A new blueprint for an old problem
In 1991, Burbank, Calif., became the first U.S. city to pass an ordinance requiring new buildings to ensure adequate first responder communications. Since then, municipalities nationwide have copied Burbank’s action. Currently, more than 200 cities have codes in place and are applying them to both new constructions, as well as major building renovations.
“At this point, I think it’s unstoppable,” said Jack Daniel, a member of APCO’s Commercial Advisory Committee who has 18 years of experience designing and implementing in-building radio frequency (RF) coverage systems. “[First responder] in-building coverage has become synonymous with having fire detectors. … We see this [code] growth all over the place.”
First responders — including fire, police and emergency medical services — often find they can’t effectively use their radios in larger structures. As agencies have moved to 800 MHz systems, the situation has become worse, driving governments to mandate coverage standards. Daniel said initial efforts started at the city level but are continuing to migrate upward, with efforts now afoot to pass statewide ordinances and eventually develop a national standard for public-safety in-building communications.
“Now we have countywide [codes], like the Orange County [Calif.] ordinance, that will encompass 44 cities,” Daniel said. “There’s an effort to do statewide codes in places such as Virginia and Arizona. We are moving to national ordinances or codes — a requirement in construction, that sort of thing.” For example, the National Fire Protection Association mentions in-building wireless coverage monitoring in the latest release of its National Fire Alarm Code.
Right now, codes for in-building coverage are not uniform, with municipalities generally requiring in-building frequency coverage for whatever their first responders use. “A few of them actually ask for two bands; a couple ask for three bands or frequencies,” Daniel said. Most existing codes require coverage in the 800 MHz band, with UHF and VHF coverage also sometimes required.
Radio coverage requirements also vary from city to city. “The better codes and newer codes are specifying signal levels, reliability, area, and percentage of coverage, as well as the frequencies involved,” Daniel said.
New codes being written are beginning to anticipate use of the 700 MHz band, which will become available to public safety in 2009 after broadcasters vacate the frequencies (MRT, March 2006). “They’re requiring the building owners to be aware that 700 MHz channels may be available later … and alerting them that the 800 MHz band will be rebanded,” Daniel said. “That means a lot of the very low-cost BDAs [bi-directional amplifiers] will not be convertible after [rebanding].”
Newer codes also are more stringent in terms of how in-building coverage is implemented, requiring system installers to be certified by the manufacturers.
For their part, building owners have no problem with the concept behind in-building coverage codes, but they’d like to see more standardization, according to Dave Johnston, director of codes and standards for BOMA International.
“There’s so much difference in frequency usage in jurisdictions,” Johnston said. “It’s going to be difficult to get a national building code to accommodate all those frequencies. It almost has to be a performance-type code in order to reach that goal. … We would also like to see some efforts being made by municipalities to make their frequencies and radio systems [homogeneous] to facilitate this.”
Representing business owners and managers with more than 9 billion square feet of downtown and suburban commercial office properties and facilities around the globe, BOMA has an interest in the evolution of building codes, as installing an in-building coverage system adds to bottom-line expenses.
“We’re looking at anywhere from a dollar to $1.25 a square foot,” Johnston said. “In a retrofit, [it costs] $1.10 to $1.50 per square foot in an existing building to bring in antennas. That’s added on to the cost of construction, which is around $100 per foot today.”
Though such costs only add about 1% to the total cost of a building project, he pointed out that the money could just as well be applied to other building-safety measures, such as improved egress and fire detection sensors. For existing structures, Johnston suggested in-building coverage be first tested to see if it meets code prior to mandating the installation of a costly retrofit.
“We’re all in favor of [code], but it’s going to cost something,” Johnston said. “We’re all for code changes, but they have to be fair, balanced and cost-effective. In this case, we don’t think it’s too cost-effective. How many buildings cannot accommodate [first responder radio coverage]? Not many. In the same sentence, we are for [RF] being able to be received throughout the whole building.”
BOMA is working with the Virginia Housing Commission and the Richmond Apartment and Building Owners Association to establish a standardized in-building coverage code for the State of Virginia. The state would like to finalize the code by May 2007.
“In Northern Virginia, there are only three buildings that are seven stories and higher that have difficulties in accommodating radio reception throughout the building,” Johnston said. “In other structures, such as the [retail] ‘Big Boxes,’ we understand there is a problem, [and] we’d like to like to talk to the owners of these facilities. [But] as far as code development goes, do we need a code for three buildings? Building owners can advance safety measures in other areas. … That is what we would like to see.”
Industry representatives working with public-safety representatives and building owners understand both sides of the issue, according to Motorola’s Stu Overby, chair of the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC) in-building working group, who said wireless coverage is only one factor that must be considered. “Not of all of this is wireless. For example, most commercial buildings have wired fire alarm systems, wired communication systems.”
NPSTC’s in-building working group is taking a holistic approach to first responder in-building coverage, he said. For instance, the group examines FCC regulations, different ways to deliver cost-effective communications and interference issues. “Codes are only one element that we’re looking at. We’re also looking at best practices [and] design of systems,” Overby said.
According to Overby, public safety ideally would have adequate coverage in every building in which it’s needed, which can be accomplished with the installment of BDAs and coaxial cable. But that only goes so far.
“Putting in bi-direction amps, putting in cables, improves coverage in that building, but in that building only,” he said. “In Washington D.C., its voice radio system has [sufficiently] strong signal strength that it provides coverage not only on the street but in the buildings as well. Every building is covered. Some cities don’t have that coverage yet.”
Real estate developers are starting to recognize that having reliable in-building wireless coverage — regardless of the frequencies delivered — is not simply an additional overhead expense. “Commercial real estate is viewing improved wireless coverage as a value-add for their tenants and for the public-safety aspect,” Overby said.
Improved and consistent in-building cellular reception, then, can serve as a key differentiator — which is good news for public safety.
SELECT IN-BUILDING COVERAGE CODES
- BURBANK, CALIF.
- Frequency
470-473.5 MHz - Signal Strength
1 microvolt available in 85% of area of each floor of the building - Building Exemptions
Wooden frame buildings, underground structures - SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ.
- Frequency
153 MHz-155 MHz (Fire)
806 MHz-869 MHz (Police) - Signal Strength
1 microvolt available in 85% of area of each floor of the building - Building Exemptions
Single-family residences - SCHAUMBURG, ILL.
- Frequency
806 MHz-816 MHz & 856 MHz-866 MHz - Signal Strength
DAQ 3 (Delivered Audio Quality 3) available in 95% of the area - Building Exemptions
Buildings less than 5000 square feet. Single-family detached residential dwellings, Multifamily building or structure less than 5000 square feet
