans, old newspapers, untreated wood, old plastic cups, and more... they all can cause porch fires. Better yet, ban alcohol, cigarettes, coffee, fast food, red meat, cars with less than perfect safety ratings, following another vehicle with less than a quarter mile gap, smoked foods (suspected carcinogenicity.) They all cause more deaths than porch fires. People are dying as I write this from these potentially criminal causes! Save the children by knocking off a tailing zero in their bank statements! This is such a freak event - couch leading to death - that almost anything is comparably more dangerous. In fact, those who would defend us from the couches, the police - they could potentially beat you to death in an episode of random police brutality. I bet the odds of this happening are higher. Maybe we should ban cops? Ban laws? This proposition strikes me as an appeal to overprotective parents of prospective students, and a diversion from the failure to quickly stop the arsonist. We live in a culture of victim blaming - it's your fault you burned alive! It's easier and raises revenue, while making a mockery of the "left."
a2d3
Mon, Sep 6, 2010 : 10:24 a.m.
MaBear: Im not convinced that the proposed ban would actually curb fires. Furniture marketed for 'outdoor use only' have no flammability or smoke production standards and in fact are frequently made with highly flammable materials. For example, a popular material for exterior furniture is wood wicker which has extreme flammability. Replacing a solid wood indoor chair with a wicker chair decreases fire safety; not increases it. The cushions for outdoor furniture likewise have no flammability or smoke production standards. Thus 'outdoor use' couches and other large pieces are not necessarily any safer than indoor use types. Furthermore the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission is actively developing a national standard for flammability of upholstered furniture; it's one of their main goals for 2011 (see CPSC.gov 2011plan pdf on website) However the proposed standards excludes furniture made for outdoors. Therefore not only does the proposed ban actually allow (may even promote) highly flammable external furniture but will in-fact ban flame resistant furniture in the next few years.
MaBear
Mon, Sep 6, 2010 : 10:01 a.m.
The problem with these landlords is they don't live around here & it is true they are in this business to collect rent. If the City does not force their hand then the outside of these buildings look awful &and fires are the sad result. Mabear
GRANDPABOB
Mon, Sep 6, 2010 : 8:32 a.m.
They are worried about the citations being mailed to owners of record. Just who is to watch for these items? It seems as though the LANDLORDS would patrol their own properties instead of letting officials do it then cry about the fine.
Homeland Conspiracy
Mon, Sep 6, 2010 : 7:23 a.m.
I say we ban everything! We all would be a lot safer
sbbuilder
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 6:47 p.m.
CPS I should have written, 'apart from the recent incident...'. Of course all the brouhaha is a result of the tragic fire at the house on S State.
ChunkyPastaSauce
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 2:02 p.m.
ssbuilder: "When was the last time a person died from a couch fire here in A2? Nyet." Although exceedingly rare anywhere(from the data i've seen and the data released by the ann arbor fire dept) someone unfortunately did die here in ann arbor earlier this year. As I understand it there was a string of fires in the area one night (highly suspected to be arson) and the fire from that spread to a porch with a couch on it. The AnnArbor.com article is here : http://www.annarbor.com/news/investigation-continues-into-fatal-fire-on-south-state-street/ But as I said that from what Ive read it's extremely rare. We might as well ban swimming pools and candles since they cause many many more deaths than furniture fires on porches.
sbbuilder
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 1:20 p.m.
Is the property owner supposed to drive by each and every property three times a day to make sure the solipsistic students haven't transgressed yet again? I think you guys are missing the point here. The City is tying a new ordinance to revenue gain. Chunkypastasauce has a great point, given that the data is indeed correct. When was the last time a person died from a couch fire here in A2? Nyet. But, hey, I can recall a number of Frats burning down to the ground because of fires set internally. Corner of State and Hill, a huge Frat burned down to the foundation. Farther up Hill, they are in the process of rebuilding another huge Frat house heavily damaged by fire. Another Frat up on Geddes, same thing. I can't recall any suspicious couches being blamed for those fires. You see, the city can't make any money on those burnt out shells.
zags
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 1:06 p.m.
Cripes, just put it into the lease: : "As per section whatever of the Ann Arbor City Code, you can not have couches on the porch." How hard is that? And if a landlord thinks that they are not a babysitter to their residents in the student ghetto, then they deserve whatever befalls them.
ChunkyPastaSauce
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 10:55 a.m.
David: "And it is only "furniture which is not intended or designed for outdoor use" which would be banned." Yup you're right. I was looking at the 2004 version by mistake. I think this is pretty crazy... the proposed ban would make it illegal to grab a chair from the kitchen to put on your deck if one had extra people over.... that's insane...
David Cahill
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 10:37 a.m.
I checked out what I think is the latest version of the proposed ordinance and here is what I found: New Section 9:7(1) says "'responsible person' shall mean a property owner, tenant, occupant, lessee, and any agent of the foregoing." New Section 9:7(3) says: "No responsible person shall place, or permit to remain, furniture which is not intended or designed for outdoor use on exterior balconies, porches, decks, landings, or other areas exposed to the weather." So both the landlord and the tenant would be responsible. And it is only "furniture which is not intended or designed for outdoor use" which would be banned.
ChunkyPastaSauce
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 9:28 a.m.
The National Fire Incident Reporting System data on upholstered furniture on external unenclosed porches show that deaths caused by them are extremely rare.. less than 1 person every 2 years in the entire country. To put that into prospective you are literally 1000 times more likely to be struck by lighting than to die from a fire caused started by a couch fire on a porch. Many things such as swimming pools cause many many more deaths a year... but we aren't banning those. Also I believe the wording of the ban bans all upholstered furniture including upholstered furniture designed for outdoors.
Steve
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 8:49 a.m.
this is so simple to address and it doesn't take another law to do it. Landlords you own the properties. You already put all sorts of restrictions into the leases regarding what can and can't be done in or on those properties. If you feel so strongly about not having couches designed primarily for indoor use on your porches put a clause in the lease that says they cannot be used. If someone puts one out there after signing the lease they have broken the lease and you can take action. Of course I know this actually makes you do something other than sit back and collect rent, but they are your properties so stop trying to get the city to act as defacto landlord and do something.
sbbuilder
Sun, Sep 5, 2010 : 8:41 a.m.
Once the City sniffs out a new potential source of revenue, you are faced with a steep up hill battle in getting them to reverse course. This is similar, in a way, to the NCAA rules that hold coaches responsible for athlete's actions at all hours of the day and night. Are landlords supposed to add 'babysitter' to their growing list of responsibilities?