[MassHistPres] Fire Rating

[rcsmitharch at verizon.net]

International Building Code2015 edition (adopted by Massachusetts as its base building code):

 

Under definitions; “repair” is defined as “The reconstruction or renewal of any part of an existing building for the purpose of maintenance or to correct damage.”

Section 105 Permits: Section 105.2.2  “Application or notice to the Building Official is not required for ordinary repairs to structure….”  Cutting away or removing walls and partitions would, but what is being described here sounds more like ordinary maintenance.   I have never encountered any requirement to change out exterior materials in the course of maintenance of a historic building.

 

As George Shaw said, Hardiplank does not by itself solve the issue the building inspector is attempting to address.  That would require rebuilding the entire wall assembly.  Is this siding installed over a stud construction or a brick party wall?   A wood stud wall would require adding firecode gypsum board inside and outside to get a rating; for a brick wall the function is weathering and aesthetics, and the fire rating rationale falls away.  I can’t help but think the property owner sees a way to leverage getting a lower maintenance siding on his building.

 

On the street side, it would be a very narrow street that would not provide enough fire separation to allow the historic construction to remain.  According to Table 602 of the 2015 International Building Code,  a fire separation of  10-30 feet (measured to the center line of the street or to a side lot line) means that a front exterior wall of unprotected wood construction (VB) does not have to be rated for most occupancies.

 

Richard Smith

Swampscott Historical Commission

 

From: MassHistPres <masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu> On Behalf Of Ward Hamilton
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 5:48 AM
To: Ralph Slate <slater at alum.rpi.edu>
Cc: Masshistpres <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Fire Rating

 

Other than new construction, it would seem that this concern would only become an issue when the applicant wants to secure a permit to replace the wooden clapboard cladding on the wall(s) of the building. It is rare for the condition to be such that even half of the clapboards warrant replacement. 

 

The correct, preservation approach is to replace pieces of cladding that have failed (rotted, bowing, unable to hold paint coatings) with new ones. Even if the failures extended from the foundation to four or five feet above grade, one wouldn't allow the remaining historic building fabric to be replaced. 

 

This may cause the following objection: "The building commissioner is requiring us to use fireproof materials, such as HardiPlank, and they don't match the wooden clapboards, so we have to do the whole thing." Not so fast, you say.

 

The building commissioner has the right to force owners to use new materials that are fireproof, but he doesn't have the right to compel owners to remove existing materials that are in fair, serviceable condition and replace them even if that's what the owner wants.

 

You have the power to limit the scope of work to the materials that are failing and require in kind replacement materials. In kind, meaning size (dimensions and profile), exposure to the weather (the reveal) and composition (in this case, wood). You may consider substitute materials that will be painted for a variety of reasons, including the demands of the building commissioner. 

 

However, the onus is on the owner to present substitute materials that will work with the abutting, existing building fabric. HardiPlank doesn't work? Come back with something else. Can't find something else? Keep looking.

 

What you may find is that, even if they do find a product that replicates the profile of a cedar clapboard, they don't want to use them. After the whole side of the building is painted, the new flat, smooth materials stand in contrast to the older materials. They were hoping for everything to look new or at least consistent. 

 

That is not an acceptable justification for total replacement of the wall cladding materials. Your commission has the ability to limit which materials may be replaced, and what they are replaced with, as long as they comply with the building commissioner's sole requirement that they be fireproof. 

 



Ward Hamilton 
Chairman
Melrose Historical Commission 

 

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022, 4:30 PM Ralph Slate <slater at alum.rpi.edu <mailto:slater at alum.rpi.edu> > wrote:

Is there a building code requirement in Massachusetts to prohibit wooden siding under certain circumstances? If not, then is it permissible for a local building commissioner to enact such a prohibition?

Ralph Slate
Springfield, MA

On 1/18/2022 3:42 PM, Michael J Tubin wrote:

We have been receiving more applicants that are being told by our new Building Commissioner he must consider fire rating when approving siding materials, based on his interpretation of MGL Chapter 40c section below.

 

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance, repair or replacement of any exterior architectural feature within an historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, color or the outward appearance thereof, nor to prevent landscaping with plants, trees or shrubs, nor construed to prevent the meeting of requirements certified by a duly authorized public officer to be necessary for public safety because of an unsafe or dangerous condition, nor construed to prevent any construction or alteration under a permit duly issued prior to the effective date of the applicable historic district ordinance or by-law.

 

Decision is based on setbacks and proximity to other properties, we are being required to allow property owners to use Hardi Plank cement siding. This is very frustrating when trying to keep historic materials on buildings. We are trying to push a compromise that will allow public view façades to be original materials and non-public view façades to be non-historic fire rated materials. Has anyone else run into this situation? Any materials other than Hardi Plank that would meet fire safety requirements?

 

Michael Tubin

Plymouth

 

_______________________________________________
MassHistPres mailing list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu> 
https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres

 

_______________________________________________
MassHistPres mailing list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu> 
https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/pipermail/masshistpres/attachments/20220120/a854938b/attachment-0001.html>